Charismatic Leadership: the Battle between Obama and Clinton - Literature review Example

Charismatic Leadership and Its Effects on Organisational Structure, Culture and Politics of Change by First Name Last Name A Paper Submitted to Professor in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for Course/Subject University Location Date “Charisma, that 'you'll know it when you see it' dynamic personality often defined as magnetic and inspirational, has received a lot of attention in the last two decades of leadership research” (Gibson et al 1998, p.11). Organisations and political parties alike emphasise the importance of charisma in the quest for successful leadership. The significance of charisma in modern literature on organisational development and leadership strategies, however, seems quite ironic, given the fact that defining what exactly constitutes “charisma” remains difficult to grasp. As Gibson et al (1998) noted, the concept of “charisma” falls largely into the realm of jene sais quois – not quite unlike the so-called “X factor”. For most people, defining “charisma” requires the unreliable and undefinable “gut feel”. How then, could such an empirically challenging factor be considered significant to the political and organisational development of leadership? Can attractiveness – a quality often associated with charisma – truly enhance a person's potential as a leader of many? The question of significance is a necessary one, given the emphasis that organisational psychology and literature devotes to its development as an importance factor in leadership. As Gibson et al (1998) wrote, the attention of organisational structure and leadership experts remains focused on the power of charisma to influence and lead large groups (p.11). It is, therefore, quite significant to fully understand the power of charismatic leadership in order to establish its validity as a factor in the realms of organisational structure, culture and politics of change. The current battle between Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton may be a good case in point. The issue of overflowing charisma versus a staid personality becomes quite apparent in the quest for presidential candidacy between these two Democrats. Is Obama, the more magnetic of the two candidates, more capable of leadership than the plain and largely no-frills Clinton? This dilemma – the social premium on attractiveness and charm – is present not only in American politics, but in organisational structures across the globe. Managers, student leaders, business owners – these people are all asked to believe that charismatic leadership is the key to a successful organisation. The key question, therefore, is this: what is Charismatic Leadership, and how does it affect organisational structure, culture and the politics of change? It is significant to begin by defining what exactly is considered Charismatic Leadership, prior to establishing its effects on corporate, organisational and political structures. With regards to culture, this is taken to mean the culture of a particular organisation, particularly in terms of how the organisation is managed or led. Politics of change, of course, refers to the demand for “transformational” leadership – a concept currently embodied by the campaign strategies of Barack Obama. Can Charismatic Leadership truly lead to more efficient structures and successful organisations? This paper posits that Charismatic Leadership does have significantly positive effects on organisational structure, culture and the politics of change; however, it can become a negative factor due to the development of an unhealthy ego, hero worship, self-interest and other similarly unethical abuses of the ability to influence others. Indeed, central to the concept of leadership is the ability of a person to influence and determine the actions of many with the interest of the majority in mind. Charismatic leadership, therefore, could be considered a double-edged sword, given the centralisation of attention on the magnetic qualities of the leader as both a member of the organisation and an individual person. The tendency for abuse is certainly present. To prove this thesis, this study shall begin with a concise yet meaningful definition of Charismatic Leadership. It is imperative to first understand what exactly is considered by academics and scholars as Charismatic Leadership. This definition shall then be the cornerstone of this study. Second, this study shall look into the actual effects of a charismatic leader to organisational structure, culture and the politics of change through real examples whenever possible. As such, the real world application of Charismatic Leadership shall be the benchmark of this study. Lastly, the study shall also look into the potentially negative effects of excessive reliance on Charismatic Leadership. Charismatic Leadership – A Definition What exactly is Charismatic Leadership? To answer this question, it is necessary to first look into the most significant component in the equation: charisma. Quoting The American Heritage Dictionary, Gibson et al (1998) defined charisma as “a rare, personal quality attributed to leaders who arouse fervent popular devotion and enthusiasm” (p.11). Note that the definition saw charisma as a personal quality; this means that charisma is largely tied to the personality of a human being. It is, therefore, considerably innate and part of a particular person's attitude and character. Charisma is not a skill; it is a personal characteristic. It is also significant to notice that the definition refers to charisma as a “rare” trait. Some definitions view charisma as a gift – in both a religious and a secular sense. It is a characteristic often associated with religious leaders – people blessed with the ability to inspire faith and spirituality in their followers (Gibson et al 1998, p.11). It is also identified as a form of “power” that is capable of moving large numbers of people into action without the use of threats or violence. The relationship of charisma to religious organisations stretches back to the ancient times. The word “charisma”, in fact, originates from a Greek word that means “gift”. The Christians later