As academic managers, college deans, associate deans, assistant deans, department chairs, and program coordinators play pivotal leadership roles within universities. It is, therefore, crucial to understand their organizational behavior. Without ascribing causal values to conduct, this study hypothesizes that academic managers repeatedly practice workplace hypocrisy. To test this postulation, the study seeks to identify the characteristics of perceived hypocrisy before exploring the possible similarities between hypocritical behavior and toxic leadership behavior. The data were obtained via open-ended questions answered by 175 academic managers and 517 professors working in 13 universities. The results of the analyses support the initial hypothesis: 81% of all respondents reported experiencing more than one hypocritical incident in the last year; 84% of the academic managers and 64% of the professors testified to being directly affected by first-hand hypocrisy. The responses revealed four groups of hypocritical characteristics; dishonesty, attacking others, disregard to institutional wellbeing, and disingenuous personality. Similarities between hypocritical and toxic characteristics were discussed followed by theoretical and practical implications of the findings.

作为学术经理，学院院长、副院长、助理院长、系主任和项目协调员在大学内发挥着关键的领导作用。因此，了解他们的组织行为至关重要。本研究没有归因于行为的因果价值，假设学术管理者反复实践工作场所的虚伪。为了验证这一假设，该研究试图在探索虚伪行为和有毒领导行为之间可能的相似之处之前，确定感知到的虚伪的特征。这些数据是通过在 13 所大学工作的 175 名学术管理人员和 517 名教授回答的开放式问题获得的。分析结果支持了最初的假设：81% 的受访者表示在去年经历了不止一次虚伪事件；84% 的学术管理人员和 64% 的教授作证说直接受到了第一手虚伪的影响。这些回答揭示了四组虚伪的特征；不诚实、攻击他人、无视机构福利和不诚实的个性。讨论了虚伪和有毒特征之间的相似性，然后是研究结果的理论和实践意义。