[I had chosen this article over the weekend and found it ironic that it was a heavily debated topic in class today]
M.S. Rao, chief consultant for an India-based leadership consulting agency, writes this overview of the charismatic leader, examining the best and the worst of this leadership dynamic. He opens his article with a strong statement, claiming that charisma results from effective leadership, not vice versa. Already this challenges our today’s lecture which seemed to imply that charismatic leadership theory, like great man/woman theory, is that this type of leader is born, rather than made.
The author listed numerous characteristics of the charismatic leader, both positive and negative, which I will not review here. However, Rao categorized charismatic leaders into five categories: socialized, personalized, office-holder, personal, and divine. The first uses his or her power to benefit others. The second uses his or her powers to benefit his or herself. Office-holding charismatic leaders draw power solely from their position. Conversely, personal charismatic leaders have power with or without office. The final category is the most arrogant-sounding: those who believe they are “God sent.”
The tone of the article was surprisingly upbeat. It came from an academic source unrelated to any Christian ministry. However, the descriptions the author used in explaining charismatic leadership echoed some of my understandings of servant leadership and transformative leadership theory. The author’s final advice for a leader seeking to become charismatic is from Dan Reiland: “How can you have charisma? Be more concerned about making others feel good about themselves than you are making them feel good about you.”
Read it--what do you think?
I got this
ReplyDeleteI believe that leadership in general is tricky subject. Any attempt to define a certain style tends to open itself to a variety of exceptions. Within the article I believe I have found something that might join the idea of a predisposition of charisma vs. attainable charisma. Jane A. Halpert divided charisma into referent power, expert power, and job involvement. Expert power and job involvement are in complete control of the individual in how effective they are which I believe aren’t necessarily “charismatic” in nature but add to any leadership style.
ReplyDeleteReferent power however is the traits or virtues that draw others to you. Although Charisma is something that you are born with and while some are given mucho charisma, some are not. The difference is that through good habits aimed at positioning individuals to attain traits or virtues, an individual may actually obtain new virtues. To use one of the traits within the article an individual can become more charismatic by memorizing people’s names. The habit itself is beneficial in itself but it may also create a greater awareness within the individual of others. It may predispose an individual to “read the room” with greater effectiveness. Thus we can become more charismatic potentially through habits and practices.