utilised the derivative “charismata” to refer to a person blessed with the Christian God's gift of healing or prophecy (Gibson et al 1998, p.11). As mentioned, charisma is viewed as a gift – innate rather than acquired. The concept of charisma as a potentially powerful quality in a leader began with Max Weber. Charismatic Leadership was one of the three forms of authority identified by Weber, and it was achieved with nothing more than the powerful effect of the leader's personality. He wrote that, “[Charismatic Leadership is based on] devotion to the specific and exceptional sanctity, heroism, or exemplary character of an individual person” (Gibson et al 1998, p.11). In essence, what Weber meant was that a person's magnetic and attractive characteristics could easily sway or persuade others to follow his suit. This person is far from ordinary, and possesses some exceptional characteristics not found in his peers. As such, he would be able to draw support and the admiration of the masses. Furthermore, Gibson and Blackwell (1999) quote J.M. House's definition of a Charismatic Leader as “leaders who have a profound emotional effect on their followers” (p.120). They have the power to connect on an emotional – not rational – level with the majority, thereby establishing a more “human” relationship that often becomes more of idolisation than anything else. The result is a different level of attachment on the part of the follower, who finds some exceptional quality in the leader that is worth admiring and emulating. In a sense, House's definition of the Charismatic Leader presents a more sociological and psychological understanding of the group dynamic. What then are the characteristics of a Charismatic Leader that sets him/her apart from the rest of the crowd? Based on several factor studies, Bass (1998) noted that a Charismatic Leader serves a role model that his followers would willingly emulate with no coercion, threat or force. These leaders are viewed as highly capable and possessing of desirable and admirable traits such as persistence and determination. They are seen as the standards of moral or ethical conduct, and are often considered the benchmark for proper, acceptable behaviour. Most important of all, the Charismatic Leader is always consistently all of these positive qualities. Their actions are reliable and never arbitrary (p.5). Through a series of field studies, House and Howell (c.f. Gibson and Blackwell 1999, p.120) identified the presence of following traits in a Charismatic Leader: “high levels of energy, endurance, work involvement, enthusiasm, cognitive achievement, strong tendencies to be creative, intelligent, visionary, inspirational, and self-confident”. The Charismatic Leader must have more energy and endurance than the average follower, in order to be able to lead and appropriately fulfil the common vision of the organisation. This means that the Charismatic Leader must be more involved and determined in pursuing the required diligence in order to achieve the goals of the group. Furthermore, the Charismatic Leader must be able to exude a certain level of confidence in order to inspire faith and trust in his followers. The leader must appear more capable and extraordinarily talented than average members, in order to project a figure of reliability and dependability. The Charismatic Leader must possess both intelligence and creativity thereby attaining the support of the majority. As House and Howell noted, a Charismatic Leader must not only appear to be extraordinary; he/she must also have a certain degree of achievements and documented skill or talent. The studies showed that these Charismatic Leaders also need to prove their worth in order to sustain the initial attractiveness that endear them to the people. Despite the focus on ability in the previous discussion, it is undeniable that physical attractiveness also plays a large role in determining the charisma of a particular leader. As Bryman noted, these Charismatic Leaders must possess a certain degree of “presence” that allows them to stand out from the crowd. The concept is simple: this presence can be established through a combination of physical attractiveness, confidence, energy and sterling communication skills. A Charismatic Leader needs to possess the most powerful of communication tools in order to succeed in gaining the attention and eventual admiration of the majority (Gibson and Blackwell 1999, p.120). There is, in essence, a strong connection not only to the person of the Charismatic Leader, but to all that he represents. As mentioned earlier, the connection is largely emotional. As Behling and McFillen wrote, there is faith in the Charismatic Leader fuelled by a strong degree of affection (Gibson and Blackwell 1999, p.120). It is not merely admiration or adoration that gives the Charismatic Leader an edge over his peers. The followers actually like the Charismatic Leader, and it is this affection that inspires them to emulate and accept the instructions of the Charismatic Leader. Rather than use fear or force in the same way as Machiavelli's Prince, Charismatic Leaders rely only on the ability to inspire in order to elicit the desired response from the majority. It is perhaps necessary to differentiate Charismatic Leadership from Transformational Leadership in order to minimise misunderstandings. Zaccaro and Klimoski (2001) wrote that unlike in Charismatic Leadership, wherein the focus is emotional connection between the Leader and the Follower, Transformational Leaders focus on empowering the subordinate as a member of the organisation, not an individual out for self-gain. Such is the primary difference between these two concepts of leadership. Charismatic Leaders are more focused on enabling change through emotions; followers choose to accept the leader's vision because of a “connection” on the emotional level. Effects of Charismatic Leadership on Organisational Structure, Culture and Politics of Change House (c.f. Zaccaro and Klimoski 2001, p.193) wrote that Charismatic Leaders are able to transform the organisational structure and paradigm through the presentation of a new vision that will become the central goal of the entire organisation. For