The fallout between business tycoon Elon Musk and US President Donald Trump presents a timely reminder of the often-far-reaching impact of spats between powerful leaders, which is a lot more common in the corporate world than you’d think
Donald Trump and Elon Musk in conversation. PIC/AFP
To any savant onlooker, the Big Beautiful Breakup between US President Donald Trump and his billionaire-in-chief Elon Musk was but an inevitable outcome. After all, the unlikely duo had one striking thing in common — a mammoth ego. Their fallout, therefore, has been spectacular, with the former cronies trading barbs and threats (instead of their typical swooning banter) on social media. But oversized egos aren’t just limited to political circles of power; if anything, they’re almost an everyday occurrence in the corporate world.
“The history of a toxic performer is very long in the world of business. That’s because their performance is typically able to blanket their toxicity — while the toxicity is experienced by people, performance is metrics based and demonstrable. With organisations being designed to focus on delivery, outcome and performance, not social harmony and congruence, the toxicity is often met with a blind eye.
Hemalatha Raghuvanshi
Unfortunately, every industry is littered with examples of toxic performers. Many of them are even regarded as heroes or God-like figures because of their ability to deliver results. But they leave behind bad relationships, burnt-out people and unhappy employees. In certain cases, their legacy is intertwined with a toxic societal impact,” notes Dr Brajesh Bajpai, an executive coach with a career spanning over 30 years across five industries.
Falling out, falling short
“In the corporate sector, such clashes can cause confusion amongst team members, even as their non-collaboration creates problems in the organisation’s daily functioning. The morale of the team drops and employees are ridden with anxiety about the future. High-priority decisions can get blocked, compromised, delayed or reversed due to ego issues, which affects operational efficiency and effectiveness,” explains Hemlatha Raghuvanshi, co-founder and chief human resource officer of Sekel Tech. The team invariably resorts to taking sides to protect themselves, which can cause them to undermine authority, she adds.
Dr Brajesh Bajpai
Importantly, when disagreements begin to play out in public, it can damage the image and affect the goodwill of the organisation. This, in turn, can affect the revenues, with shareholders losing confidence. It can also negatively impact any existing or future partnerships, as well as the morale of the vendors, leading to disruptions in the supply chain. Organisations must also realise that such spats have a cascading effect, leading to further clashes among teams and subordinates, she shares.
Setting up safeguards
According to Dr Bajpai, the most important measure that organisations can take to limit the fallout of these disagreements is to establish a very powerful board of directors. This, he says, is especially crucial when handling very senior employees.
Distributed leadership is rapidly replacing a more centralised model of leadership in many workplaces. REPRESENTATION PICS/ISTOCK
“The second, which comes from the banking industry and is now increasingly being used in other industries, is mandatory rotation — regulations in the banking industry ensure that organisations don’t allow people to hold one role for beyond three or five years. Another practice gaining popularity is that of mandatory leave, which involves the leader mandatorily taking a block of three weeks or so away, and handing over the reins to someone else. This is important because sometimes, it’s only when a person is not present that the truth comes to light. The third is the emerging notion of distributed leadership, which is rapidly replacing a more centralised model of leadership,” he shares.
“As an organisation, it is important to establish a no-tolerance policy for public disagreements. Have the right protocols in place and monitor any aberrations closely, to ensure timely resolution. Additionally, monitor vulnerabilities and establish clear expectations and consequences. Avoid being too reliant on one person, as this can lead to a concentration of power,” suggests Raghuvanshi.
For those impacted already by such a maelstrom of egos, Dr Bajpai recommends a simple but effective 3D framework:
>> Don’t delay: If there is a conflict, chances are that most people already know about it. Don’t let it fester.
>> Don’t dither: Do not be uncertain. Take a decisive course of action. It doesn’t necessarily matter if your decision is 100 per cent accurate. What matters is that you make it. Understand that when mired by uncertainty, other employees are seeking leaders who are decisive and can at least project confidence.
>> Be directional: Don’t be distracted by the thought of only solving the crisis at hand. Instead, remember that you are responsible for the larger direction of the organisation.
The crisis checklist
>> If you have the misfortune of being at the receiving end of such a conflict (or are even the perpetrator), here are a few ways you can check your stride:
>> Don’t wash your dirty laundry in public. Remember that communication on social media platforms is not designed for solutions. It is designed to further inflame a situation, advises Dr Bajpai.
>> If you simply cannot see eye to eye, engage a mediator who has some common ground with both parties. Now that trust has broken down, such an individual could help restore channels of communication again, Dr Bajpai observes.
>> Try having a face-to-face conversation that’s away from the limelight so that you can avoid any further miscommunication and clear the air about any misunderstandings.
>> Avoid trading barbs, even if you know you are right. Remember, respect for the individual you are engaging with is non-negotiable.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
