Why CEOs Yelling At Employees Is A Symptom Of A Bigger Leadership Crisis

Forbes

5 days ago

The Anatomy of Parent-Child Leadership
When employees bring problems to their leaders, a dangerous dynamic often emerges, one that turns capable professionals into helpless children and transforms managers into overbearing parents. This "parent-child" leadership style isn't just outdated; it's actively undermining performance, stifling innovation, and creating toxic workplace cultures.
And it's not limited to middle management. Look no further than recent CEO behavior, like public scolding, town hall tirades, and memo-driven shaming campaigns. Whether it's a famous CEO warning remote workers they're not doing enough or other leaders lambasting teams for lack of "hustle," we're seeing textbook examples of a leadership style that infantilizes employees rather than empowering them.
The Anatomy of Parent-Child Leadership
Parent-child leadership generally takes two forms, both equally destructive.
The first is the helicopter parent leader, constantly stepping in to fix problems for their team. A customer complaint comes in, and the leader says, "I'll just handle this myself." While that might feel helpful in the moment, it erodes confidence and deprives employees of growth opportunities.
The second is the critical parent; the leader who responds to problems with blame and disappointment: "How could you let this happen?" or "You know better than this." This style fosters defensiveness, secrecy, and a culture of fear.
At the heart of both behaviors is anxiety. As leaders ascend the hierarchy, they gain power but lose direct control over day-to-day outcomes. That loss of control creates discomfort. For some, the reaction is to clamp down, either by micromanaging or by reprimanding. But both reinforce the same message: I don't trust you to solve this.
The CEO Version of Critical Parenting
It's easy to spot this dynamic in the highest levels of leadership. When CEOs berate teams in all-hands meetings or ridicule employees in public memos, they're not exercising strong leadership; they're exhibiting anxiety-driven control. These are not courageous or candid conversations; they're corporate versions of "I'm not mad, just disappointed."
The problem? These behaviors cascade. When senior leaders model parental behavior, middle managers mimic it. Teams stop thinking for themselves. Innovation dies. Accountability fades.
And the data backs this up.
That last point is especially troubling. When leaders solve every problem or respond with criticism, they create dependence. Employees stop thinking critically because they've learned someone else will handle it—or that trying will only get them in trouble.
The Hidden Cost of Control
Parental leadership might feel efficient in the short term, but it carries steep long-term costs.
Research from Leadership IQ shows that employees whose leaders respond constructively to problems are 12 times more likely to recommend their company as a great place to work. Those with a high internal locus of control (meaning they believe they can shape outcomes) are 136% more satisfied with their careers than those who've been conditioned to depend on their bosses.
Now contrast that with this stat: only 5% of leaders consider themselves highly effective at turning average performers into high performers. Why so few? Because the parent-child dynamic blocks the development path. It removes the very conditions, like ownership, challenge, and feedback, that spark real growth.
And at scale, this becomes a systemic issue. Organizations that run on parent-child dynamics can't build capacity. They stay locked in reactive mode, forever dependent on top-down direction. The very leaders who want initiative and accountability are the ones inadvertently killing it.
The Seven-Word Solution
There is a simple, powerful tool leaders can use to shift from parent-child to adult-adult relationships. When an employee brings you a problem, ask them: "What's your plan for solving this issue?"
These seven words communicate trust, transfer ownership, and encourage problem-solving. They say, "I believe you're capable," rather than, "Let me fix it." And they fundamentally change the tone of leadership from supervision to support.
But for many leaders, especially leaders driven by power, the shift is deeply uncomfortable. Our research shows that about 14% of people are power-motivated, but senior executives are 75% more likely to be driven by power than frontline employees. That means the very people who most need to let go often have the hardest time doing so.
The irony? Leaders who can't release control limit their own growth. They stay trapped in tactical firefighting roles, never evolving into strategic thinkers or talent multipliers.
Building Adult-to-Adult Cultures
Moving away from parent-child dynamics takes more than a single question. It requires a fundamental change in how leaders approach performance, development, and feedback.
Start by making expectations explicit. Help people understand what "Great Work" looks like, so employees don't need constant correction. Praise suggestions and curiosity, not just outcomes. Replace blame with coaching.
And most importantly, examine your own triggers. Are you stepping in because the problem is urgent or because uncertainty makes you uncomfortable? Are you criticizing because it helps the employee or because it soothes your own anxiety?
Leaders who can answer these questions honestly can start to create the conditions for a culture of trust, initiative, and sustainable high performance.
The Real Risk Isn't Failure, It's Stagnation
Some of your best people are already looking for environments where they'll be treated like adults. If they can't bring ideas without getting scolded or make decisions without being second-guessed, they'll leave. The ones who stay? They're often the ones who are happy to be micromanaged.
So yes, that CEO rant might get headlines. But what it signals internally is far more damaging. Parent-child leadership feels like control. But what it really breeds is dependence, disengagement, and mediocrity.
The alternative, namely adult-to-adult leadership, isn't just more respectful. It's more effective. And it might just start with a single question: What's your plan for solving this issue?