i already asked this. i need a different answer.

This longitudinal case study describes a UK charity that hired a new CEO who was reported by two middle managers to have all or most of the ten corporate psychopathy traits. The organisation was described as a lost organisation without direction due to this CEO's high corporate psychopathy score. The organization's aimlessness and lack of drive are described in this paper. A former CEO of the same company was reportedly authentic, effective, and transformational. Under a CEO with a high corporate psychopathy score, bullying, staff withdrawal, and turnover increased as good workers left. Revenue, employee commitment, creativity, and organisational innovativeness also declined. As the first study of a CEO with a high corporate psychopathy score, this paper advances leadership and corporate psychopathy research.

Corporate psychopaths, predatory and parasitic people without conscience, are common in the workplace. They are career-focused, ruthless, unethical, and exploitative workers with brain functionality differences. Psychopaths commit 50% of serious crimes and 20% of North American prisons, according to research.

Corporate psychopaths are career-driven but ruthless, unethical, and exploitative. Approximately 1% of junior employees are corporate psychopaths, but 3.5% of senior employees are. Corporate psychopaths may be more common in CEOs and lawyers, with 5.75% to 13.5% of employees working with them.

Some commentators dismiss psychopathy in the workplace, but others say it may benefit organisations. Psychopathy literature may deny the role of economic and social factors in individual wrongdoing. This study examines a UK charity whose CEO was described as toxic and psychopathic. The respondent's new CEO met all ten corporate psychopath traits, according to the "Psychopathy MeasureManagement Research Version 2" (PM-MRV2).

Psychopathic CEOs and authentically transformational CEOs can have a big impact on an organisation. Case studies compare the effects of psychopathic and authentically transformational CEOs on organisational outcomes. This qualitative study sheds light on toxic leaders, bullying, and psychopaths at work. The case study follows a company with a psychopathic CEO and a transformational former CEO.

Psychopathic personalities are stable, and corporate psychopaths have a common approach. Based on Hervey Cleckley's work, the PM-MRV2 measure measures psychopathy by identifying key traits. The respondent, a senior manager during both CEOs' terms, rated the current CEO as highly psychopathic.

Two in-depth interviews were conducted with the respondent about the UK charity. The respondent agreed that the paper accurately described his experience working under a psychopathic CEO. This case study research can shed light on highly toxic leaders, bullying, and psychopaths at work and how they affect an organisation.

The research found that the psychopathic CEO, who ruled by fear and intimidation, denies his employees a voice. In contrast, the previous CEO encouraged and facilitated employee suggestions and contributions to organisational tactics and strategy. As long as their input is considered, employees who participate in organisational discussions and decisions are positive.

Psychopathic CEOs were discouraged from making decisions, and board meetings became "rubber stamping" exercises. He formed a working group to examine organisational strategy, but only asked junior and middle managers, who were easy to sway towards the CEO. The CEO formed small project groups to negotiate without involving key stakeholders.

At the second interview nine months later, another behaviour change occurred. The CEO sought employee opinions before making strategic and other decisions, but they were often tactical. The psychopathic CEO gave no explanation for ignoring employee opinions, and no further discussion was had about such decisions.

The previous CEO was approachable with an open-door policy, but he was serious and focused on strategic issues rather than organisational details.

The previous CEO inspired and motivated subordinates to focus on strategic issues. Workers respected him and followed him to the moon and back, while the psychopathic CEO could not get workers to follow him to the pub. The psychopathic CEO had a dysfunctional, semi-absent, and incapable leadership team, while the previous CEO had a strong, capable, and motivated team of directors and senior managers.

The previous CEO encouraged consultation and constructive criticism of strategic decisions, while the psychopathic CEO shut down dissent. The CEO ignored such views, making them hard to hear. Psychopathic CEO pre-arranged "discussion" papers for people to agree with in meetings, claiming they were pointless.

The psychopathic CEO needed control so much that he couldn't tolerate a manager who disagreed with him but followed his plans. The controlling behaviour was daily, interfering with details and not part of the vision, five, or ten-year strategic plan.

Corporate psychopaths often neglect their companies, resulting in dysfunctional leadership. A psychopathic CEO, often viewed as a visionary, lacks credibility and insight into his true abilities and cannot lead his staff. If the charity follows rather than leads, it may lose creativity, innovation, and market leadership.

The psychopathic CEO's leadership is so poor that staff don't take him seriously, leaving a void. Lack of direction and leadership can mean a lost organisation with unsupported and demotivated employees. Lack of leadership at the top can limit junior employees' success.

Corporate psychopaths like the psychopathic CEO care about themselves but not their employers. Lack of leadership and control can lead to a dysfunctional team and organisation.

After three years, the psychopathic CEO was criticised for his poor management and leadership. Employees report losing job enthusiasm and becoming aimless and directionless. A large minority of employees left the leaderless organisation as soon as possible, demonstrating their desire to leave a hostile, leaderless, and directionless organisation.

Following the organization's poor leadership and direction, new hires have left at rates exceeding 100%. Lack of leadership has also hurt the organization's finances and revenue. Employees also report higher staff turnover, lower morale, and a lack of direction and leadership.

