Masks of Sanity in Suits and Ties – The Rise of Charismatic Deviance
- Brainz Magazine
- Jan 19
- 7 min read
Barbara Suigo is a charisma expert, HR consultant, and author. Specializing in the development of soft skills, she has published the "Charisma Trilogy" and offers personalized training and coaching programs for leaders and professionals.
When charisma becomes a tool for domination rather than trust, leadership can appear sane while quietly turning destructive.
In recent years, the topic of managerial psychopathy has forcefully entered the debate on leadership and organizational power. The figure of the “psychopathic boss” evokes disturbing images: no longer just serial killers in thrillers, but elegant, charismatic executives who, behind a reassuring smile, conceal dangerously antisocial personality traits.
This is not mere pop psychology borrowed from cinema. Recent research suggests that a surprisingly high percentage of top managers display precisely these characteristics. A forensic study cited by expert Nathan Brooks estimated that around 21% of senior executives show clinically significant psychopathic traits, a percentage comparable to that found among prison inmates. In other words, in some boardrooms, we may find as many “masks of sanity” as in prison, with the difference that behind bars, no one compliments you by calling you “boss” when you burn down an entire department.
How did we arrive at this unsettling reality? To understand it, we must retrace the evolution of the concept of psychopathy, from a clinical and criminological phenomenon to a structural problem of contemporary managerial leadership.
From the mask of sanity to white-collar criminals: The origins of the problem
In 1941, American psychiatrist Hervey Cleckley published The Mask of Sanity, the seminal work that first outlined the clinical profile of the psychopath. Cleckley described individuals who appeared perfectly normal, free from delusions or overt signs of madness, often charming and socially well integrated, the “mask of sanity,” precisely, yet hiding a profound disorder: an inability to feel empathy or remorse, and a failure to conform to moral norms.
These individuals may seem healthy and engaging, but behind the façade lies an emotional void and a dangerously irresponsible personality. The idea of a “master of deception,” devoid of ethical restraints yet impeccable in public life, captured the imagination of the time, suggesting that “undercover” psychopaths could be lurking anywhere in society. Cleckley thus laid the groundwork for recognizing psychopathy not only in the cells of violent criminals, but potentially also in the refined living rooms of respectable society.
Almost in parallel, criminologist Edwin H. Sutherland challenged the belief that crime was exclusive to the underprivileged or to traditional “antisocial types.” In his book White Collar Crime (1949), Sutherland coined the term to describe crimes committed by respectable, high-status individuals in the course of their professional activities.
In other words, even the elegant, educated executive, the banker, the industrialist, the politician, could turn out to be a criminal, albeit using different means and methods than a street thief. Sutherland documented how major corporations and powerful figures defrauded, deceived, and exploited others on a massive scale, often with impunity, displaying an alarming disregard for the common good.
Cleckley and Sutherland, each in their own field, thus posed a deeply unsettling dilemma: what if some of our leaders, professionals, and managers with respectable appearances were in fact disguised psychopaths? If we combine their contributions, psychology showing that psychopaths can wear the mask of the ordinary person, and sociology revealing unsuspected crimes among the unsuspected, we arrive at the premonition of a figure that had until then been little explored: the successful psychopath, the one who does not end up in an asylum or in prison, but sits in luxurious offices and positions of power.
From prison to the office: The psychopathic model as corporate leader
For decades after Cleckley, the study of psychopathy remained largely focused on criminal and forensic contexts. Starting in the 1970s, Canadian clinician Robert D. Hare, inspired by Cleckley’s work, developed systematic criteria to identify psychopathic traits, culminating in the creation of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), still the most widely used diagnostic tool today.
Hare began to notice something familiar among the most ruthless white-collar professionals. In collaboration with industrial psychologist Paul Babiak, he studied cases of apparently brilliant corporate executives whose behavior was manipulative and destructive. In 2006, the two published Snakes in Suits, bringing to a broader audience the idea that some colleagues and superiors might be psychopaths camouflaged in the workplace.
Anyone who has dealt with such a boss will recognize some classic signs. The true managerial psychopath is not necessarily explosive or overt, but subtle and refined. They smile while taking your project out of your hands, flatter you with compliments laced with hostility, steal your ideas with the grace of a professional thief, and, when something goes wrong, manage to convince you that it was your fault.
This type of individual tends to rise to leadership positions, where their antisocial behaviors can flourish under institutional protection. Studies show that the prevalence of psychopathic traits in managerial roles is higher than in the general population. Estimates vary, but range from 3-4% to over 15% of senior managers.
