Search results

In the 1990s, scientists succeeded in demonstrating the highly positive effects of transformational and charismatic leadership on performance effectiveness, based on a large number of empirical findings. Bass (1985) predicted that this type of leadership would be related to “performance beyond expectations”. This has proved to be true to a very large extent. The so-called “new leadership approach “, however, has not yet succeeded in a close analysis of the interaction and influencing processes between charismatic leaders and their followers. This paper provides such an analysis. After pointing out the main problems with prior theoretical work, we offer an alternative model to help explain the emergence of charisma using social-cognitive and psycho-dynamic theories. Basically, we start from the premise that a focal person may be categorized as a charismatic leader on the basis of evaluative borderline attributes assigned to him or her, which are closely related to characteristics stigmatized by society. These attributes are exhibited consciously or unconsciously by the leader, either by means of social dramatization or by means of social reversion. We then propose a model of charismatic leadership relationships, which deal with both intra-personal and inter-personal feedback processes, based on recent theories of narcissistic behavior. Our overall intent is to help explain and clarify the processes between leadership behavior and the attribution of charisma.

We take as our point of departure Weber's well-known taxonomy of forms of authority (Weber, 1947; 1968). Traditional authority, which first of all characterizes pre-modern societies, is based on inherited privileges and positions. Legal authority, which is often termed rational and bureaucratic, is based on position and competence. In addition, it is impersonal. By contrast, charismatic authority is personal, not positional. It has one main feature, authority legitimated by the appeal of leaders who claim allegiance because of the force of their extraordinary personalities. Weber saw this kind of authority as liberation from the alienation, which the bureaucratic “iron cage” represented. The essence of charisma is a sort of life and vitality, which is the opposite of the formality of bureaucracy and the roles and conventions of traditional society (Weber, 1968, p. 24). Consequently, charisma implies a sort of renewal. According to one of Weber's most heavily quoted passages, charisma is based on “the devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him” (Weber, 1968, p. 46). The charismatic leader has, in other words, exceptional qualities and is accordingly “set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities” (Weber, 1968, p. 48).

The aim of this chapter is to argue that charisma is a collective representation, and that charismatic authority is a social status that derives more from the “recognition” of the followers than from the “magnetism” of the leaders. I contend further that a close reading of Max Weber shows that he, too, saw charisma in this light.

I develop my argument by a close reading of many of the most relevant texts on the subject. This includes not only the renowned texts on this subject by Max Weber, but also many books and articles that interpret or criticize Weber’s views.

I pay exceptionally close attention to key arguments and texts, several of which have been overlooked in the past.

Writers for whom charisma is personal magnetism tend to assume that charismatic rule is natural and that the full realization of democratic norms is unlikely. Authority, in this view, emanates from rulers unbound by popular constraint. I argue that, in fact, authority draws both its mandate and its energy from the public, and that rulers depend on the loyalty of their subjects, which is never assured. So charismatic claimants are dependent on popular choice, not vice versa.

I advocate a “culturalist” interpretation of Weber, which runs counter to the dominant “personalist” account. Conventional interpreters, under the sway of theology or mass psychology, misread Weber as a romantic, for whom charisma is primal and undemocratic rule is destiny. This essay offers a counter-reading.

While organizationally relevant outcomes of charismatic leadership have been studied more extensively, we do not know as much about when and why followers attribute charisma to leaders. Drawing on the self-concept based motivational theory of charisma developed by Boas Shamir and colleagues, we propose that congruence between leaders and followers on a core characteristic, namely organizational identification plays an important role. When leaders are high on identification with the organization, they embody and communicate the values of the organization more strongly in their vision and behaviors, which is likely to affect the attribution of charisma to these leaders, but only for followers who themselves strongly identify with the organization. In contrast, those leaders low on organizational identification are more likely to communicate messages that appeal to followers who are similarly low on identification. A multi-source study in the healthcare sector largely supports our model as congruence between organizational identification levels of leaders and followers is positively linked to perceived charisma and, in turn, charisma relates to followers’ organizational citizenship behavior.

Mission statements are usually related to strategic management and elements related to the organization's identity. Catholic higher education organizations (CHEOs) identity is based on the Charisma of the founder of the Catholic order or congregation. If in contradiction, it puts their organizational legitimacy at risk. If organizations deviate from their identity, it means a mission drift. Even more severe is when mission statements are misaligned with the identity. In this study, the authors seek better understand the mission drift by the misalignment between the mission statement and the organizational identity of the CHEOs.

The authors examine the mission statements of 112 Catholic CHEOs in Brazil. They used lexical analysis based on descending hierarchical classification and post-factorial analysis. They analyzed the vocabularies of each class extracted from the descending hierarchical classification and determine the presence or absence of the Charisma.

The results indicate that aspects of Catholic identity through the Charisma are manifested in the organizational mission but are not predominant. There is a variation of the mission statements relative to the Charisma of the orders and congregations. A significant part manifests generically. They respond in a similar and isomorphic way or to internal institutional pressures of CHEOs.

The authors empirically identified a mission drift, considering the mismatch between the mission statement and the Charisma. The authors emphasize that for organizational identity to manifest, it should consider the identity that emerges from the founder's Charisma. This influence must appear in central elements of the organizational identity, such as the mission statements.