House, this change in vision constituted a change not only in the goals of the organisation, but also on the self-concept of the members. Their association with the organisation cannot be entirely separated from their personal identities and interests; as such, a transformation in the central vision of the organisation would inevitably lead to a transformation in the members' structure and organisational culture. Through a strong emotional connection, the Charismatic Leader is able to transform both the members and the organisation. Transformation in the organisational culture and structure are born of the trust and faith that followers have on the Charismatic Leader. One such example was Herb Kelleher, president of Southwest Airlines. Kelleher's aggressive personality was initially highly different from the organisational culture of Southwest Airlines. Once similar in model and method to other airlines, the arrival of Kelleher fully transformed both the structure and the culture of the organisation. Under Kelleher, “Southwest departed drastically from the way major airlines functioned. These major differences included using only one type of airplane, operating from secondary airports, minimising the turn around time on the ground, concentrating on short flights, eliminating meals, and providing low-cost, frequent flights to the cities it serves” (Gibson and Blackwell 1999, p.120). Though initially viewed as a bold and risky move doomed for failure, the members of Southwest Airlines nevertheless shared the vision of Kelleher because the employees found his attitude of “work hard, play harder” admirable. He was, in essence, a role model that they easily embraced. It would not be far-fetched to describe the culture of Southwest Airlines as an extension of Kelleher's personality. His ability to communicate and inspire the employees into supporting his initially risky vision is well-documented. In fact, support for Kelleher and his vision is such that Southwest Airlines was voted the best company to work for in 1998 ( Gibson and Blackwell 1999, p.120). Establishing the power of charisma in the political arena is quite more difficult. Whereas Charismatic Leadership easily shows itself in the corporate or organisational setting, politically speaking, a leader's charisma easily fluctuates given the circumstances he finds the nation in. In the political world, Charismatic Leadership is difficult to identify. One very good example is Winston Churchill, who was not viewed as charismatic until after the Dunkirk Evacuation. By then Churchill had established himself as an admirable leader with his passionate rhetoric, confidence and achievements (Nye 2008). After the war, however, Churchill suffered electoral defeat. Achieving the status of a Charismatic Leader in politics, therefore, can be quite difficult and complicated. How does Charismatic Leadership affect the politics of change? The campaign of Barack Obama is a good case in point. Preaching his “new politics”, Obama is offering a radical break from the current administration's decisions and actions. For many, Obama's offer of the politics of change is possible only because he is seen as a man of conviction, intelligence and confidence. It is his charisma that makes the concept of transformation in politics realistic and achievable. Unlike in the corporate setting, however, Charismatic Leadership is not as solid in politics. Nye (2008) points out that the public support for Obama lasts only as long as the circumstances and the status quo remain ripe for transformation. Otherwise, his call for political change will inevitably fall flat. Negative Effects of Charismatic Leadership Raelin (2003) warns that too much reliance on the so-called emotional connection between the follower and the Charismatic Leader can lead to over-dependence and compliance. He notes that much of the connection may be the product of image manipulation rather than an actual resonance in the vision proposed by the Charismatic Leader. A large part of achieving the status of a Charismatic Leader relies on awe and idealisation; as such the actual person may not be quite as powerful as the legend. It is when the rapport between follower and Charismatic Leader is faked that Raelin finds the potential for abuse, manipulation and organisational destruction (p.46). Conclusion In conclusion, Charismatic Leadership can truly be powerful when it is genuinely innovative and radically constructive. As in the case of Kelleher, a Charismatic Leader was able to influence the culture and structure of an entire organisation. It may be said that the Southwest culture is a reflection of Kelleher's own work ethic and outlook in life. However, Charismatic Leadership in the political arena may not be as easy to define. Barack Obama and Winston Churchill are two good examples; in the world of politics, the circumstances and the need of the people far exceed any charismatic personality. Though positively helpful, as in the case of Southwest, it is also imperative that care be exercised in the application of Charismatic Leadership. It is a powerful tool; once must recognise, however, that it is also open to abuse and manipulation. Bibliography Bass, B 1998, Transformational Leadership: Industrial, Military and Educational Impact, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ Gibson, J and Blackwell C 1999, 'Flying High with Herb Kelleher: A Profile in Charismatic Leadership', Journal of Leadership Studies, p.120 Gibson, J et al 1998, 'Charismatic Leadership: The Hidden Controversy', Journal of Leadership Studies, vol. 5, no. 4, p.11 Nye, J 2008, 'Charisma and Leadership', The Huffington Post, viewed 2 May 2008, retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-nye/charisma-and- leadership_b_99466.html Raelin, J 2003, 'The Myth of Charismatic Leaders: It can be Foolish, Futile and even Dangerous to Follow Leaders Just Because They're Charismatic. Be Careful of Hero Worship and Step Forward', T&D, vol. 57, no. 3, p.46 Zaccaro, S and Klimoski, R 2001, The Nature of Organizational Leadership: Understanding the Performance Imperatives Confronting Today's Leaders, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco Read More

 

Read More