Corporate leaders and billionaires are often viewed as visionaries and wealth creators. But beneath the surface, many are trapped in an invisible financial \u201ccrisis\u201d \u2013 one rooted not in market volatility or poor investments but in their psychological relationship with money.<\/p>\n
As a finance professor<\/a> and editor of the forthcoming book \u201cFinancial Therapy for Men,\u201d I study this often overlooked aspect of financial psychology. Money is far more than numbers on a balance sheet \u2013 it carries emotional, psychological and social meaning. People\u2019s relationships with money<\/a> are shaped by childhood experiences, cultural beliefs and personal triumphs and failures. This emotional baggage can influence not only their sense of safety and self-worth but also how they manage power and status.<\/p>\n The field of financial therapy<\/a> emerged in the mid-2000s to address these dynamics. Drawing from behavioral economics, financial psychology, family systems theory and clinical therapy, it aims to help people understand how their thoughts, feelings and experiences shape financial behavior. Foundational academic work began at Kansas State University, home to one of the first graduate-level programs in the field.<\/p>\n Since then, financial therapy has gained traction in the U.S. and globally: It\u2019s supported by a peer-reviewed journal<\/a> and is increasingly integrated into professional practice by financial advisers and licensed therapists. Studies have shown that financial therapy can improve relationships<\/a> and reduce emotional distress<\/a>.<\/p>\n Yet much of the field focuses on people who are emotionally open and reflective \u2013 neglecting executives, who are often socialized to view themselves as purely rational decision-makers. I think this is a mistake.<\/p>\n Research shows that people often project their unconscious anxieties onto markets<\/a>, experiencing them as mirrors of competence, failure or control. This means that public valuations and capital flows may carry deeply symbolic weight for corporate leaders.<\/p>\n My research suggests that people at the highest levels of wealth and power have deeply complex emotional relationships with money \u2013 but the field of financial therapy has largely overlooked them. This isn\u2019t an accident. It reflects a broader assumption that wealth insulates people from psychological distress. In reality, emotional entanglements can intensify with greater wealth and power \u2013 and research suggests that men, in particular, face distinct challenges. True inclusion in financial therapy means recognizing and responding to these needs.<\/p>\n When distress becomes a leadership crisis<\/p>\n In a 2023 study \u2013 When and why do men negotiate assertively?<\/a> \u2013 Jens Mazei, whose research focuses on negotiations and conflict management, and his colleagues found that men become more aggressive in negotiations when they think their masculinity is being threatened. This was especially true in contexts viewed as \u201cmasculine,\u201d such as salary negotiations. In \u201cnonmasculine\u201d contexts, such as negotiations over flexible work and child care benefits, participants weren\u2019t significantly more aggressive when their masculinity was challenged.<\/p>\n On male-coded topics, many men in the study reinforced gender norms by rejecting compromise, using hardball tactics or even inflating financial demands to reassert their masculinity. These behaviors reflect an unconscious need to restore a sense of masculine identity, the researchers suggest. If this reaction occurs in salary negotiations, how might it manifest when the stakes are exponentially higher?<\/p>\n Emerging research in organizational psychology shows that financial stress is linked to abusive supervision, particularly among men<\/a> who feel a loss of control. Further, traits such as CEO masculinity have been linked with increased risk-taking, while female CEOs tend to reduce risk<\/a>. Together, these findings point to a dangerous intersection of psychological stress, masculinity and executive decision-making.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n As Elon Musk memorably said, \u201cI\u2019ll say what I want to say, and if we lose money, so be it.\u201d<\/p>\n M&A as a masculinity battleground<\/p>\n Financial distress doesn\u2019t always look like bankruptcy or bad credit. Among powerful men, it can manifest as overconfidence, rigidity or aggression \u2013 and it can sometimes lead to very uneconomical outcomes.<\/p>\n Consider the research on M&A. Most mergers and acquisitions are value killers<\/a> \u2013 in other words, they destroy more economic value than they create \u2013 and the field of M&A is deeply male<\/a>. These two facts suggest that some mergers are driven more by threatened masculinity than by strategic logic. If men become more aggressive in negotiations when their masculinity is threatened, then CEOs and corporate leaders, who are overwhelmingly male, may react similarly when their companies, and by extension their leadership, are challenged.<\/p>\n Target companies rarely take a passive approach to acquisition attempts. Instead, they deploy defensive measures such as poison pills<\/a>, golden parachutes<\/a>, staggered boards<\/a> and scorched-earth tactics<\/a>. In addition to serving financial goals, these may also act as symbolic defenses of masculine authority.<\/p>\n Mergers and acquisitions, by their nature, create a contest of power between dominant figures. The very language of M&A \u2013 for example, \u201craiders<\/a>,\u201d \u201chostile takeovers,\u201d \u201cdefenses\u201d and \u201cwhite knights<\/a>\u201d \u2013 is combative. This reinforces an environment where corporate leaders may view acquisition attempts as challenges to their authority rather than as just financial transactions.<\/p>\n A growing body of behavioral-strategy research<\/a> confirms that boardroom decisions are often shaped by emotional undercurrents rather than purely rational analysis. While this research stops short of naming it, the dynamics it describes align closely with what Mazei and colleagues call \u201cmasculinity threat.\u201d<\/p>\n This has direct implications for corporate M&A. The overwhelming majority of top CEOs<\/a> are men, and the language of M&A often evokes siege, power struggles and conquest. In such a symbolic arena, acquisition attempts can trigger deep, emotionally charged responses, as the identity stakes are high. What appear to be strategic financial decisions may actually be reflexive defenses of masculine authority.<\/p>\n On a related note, researchers in behavioral finance have long studied the \u201cendowment effect<\/a>,\u201d or the tendency for people to value assets more simply because they own them. While the endowment effect has been studied primarily among retail investors making ordinary financial decisions<\/a>, it could be particularly important for corporate executives and billionaires, who have more to lose.<\/p>\n When combined with threatened masculinity, the endowment effect can produce combustible reactions to declining valuations, missed earnings or takeover bids \u2013 even for individuals who remain vastly wealthy after marginal losses. While the research at this intersection is still emerging, the underlying behavioral patterns are well established.<\/p>\n What does financial therapy for the ultrarich look like?<\/p>\n Financial therapy for high-net-worth individuals rarely looks like sitting on a couch discussing childhood trauma. Instead, it takes an interdisciplinary approach involving financial advisers, therapists and sometimes executive coaches. Sessions tend to focus on legacy planning, control issues, guilt over wealth, or strained family relationships.<\/p>\n Many high-net-worth men display behaviors that don\u2019t look like like stereotypical \u201cfinancial distress.\u201d These can include compulsive deal-making, emotionally driven investment decisions, workaholism and difficulty trusting advisers. In some cases, unresolved financial trauma shows up as chronic dissatisfaction and the sense that no achievement, acquisition or net worth is ever \u201cenough.\u201d<\/p>\n While financial therapy is intended to help individuals, I think it could actually be a tool for global economic stability.<\/p>\n After all, when masculinity is threatened in corporate decision-making, the consequences can extend far beyond the boardroom. These actions can destabilize industries, fuel economic downturns and disrupt entire labor markets. Unchecked financial anxiety among corporate elites and billionaires isn\u2019t just their own problem \u2013 it can cascade and become everyone\u2019s problem.<\/p>\n From this perspective, financial therapy isn\u2019t just a personal good. It\u2019s a structural necessity that can prevent unchecked financial distress from driving destructive corporate decisions and broader economic disruptions.<\/p>\n