Search results

Questionnaires assessing subjects′ perceptions of charismatic and non‐charismatic leaders were administered to civilians and military officers. Results provided support for House′s 1976 model in that many traits distinguished charismatic from non‐charismatic individuals. Additionally, charismatic military leaders differed from charismatic civilian leaders on a number of personal characteristics. Implications for selecting and training leaders in organisations are discussed.

Articulation of a vision is commonly held to be a critical component of theories of outstanding leadership – both transformational and charismatic leadership. Although there is reason to suspect that vision contributes to leader performance, less is known about the nature and origin of viable visions. In the present chapter, we argue that leaders’ visions can be viewed as a prescriptive mental model reflecting beliefs about the optimal functioning of an organization. To test this proposition, outstanding leaders possessing two contrasting types of prescriptive mental models were identified: ideologues whose models stress the maintenance of extant standards and charismatics whose models stress adaptive change. These two types of prescriptive mental models were associated with distinct patterns of leader behavior in a sample of notable historic leaders. The implications of these findings are discussed with respect to current theories of outstanding leadership.

Using five categories summarized by Bass (1990), this chapter attempts to address three key questions about charismatic leadership:

• (1)

  What are the key behavioral dimensions of charismatic leadership?

• (2)

  How does charismatic leadership differ from other forms of leadership?

• (3)

  Who may become followers of charismatic leaders and when do they become followers?

What are the key behavioral dimensions of charismatic leadership?

How does charismatic leadership differ from other forms of leadership?

Who may become followers of charismatic leaders and when do they become followers?

By focusing on Weber’s original view of charisma, we suggest that his three dimensions of charismatic leader behaviors underlie most contemporary approaches. By considering these three dimensions in more detail, we demonstrate how this view allows for different views of leadership and is distinguishable from management. Finally, by extending Weber’s view and by identifying two types of charismatic leaders who differ in their power motives, we suggest how the characteristics of followers and the context influence followers’ acceptance of charismatic leaders as legitimate. Some implications for leadership effectiveness are discussed.

Despite apparent consensus about the importance of leader rhetoric, the topic has not received systematic attention from leadership scholars. The purpose of this article is to advance the study of the relationship between rhetorical behavior and charismatic leadership in three ways: first, by presenting theoretically derived propositions about the expected contents of charismatic leaders’ speeches; second, by offering a thematic content analysis of a representative speech by a charismatic orator, in order to demonstrate the content themes suggested by the propositions; and third, by specifying the requirements for more systematic studies of the relationship between speech content and charisma.

The literature on charismatic leadership in organizations has neglected the organizational context in which such leadership is embedded. The purpose of this article is to enrich and refine charismatic leadership theory by linking it to its organizational context. We argue that while charismatic leadership principles and processes potentially apply across a wide variety of situations, the emergence and effectiveness of such leadership may be facilitated by some contexts and inhibited by others. We develop and present a series of propositions linking contextual variable to the emergence and effectiveness of charismatic leadership. Among the contextual variable we examine are the organizational environment, life-cycle stage, technology, tasks, goals, structure, and culture, as well as the leader’s level in the organization and the circumstances surrounding his or her appointment.

This paper reviews and compares six theoretical explanations of the effects of charismatic leaders on their followers. Of the six explanations two are based on psychoanalytic theory, two on attribution theory, one on a sociological theory of symbolic centers, and one on the social psychology of the self-concept. The review exposes differences among the explanations in their motivational assumptions, their predictions regarding leader behaviors and effects on followers, and the mediating mechanisms they posit between leader behaviors and effects on followers. The most critical differences are highlighted and suggested as foci of future research on charismatic leadership.

Theories of outstanding, historically notable, leadership have traditionally emphasized charisma. Recent research, however, suggests that charisma may represent only one pathway to outstanding leadership. Outstanding leadership may also emerge from ideological and pragmatic leadership. In this article, we examine the conditions influencing the emergence and performance of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders. It is argued that different conditions operating at the environmental, organizational, group, and individual levels influence the emergence and performance of each of these three types of leaders. Implications for understanding the origins and impact of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders are discussed.

The relevance of affective factors in the charismatic leadership process has been widely acknowledged in leadership research. Building on this notion, the present study empirically investigated the role of leaders’ positive mood and emotional intelligence in the development of charismatic leadership behaviors. We developed hypotheses linking these constructs and tested them in a sample of 34 leaders and their 165 direct followers from a multinational corporation. Results showed that both leaders’ positive mood and leaders’ emotional intelligence were positively related to their charismatic leadership behaviors, as rated by followers. Further, we found leaders’ emotional intelligence to moderate the relationship between leaders’ positive mood and their charismatic leadership behaviors. Emotionally intelligent leaders exhibited charismatic leadership behaviors to a high extent, largely irrespective of their degree of positive mood. In contrast, leaders low on emotional intelligence were more likely to exhibit charismatic behaviors when their positive mood was high, while they were less likely to exhibit such behaviors when their positive mood was low. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for leadership theory, research, and practice.

The empirical literature on charismatic or transformational leadership demonstrates that such leadership has profound effects on followers. However, while several versions of charismatic leadership theory predict such effects, none of them explains the process by which these effects are achieved. In this paper we seek to advance leadership theory by addressing this fundamental problem. We offer a self-concept based motivational theory to explain the process by which charismatic leader behaviors cause profound transformational effects on followers. The theory presents the argument that charismatic leadership has its effects by strongly engaging followers’ self-concepts in the interest of the mission articulated by the leader. We derive from this theory testable propositions about (a) the behavior of charismatic leaders and their effects on followers, (b) the role of followers’ values and orientations in the charismatic relationship, and (c) some of the organizational conditions that favor the emergence and effectiveness of charismatic leaders.

Social entrepreneurs often make public appeals for funding to investors who are motivated by nonfinancial considerations. This emerging research context is an opportunity for researchers to expand the bounds of entrepreneurship theory. To do so, we require appropriate research tools. In this chapter, we show how computer-aided text analysis (CATA) can be applied to advance social entrepreneurship research. We demonstrate how CATA is well suited to analyze the public appeals for resources made by entrepreneurs, provide insight into the rationale of social lenders, and overcome challenges associated with traditional survey methods.

We illustrate the advantages of CATA by examining how charismatic language in 13,000 entrepreneurial narratives provided by entrepreneurs in developing countries influences funding speed from social lenders. CATA is used to assess the eight dimensions of charismatic rhetoric.

We find that four of the dimensions of charismatic rhetoric examined were important in predicting funding outcomes for entrepreneurs.

Data collection and sample size are important challenges facing social entrepreneurship research. This chapter demonstrates how CATA techniques can be used to collect valuable data and increase sample size. This chapter also examines how the rhetoric used by entrepreneurs impacts their fundraising efforts.