Their ruthless management style creates toxic environments, demoralizes staff, erodes trust and collaboration, and, in the long run, undermines organizational stability. If such a psychopath reaches the top, the risks increase exponentially: reckless decisions, fraud, data manipulation, organizational bullying, and a general contempt for any value that does not coincide with personal interest.
Real cases and pop culture: From the myth of the “jerk boss” to courtroom chronicles
The theory of managerial psychopathy has found dramatic confirmation in numerous events over recent decades. Every major corporate scandal carries with it a lingering suspicion: is it possible that at the top were individuals devoid of scruples, capable of lying, manipulating, and taking risks without remorse?
Bernie Madoff, architect of a colossal $50 billion Ponzi scheme, is often cited as an emblematic example: affable and respected on the outside, yet a serial deceiver utterly indifferent to the victims of his fraud. The same applies to Enron executives, protagonists of the early-2000s energy collapse, described in several studies as displaying behaviors consistent with psychopathic traits.
The global financial crisis of 2007-2008 also fueled similar reflections. Some authors have argued that many Wall Street executives whose actions cost the world trillions of dollars exhibited a severe lack of ethics and empathy.
Outside the United States, comparable examples abound. The case of Italian businessman Sergio Cragnotti, former “King Midas” of Cirio, is particularly telling. Celebrated in the 1990s as a brilliant entrepreneur, his group collapsed in 2003, leaving a €1.2 billion hole and thousands of ruined savers. In the face of disaster, there was no remorse, no genuine assumption of responsibility, only ostentatious confidence, carefully calibrated statements, and a self-narrative as a victim or misunderstood genius.
Neoliberalism, extreme competition, and the selection of “predators”
At this point, the question becomes inevitable: are we dealing only with “deviant” individuals, or does a system exist that favors the rise of such personalities? Many scholars suggest that contemporary capitalism, particularly in its neoliberal form, has created a fertile environment for psychopathic traits in managerial leadership.
A system that rewards ruthlessness, greed, and extreme competition inevitably advantages those who naturally lack a moral conscience. Those willing to do anything to win are not stigmatized, but often celebrated as models of success.
The documentary The Corporation offers a striking metaphor. If we were to treat a corporation as a person from a psychiatric perspective, argue Joel Bakan and Robert Hare, it would meet many criteria for clinical psychopathy: disregard for others’ feelings, inability to form authentic relationships, lack of guilt, and respect for rules only when convenient.
The consequences are plain to see: devastating financial crises, global fraud, organizations reduced to rubble, and toxic cultures that consume people as disposable resources.
Conclusion: Recognizing (and containing) the snakes in power
From the criminal asylums of the 1940s to today’s boardrooms, the concept of psychopathy has taken an unsettling yet illuminating journey. Today, we know that knives are not required to create victims. Sometimes a pen, a signature, or a decision made without empathy is enough.
This awareness forces us to dismantle a persistent myth: that success is automatically synonymous with competence, integrity, or human value. It is not. Recognizing managerial psychopathy means learning to distinguish between the decisive, responsible leader and the manipulative predator disguised as a leader.
At a societal level, it also means rethinking the models of success we celebrate. As long as we continue to idolize the ruthless executive or the lone man in command who wins at any cost, we will continue to create fertile ground for psychopaths in power.
Perhaps it is time to recalibrate our concept of leadership, valuing empathy, responsibility, and moderation, qualities that do not appear on the Psychopathy Checklist, but without which no organization can truly be considered healthy.
This article is drawn from my forthcoming book, Charismatic Psychopaths. The Dark Side of Charisma, an analytical work that explores how certain forms of charisma, apparently effective and seductive, can become instruments of manipulation, domination, and relational destruction in contexts of power, leadership, and work.
Read more from Barbara Suigo
Barbara Suigo, Senior HR Consultant, Author, Charisma Expert
Born in Italy and naturalized as a French citizen, Barbara Suigo is an HR consultant, author, coach, and trainer specializing in the art of charisma. With solid experience in corporate communication and extensive training in NLP, persuasion, and storytelling techniques, she supports professionals and companies by offering personalized coaching, training programs, and in-depth content.
Barbara is the author of the Charisma Trilogy, a work that deeply explores how to develop and harness personal influence and leadership presence. She has also published other books focused on personal and professional growth, solidifying her role as a leader in the field of soft skills development.
Essential References:
Hervey Cleckley, The Mask of Sanity;
Edwin H. Sutherland, White Collar Crime;
Robert D. Hare, Without Conscience;
Paul Babiak, Robert D. Hare, Snakes in Suits;
Jon Ronson, The Psychopath Test.
