ABSTRACT
There is an inherent contradiction in the messages that academics receive. On the one hand, they are encouraged to be generous team players, constructively orientated and service active. This creates a strong platform for a range of critical activities that universities need to accomplish in order to function (Shattock 2010). On the other hand, academics are pushed to perform and to be high achievers, demonstrating individual excellence and differentiating themselves from the crowd. This can encourage narcissistic, selfish and even anti-social behaviours. It can increase competitiveness, a reluctance to share and an unwillingness to spend time on administration and other “unmeasured” activities (Cipriano 2011). Where the leader lacks concern for others, it becomes increasingly problematic, particularly if they fail to sponsor and advance their subordinates or protégés (Saltmarsh et al. 2011). These leadership styles can generate high turnover, including the attrition of good potential employees from the sector, and may also incur considerable costs through ill-health, complaints and loss of productivity (Gilbert et al. 2012; Schyns and Schilling 2013). Poorly behaved individuals also provide a highly visible model as to the dominant behaviours that will be accepted.
