Proactive development of ethical leader identity

Mitchell et al. (2026) proposed that hyperpersonalizing human resource (HR) practices emphasize leaders' individual achievements and specialties, thereby encouraging them to internalize success as stemming from their own abilities.By contrast, depersonalizing HR practices frame accomplishments as group efforts, leading leaders to attribute positive outcomes to collective contributions.Although we agree that organizational HR systems are the right place to look to understand how organizations get the leaders and cultures they have, we believe that these HR practices focus on selecting and developing leaders to appreciate their unique skills and attributes without encouraging the destruction that comes from narcissistic leadership.We argue that a more effective approach to accomplishing the goals of the focal article would be to focus on shaping leaders' ethical identity.Our response expands the discussion by moving beyond reducing narcissism to highlight how HR practices can cultivate ethical leader identity.From avoidance to proactive development By placing this work within the frame of narcissism, Mitchell et al., draw on powerful stories and frustration about negative experiences with leaders.However, most organizational leaders are not clinically narcissistic, and importing the language of personality disorders into workplace settings brings unnecessary baggage to the goal of organizational change.Although we acknowledge that the research on narcissism in the workplace is mostly done using subclinical measurements and arguments about the full spectrum of the trait, this subtlety is not easy to communicate.Using the label of narcissism in selection or development decisions risks pathologizing normal employees and applying tools designed for diagnosis rather than workplace behavior.We therefore suggest avoiding the narcissism label when describing a problematic leader's self-serving behaviors in organizational settings.More importantly, leadership development should not be framed as only preventing selfserving behavior.The focal article emphasizes depersonalized HR practices to avoid narcissistic leaders.Yet avoiding narcissism is not the same as cultivating ethical identity: the former reflects a reactive orientation that reduces unethical behavior and minimizes harm, whereas the latter is proactive, promoting ethical actions that prioritize group needs, collective achievements, and responsible decision-making.This highlights constructive outcomes beyond damage control and clarifies how leaders define themselves, how others grant legitimacy, and how leadership is enacted in practice.Organizations expect leaders to contribute positively through proactive and often difficult decisions rather than merely avoiding harm.Thus, shifting from avoidance to