This article reveals the mutability of charisma by tracing changes in the conceptualization of charisma throughout the history of leadership research. Religious, societal, and organizational phases in the conceptualization of charisma are identified. The mutability of charisma has extended charismatic leadership theory from the domain of theology to multiple facets of the organizational sciences. Shifting conceptualizations of charisma that emphasize different elements have facilitated the study of leader traits, leader behaviors, situational contingencies, leader and organizational communications, and organizational cultures. These pluralistic conceptualizations of leadership and charisma have broadened our understanding of charismatic leadership. Yet, we must acknowledge that the breadth of knowledge we have gained has been at the expense of a more profound understanding of any one particular conceptualization of charisma.

Charismatic leadership can be defined by the features of the leaders, but also by the multiple‐level interaction processes that take place between the leaders and the led. As we approach the phenomenon, it is easy to see that in earlier research charismatic leadership is faced with many kinds of criticism. As seen, its consequences may be dangerous for organizations which may be led for “shared madness”. The undesirable consequences at the societal level include totalitarian aspects as well as truth manipulation practised by charismatic leaders. At the same time, charismatic leadership can be regarded as part of transformational leadership, where vision, intrapreneurship and emotions play a vital role. In this paper we explore charismatic leadership and followership taking a case from ice hockey coaching as an example. We suggest that ethics usually takes a guardian’s role in evaluating the outcome of charismatic leadership processes, that emotionality plays a vital role both in charismatic leadership and followership, and that charismatic leadership needs to be understood in the contexts that may culturally trigger it.

The intention of this paper is to conceptualize charisma as a multidimensional, cognitive‐affective phenomenon for the reason that the current practice of conceptualization and operationalization of charisma in terms of observable extraordinary behaviour of the leader has diluted “attributed extraordinariness” while disregarding other facets that the theorists assume to be part of charisma.

The existing literature on charisma in many diverse disciplines is appraised in order to enumerate the dimensions of charisma. Accordingly, the paper presents a working definition of charisma and makes suggestions on developing a scale of charisma as a multidimensional, cognitive‐affective phenomenon.

The paper concludes that charisma is a cognitive‐affective phenomenon and is characterized by “Leader extraordinariness”, “Leader archetypicality” “Leader group prototypicality” (cognitive dimensions), “Reverence with awe” and “Love with enthusiasm” (affective dimensions).

Other than explaining how a scale of charisma could be developed, the paper also explains how the proposed conceptualization opens up new avenues for the exploration of routinization of charisma and follower psychological dynamics.

While the paper urges leaders to appeal to followers emotionally and to use the impression management techniques, it urges followers to be vigilant about the “dark side of charisma”.

The present paper can be taken as the first attempt at conceptualizing charisma as a multidimensional, cognitive‐affective phenomenon, though charisma has been long thought to be so. As it takes a follower‐centric approach and incorporates many dimensions of charisma which are presently neglected in operationalizing charisma, the suggested scale of charisma will more validly measure the charisma of leaders than scales presently used.

The purpose of this paper is to develop measures of charisma and vision and to examine their influences on follower‐level outcomes in four countries, namely, India, Singapore, the UK, and the USA.

The authors conducted a series of three studies. In the first study, conducted in Singapore, an open‐ended questionnaire was used to gather statements of charisma and vision for developing charismatic and visionary categories or themes. The second study, also conducted in Singapore, involved constructing items to represent various categories or themes of charisma and vision, collecting data, and performing factor analyses to develop dimensions of charisma and vision. The third study validated the measures of charisma and vision developed in the first two studies across national samples drawn from two Asian (India and Singapore) and two Western countries (the UK and the USA), and examined the relationships of charismatic and visionary dimensions with motivation, satisfaction, cooperation, and performance of employees.

One major dimension of charisma, social sensitivity, and two key dimensions of vision, daring/change‐seeking and expertise/knowledge, universally emerged across all four countries. Social sensitivity showed highly significant positive relationships with motivation and satisfaction of followers across all four countries. The daring/change‐seeking leadership was highly positively related to motivation, satisfaction, cooperation, and performance of employees in the UK and the USA only. Expertise and knowledge showed relatively stronger relationship with follower outcomes in India and Singapore than in the UK and the USA.

The study identifies charisma and vision as two basic components of transformational leadership, develops new measures of these constructs, and examines their relationships with follower‐level outcomes.

Weber emphasized the informal structure, followers' power, and time in charismatic leadership; yet the extant literature either overlooks or underplays the significance of each of these facets. The aim of this paper is to revisit Weber's conceptualizations of charisma and illuminate these facets, thus creating new avenues for the contemporary charismatic leadership research.

The focus of this research is on analysis of Weber's conceptualization of charisma. The analysis of selected quotes is grounded within contemporary discourse in order to illustrate how three overlooked facets may propel future research on charismatic leadership.

By revisiting Weber's seminal work, the paper illustrates several historical findings and identifies research opportunities that are yet to be addressed by contemporary study in charismatic leadership. In doing so, the paper generates a set of propositions as an impetus for future exploration.

To address the three proposed questions, researchers should focus their attention on the exploration of charisma outside of the formal bureaucracy, the dynamic power relations between leaders and followers, and the temporally bound nature of charisma. Given the nature of these questions, researchers may also consider alternative research methods such as in-depth case studies and narratives in order to more fully capture the dynamic and unpredictable nature of charisma in complex contexts.

Contemporary research largely overlooks or underplays the issues of time, the informal structure, and followers in the study of charisma. Through analysis of Weber's writings, this paper brings to the forefront these issues, and thus provide rich opportunities for future research on charismatic leadership.