Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Transcript of Charismatic Leadership
Conger & Kanungo (1998) describe five behavioral attributes of charismatic leaders:
1. Vision and articulation;
2. Sensitivity to the environment;
3. Sensitivity to member needs;
4. Personal risk taking;
5. Performing unconventional behavior. What is Charismatic Leadership? Seven Core Motivational Processes: Jung and Sosik (2006) describe positive aspects:
1. Works in a social structure to heighten morale of followers.
2. Motivates followers to give extra output.
3. It achieves self-actualization from its followers.
4. It shapes the society the way followers and leaders dream it would be.
5. It increases overall performance of a organization.
6. Creates unity and belonging in followers.
Decelles and Pfarrer (2004) describe negative aspects:
1. The leader can use the followers' energy in a destructive negative way.
2. As leader's confidence increases, can become blinded, which leads to misuse of power and becoming corrupt.
3. Organization follows leaders wholeheartedly, no resistance or internal check of power. Positive versus Negative Aspects of Charismatic Leadership 1. Individual and Organizational Characteristics (Leader's traits & organizational culture)
2. Leader Behavior ( Leader establishes a vision & models desired traits, values, and beliefs to achieve that vision )
3. Effects on Followers and Work Groups (Increase motivation and group cohesion, identification of collective interests, achievement, orientation, and goal pursuit )
4. Outcome (Personal commitment to leader and vision through self-sacrificing behavior, commitment and satisfaction) By: Sarah Wilson, Abbey Duggal, & Adrian Carr
February 27, 2013
ED9501 - Theories in Educational Administration
Professor Rose Burton Spohn Charismatic Leadership:
Should it be More Prevalent in Educational Leaders? •When applying the ideologies of “charismatic leadership” to the education system
in Ontario over time, it seems appropriate to do so by focusing on the relationship between principal and teacher.
•Charismatic leaders are typically viewed as effective leaders: leaders who inspire
extraordinary performance in followers as well as build their trust, faith and belief
in the leader (Howell & Avolio, 1992).
•This seems to juxtapose the traditional view of what type of person a principal has typically been
in the past; that is to say these qualities of a charismatic leader don’t seem to really match the
stereotypical job description of a principal in Ontario over the past 100 years.
•It’s clear that education has evolved greatly since the early 1900’s; schools are no longer 1 room;
class sizes are much larger; and a greater amount of students go to school. However, has the position
of principal changed at all? Charismatic leadership styles seem to be the wave of the future, but that
future seems to have been on the horizon for many years. Charismatic Leadership:
Now •Since 1999, education has been in a state of flux; the Harris government inserted much chaos into the system, followed only years later by the McGuinty government inserting even more. In the present situation in Ontario, it is not hard to see that principals, who can inspire more intrinsic motivation within teachers, are going to have a school which has a higher probability of running programs and who will have a staff that is going to be more invested in their career (Shamir, House & Arthur, 1993).
•Charismatic leaders are able to give “meaningfulness to work by infusing work and organizations with moral purpose and commitment rather than by affecting the task environment of followers or by offering material incentives and the threat of punishment” (Shamir, House & Arthur, 1993, pg. 578.). Through this ideology, it certainly seems that even in times of labor strife, staff that had a principal exhibiting this leadership style would be more likely to engage in certain activities and still have high levels of commitment to the career.
•In the end, the ability to make individuals transcend their own self-interest for the sake of the larger vision of the school (or even the school board),allows principals who exhibit charismatic leadership qualities to foster an environment which is more exciting and enthusiastic for both staff and students (Vera & Crossan, 2004). Charismatic Education:
The Future •As we look to the future of education, it is clear that because education
is a dynamic entity, more changes are inevitable. We have seen students change over the years as different policies are adopted (such as no late marks deducted
we have seen teachers adapt their teaching styles as new research comes out about learning styles and the use of technology; but have we really seen
a shift or change in the upper levels of leadership, specifically in principals?
The answer is a resounding no.
•The bureaucratic leadership style still seems to be the most prevalent in Ontario education, perhaps due to the presence of unions; perhaps due to the constant
cycle of labour strife; perhaps due to the characteristics of the type of individual the job of principal attracts. But is it the most efficient and most suitable for a career
based around relationships? The answer again is a resounding no.
