The Absent Leader: A Recipe for Toxicity

Photo by Yener Ozturk on Unsplash

It is not a unique experience to feel disconnected from the person at the helm; the COVID-19 pandemic made that painfully clear for many. What if the main, undeniably effective, quality of a leader is not about ability to strategise or make amazing PowerPoint slides, but simply being present… and not physically or performatively present, but there and aware throughout upheaval, mess and chaos. When organisational structure changes, the absence of a meaningful presence from the top is the loudest, and it turns ordinary pain into toxic pain.

In research during the pandemic in 2020, a study on the experiences of front line nurses explored the dynamics of leadership, and if the physical and emotion presence of senior leaders made a significant difference to these nurses’ experience during the crisis conditions. The research drew meaningful conclusions; leadership presence isn’t managerial, it’s a symbol of support and solidarity, and the absence of a leader is not neutral, it presents risk of turning pain into toxicity. Stress withdrawal and burnout become organisational norms and the staff not only feel exhausted, they feel abandoned.

What is the difference between organisational pain and toxic absence?

Pain is a natural and regularly experienced, in the workplace it’s caused by the emotional burden of difficult work, complex decisions, and in the case of a nurse, relentless human suffering. Toxicity, on the other hand, is not about the difficulty of the work itself, but develops when pain is unacknowledged, the employee feels isolated without someone to cause a break in emotional distress. Leaders who are absent from frontline realities allow pain to fester, resulting in emotional breakdowns, poor mental health and eventually resignation.

It's not a secret and nor is it exclusive; if someone reports that during a stressful situation their boss just ‘hid in the office’, it stirs some irritation. In the case of the nurses, feeling abandoned, like ‘cannon fodder’, is unarguably the result of not being seen, heard or valued. It’s not a complaint about strategy, it’s indicative of leadership’s emotional footprint. When the people who matter most feel abandoned, the system unravels.

Let’s focus on presence; what does it do?

• Signals support:

It’s communication from leaders that they understand, they’ve not grown in ranks and decided they’re ‘above’ everyone else. In high stress environments, employees knowing that they are not alone is a foundational human need.

• Shares reality:

Strategy on a spreadsheet is abstract, ambiguous. Shared experience in the moment, on the floor, on the front lines, is real. Leaders have the opportunity to gather data that matters, not misinformation that they think will look good.

• Reshapes emotional climate:

Absence is depersonalising, but presence humanises people. Pain does not look like operational risk, but a shared human experience; something to be mitigated together.

In reality, this is not as common as one would hope, but it’s not an easy thing to choose to experience the same difficulties as everyone else if it can be avoided. But it’s not sustainable, and leaves a team of hardworking people left feeling increasingly demotivated, misunderstood and alone.

Leadership mythology is laced with slogans: ‘Lead from the front’, ‘Be visible’, ‘Stay connected to your people’. When push comes to shove many leaders default to offices and hierarchies. In crisis, distance becomes a defence mechanism rather than a strategic advantage. What many leaders fail to realise is that the quality and meaning of their leadership is not decided by them, but perceived by those they lead. Intention is irrelevant when the repercussions of removing oneself is neglect and corrosive.

This matters in many industries, not just in healthcare. In everyday organisational life, it looks the same:

-            Leaders listening without judgement

-            Executives spending time with frontline workers to understand pain points

-            Organisations that create cultures where people are both managed AND acknowledged

The upside of presence is not only better morale, it enables informed decision making; leaders who understand the lived reality of their employees will always make better structural choices.

Depth psychology would see the retreat of a leader as the psychological shadow. The unbearable realities of crisis, fear and morality would activate the ‘collective shadow’ of the organisation. When leaders withdraw, they are not neutral observers, they are unconsciously displacing this shadow downward. The front line becomes the container for all that leadership refuses to (consciously or unconsciously) face, such as vulnerability, grief, uncertainty and guilt. What is not consciously acknowledged will inevitably projected, pushing the pain onto those unable to retreat, who ultimately carry the unprocessed fear of the system itself. Presence is not about being a hero, it’s shadow work. Leaders able to push through the discomfort and be present in the unknown can metabolise anxiety instead of exporting it to others. Absence allows the shadow to feral, presence integrates it, preventing toxicity from becoming identity.

For the full research paper, published in the Journal of Nursing Management, 2023, find the link here:

Toxic Absence: Why Leader Presence Matters in Times of Crisis - PMC

Follow The Heretic for acknowledgements of successful and unsuccessful leadership and their ripple effects