The psychopathic CEO is absent conceptually and intellectually, and directors and managers often miss work with stress-related illnesses. The remaining directors are unwilling or unable to make decisions for the psychopathic CEO, who is absent when needed. According to reports, the previous CEO was a transformational leader with the confidence to challenge norms. Psychopathic leadership by corporate psychopaths can cause organisational dysfunction. Junior employees may be leaderless due to this lack of leadership. The organisation has few experienced managers after replacing or leaving competent directors and senior managers. Demotivation and team dysfunction can result from poor leadership. The psychopathic CEO's carelessness and lack of leadership and control are concerning. Three years later, employees are cynical about the company and leadership. A dysfunctional organisation and lack of employee care can result from this lack of care and control.

An organization's former CEO was criticised for his poor management and leadership, creating a hostile and aimless environment. The employees reported losing interest in their jobs and becoming aimless at work. A large minority of employees left the organisation without jobs, demonstrating their desire to leave a hostile, leaderless, and directionless organisation.

The psychopathic CEO was conceptually, intellectually, and physically absent, with directors and managers often sick with stress. Since the CEO was often at home, no one was in charge at the office. Employees spent time socialising, surfing the web, or messing around without supervision.

The remaining directors were unwilling or unable to make decisions for the psychopathic CEO, who was absent when needed. The previous CEO was a transformational leader who challenged norms and the status quo, encouraging questions, debate, and creativity.

In conclusion, the previous CEO was criticised for his lack of direction and leadership, creating a hostile and aimless environment.

The previous transformational CEO was confident and proud of his leadership. However, the lack of leadership decreased creativity, challenge, and innovation, resulting in more staff turnover. The hostile environment and poor leadership drove one talented director away. Compared to the psychopathic CEO's lack of direction and leadership, the previous CEO built teams well.

The psychopathic CEO limited directors to four, calling three useless and one a time server. The CEO had a comfortable role in the company. One director is retiring, and the other two are useless.

Stress-related illnesses from poor leadership and bullying contributed to the company's decline. One employee missed work due to illness once a month under the transformational CEO, but four did so daily under the psychopathic CEO. This 8000% increase in illness absence is due to top-down leadership failure.

Corporate psychopathy theory suggests that corporate psychopaths' inability or unwillingness to do their own jobs and train others increases their workload. Incompetent leadership from the previous CEO changed the company's fear tone. Due to staff aimlessness and perceived lack of direction, this was not ethical stewardship leadership. Ethics requires leaders to honour their duties to employees, stakeholders, and society, but this wasn't happening.

Corporate psychopaths use fear, abuse, and bullying to hide their agenda. Many employees are too afraid to question corporate psychopaths or their abuse and bullying. This is consistent with research linking psychological contract violations to loyalty, leaving, and neglect.

Corporate psychopaths are linked to abusive and bullying supervision, which affects employees' work and personal behaviour. In the case study, the psychopathic CEO was linked to employee behaviour changes like longer breaks and sick days. This case study showed that bullying affects turnover intention.

Corporate psychopaths may be seen as "impostors" in business because they lack leadership skills. They also tend towards social dominance, which can lead to negative workplace outcomes.

Corporate psychopaths, or psychopathic leaders, affect organisations greatly. This research shows that the psychopathic CEO was seen as a "Fawlty Towers" character with no leadership skills. This fear reduced attempts to overthrow the psychopathic CEO.

The psychopathic CEO's incompetence and self-importance caused a financial and HR collapse. The previous (authentic) CEO had a synchronous performance gap, with the psychopathic CEO presenting a glowing picture of apparent success to the board of trustees while managers believed fund raising innovativeness, creativity, direction, authentic leadership, and revenue were declining.

Bullying, confusion, and seemingly aimless leadership lowered performance within 10 years. The gap between actual and perceived performance is assumed to be unsustainable in the medium to long term, as financial figures can only be massaged so long before the truth emerges.

The CEO took the job to fill a gap in his CV, which included charity work and political ambitions. This caused high staff withdrawal, illness absence, and turnover. Corporate psychopathy theory predicts that senior-level employees' well-being decreases and stress and distress increase.

Corporate psychopaths, often perceived as CEOs, can create a directionless, demotivated workplace. This study found that psychopathic CEOs who are not transformational or authentic are linked to job dissatisfaction and negative attitudes. The previous CEO's behaviour may have been worse, but another manager reported on the psychopathic CEO's.

As shown by the organisational effects of a psychopathic CEO's relative lack of leadership, leadership is crucial to team effectiveness and performance. Teamwork, performance, and organisational effectiveness collapse. A psychopathic CEO caused the company to feel leaderless after his appointment. Employees were left to their own devices without direction or hope for their careers. They had no say in how the psychopathic CEO ran the company and were denied the teaching and coaching they would have received from a transformational leader.

This research helps advance leadership literature by showing how leaderlessness and corporate psychopathy theory affect leadership. It is also the first sign that corporate psychopaths' tactics may change and that less bullying and intimidation are needed once they have achieved submission and control through fear. A longitudinal study of corporate psychopathy could investigate this phenomenon.

ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS

1. Using the academic literature on ethics and leadership:
2. Define ethical leadership.
3. Identify the positive and negative ethical issues raised in the Psychopathic Leadership case study.
4. Discuss the impact of the negative ethical issues and how the organisation concerned might have dealt with them better