•It certainly seems that having a person in a position of power who can incorporate their staff’s hopes, dreams and aspirations into their
vision as well as develop
creative, critical thinking; welcome positive and negative feedback and recognize the contributions of the staff, would serve education
very well going forward (Howell & Avolio, 1992).
•Furthermore, through manifesting charisma, providing inspirational fillips, stimulating teachers intellectually and offering consideration and concern
on a one-to-one basis, teachers motivation and self-confidence will be enhance; which, when a business such as education is undergoing constant change,
seems to be of the utmost importance (Dubinsky, Yammarino & Jolson, 1995). Neo-Weberian Perspectives or
The Neo-Charismatic Leadership Paradigm: Max Weber: Max Weber & the Theory of Charismatic Leadership: Influence of Max Weber’s Theory of Charismatic Leadership: Recommended Sources: References Conger, J. A., and R. N. Kanungo (Eds). (1998). Charismatic Leadership in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
DeCelles, K. A. and M. D. Pfarrer (2004). Heroes or villains? Corruption and the charismatic leader. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 11(1): 67(11).
Dubinsky, A., Yammarino, F., & Jolson, M. (1995). An Examination of Linkages Between Personal Characteristics and Dimensions of Transformational Leadership. Journal of Business and Psychology, 9:18, 315-335.
Jermier, M. John. (1993). Introduction-Charismatic Leadership: Neo-Weberian Perspectives. Leadership Quarterly 4:4, 217-233.
Jung, D. and J. J. Sosik. (2006).Who are the spellbinders? Identifying personal attributes of Charismatic Leaders. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 12:4, 12-15.
Houghton, D. Jeffrey. (2010). Does Max Weber’s Notion of Authority Still Hold in the Twenty-First Century? Journal of Management History 16:4, 449-453.
House, J. Robert. (1999). Weber and the Neo-Charismatic Leadership Paradigm: A Response to Beyer. Leadership Quarterly 10:4, 563-574.
Howell, J. & Avolio, B. (1992). The ethics of charismatic leadership: submission or liberation? The Executive, 6 :2, 43-54.
Howell, J. & Shamir, B. (2005). The role of followers in the charismatic leadership process: relationships and their consequences. The Academy of Management Review, 30:1, 96-112.
Shamir, B., House, R., Arthur, M. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: a self-concept based theory. Organization Science, 4:4, 577-594.
Vera, D. & Crossan, M. (2004). Strategic leadership and organizational learning. The Academy of Management Review, 29:2, 222-240. Shamir et. al (1993) state a leader follows the following seven core motivational processes:
1. Instill faith in a better future by expressing confidence in attaining it.
2. Increase attraction of effort by expressing symbolic and expressive aspects of the effort.
3. Increase accomplishment expectancy by expressing confidence in meeting those expectations.
4. Increase followers self-esteem and self-worth by indicating link to efforts and values held.
5. Increase value of goal accomplishment by linking goal to vision for followers.
6. Increase personal commitment by encouraging internalization and identification of values.
7. Encourage motivation for vision by increasing goal setting behavior, use of feedback and self-corrective behavior. •Born in 1864 in Erfurt, Germany, Weber was the eldest of eight children;
•Weber studied law at the University of Heidelberg, but his career would go on to span into a variety of disciplines such as history, economics, philosophy, political science, and sociology;
•In 1904, Weber published some of his most influential essays and these essays were later collected to comprise his most influential book: The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism;
•Max Weber’s ideas and writings had an immense impact on the development of the fields of management, organizational theory, and authority (i.e. traditional, rational-legal, and charismatic). •Weber redefined the term “charisma” from its original ecclesiastical meaning of “divinely bestowed power or talent” to mean “a special quality of an individual capable of inspiring and influencing others,” thus he laid the foundation for the concept of charismatic leadership;
•Dubbed the ‘father of the field,’ Weber defined charismatic leadership or charismatic leaders, as ‘extraordinarily gifted persons or at the very least, persons to whom extraordinary qualities are attributed by followers;’
•Thus according to Weber’s theory of charismatic leadership, in order for charismatic leadership to occur the five elements must be present: (1) an extraordinarily gifted person, (2) a social crisis or situation of desperation, (3) a set of ideas providing a radical solution to the crisis, (4) a set of followers who are attracted to the exceptional person and come to believe that he or she is directly linked to transcendent powers, and (5) the validation of that person’s extraordinary gifts and transcendence by repeated successes (House, 1999, p.563). •Jermier (1993), presented four distinct themes of a Neo-Weberian approach to charisma, which include:
1.The role of charisma in organizations and the work place
2.Charisma and the dimension of the social relationship (the social interactions and dimension of charisma)
3.The relationship between leader and the mission (the support of the mission vs. the support of the leader)
4.Institutionalization of charisma (establishment of an organizational structure and successors)
•House (1999), suggests the development of a new paradigm of charismatic leadership theory and research in respect to the psychological processes implicated in the charismatic phenomenon (p.565) whereas, Weber’s theory of charismatic leadership focused on the importance of social crisis and the vision of the charismatic leader. •Houghton (2010), postulated that Weber’s writings on charismatic authority has influenced today’s modern leadership theory, as the charismatic form of authority is effective and applicable in today’s chaotic and rapidly changing environments (p.451);
•Weber’s ideas are continuously inspiring and informing research, debate, and theory building regarding organizational theory and the study of leadership;
•The following works are influential Neo-Weberian thinkers and body of work:
1. Stephen Turner’s “Charisma and Obedience: A Risk Cognition Approach” 2. Nancy DiTomaso’s “Weber’s Social History and in Etzioni’ s Structural Theory of Charisma in Organizations: Implications for Thinking About Charismatic Leadership”
3. Jay A. Conger’s “Max Weber’s Conceptualization of Charismatic Authority: Its Influence on Organizational Research”
4. Alan Bryman’s “Charismatic Leadership in Business Organizations: Some Neglected Issues.” 1. Summary of Major Principals of Charismatic Leadership
2. Max Weber and Contributions to the Charismatic Leadership Theory
3. Present and Future of Charismatic Leadership
4.Five Recommended Sources
5.Reference List 1. Jermier, M. John. (1993). Introduction-Charismatic Leadership: Neo-Weberian Perspectives. Leadership Quarterly 4:4, 217-233. In this article, Jermier explores the Neo-Weberian perspectives and developments in the theory of charismatic leadership. The purpose of the article is to “stimulate further critical thought about the notion of charisma by re-examining aspects of Weber’s theory…” (p.218). Thus, the article provides thorough information on the contributions made to the theory of charismatic leadership and charisma.
2. House, J. Robert. (1999). Weber and the Neo-Charismatic Leadership Paradigm: A Response to Beyer. Leadership Quarterly 10:4, 563-574. In this article, House explores the idea of a new charismatic leadership paradigm in respect to the inclusion of psychological processes of a charismatic leader. In comparison to Weber’s theory of charismatic leadership and the importance of the ‘crisis’ and the leader’s vision. Thus, the article provides an examination of recently developed theories of charismatic leadership.
3. Jung, D. and J. J. Sosik. (2006).Who are the spellbinders? Identifying personal attributes of Charismatic Leaders. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 12:4, 12-15. In this article, the authors examine five personal attributes of leaders (ex: self-monitoring, self actualization, motive to attain social power, self-enhancement, and openness to change). They measured ratings of charismatic leadership with follower and managerial performance outcomes. Thus, the article provides results which indicate managers with high charismatic leadership result in having follower who exhibited extra effort in their work performance.
4. DeCelles, K. A. and M. D. Pfarrer (2004). Heroes or villains? Corruption and the charismatic leader. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 11(1): 67(11). Here, research indicates how corruption increases because of stakeholder and environmental pressures. Thus, the article shows the implications of the dark side of charismatic leadership, where followers participate, or even enable the leaders' wrongdoings.
5. Howell, J. & Avolio, B. (1992). The ethics of charismatic leadership: submission or liberation? The Executive, 6 :2, 43-54. In this article, Howell and Avolio examine both sides of the ideology that charismatic leaders are "...the heroes of management..."(p. 43). Specifically, they focus on the ethical charismatic leader vs. the unethical charismatic leader (one who promotes their own personal vision; censures opposing views; and is an expert in one-way communication). They argue that it is not charismatic leaders who can lead an organization to success, but rather 'ethical' charismatic leaders.