A Motivational Theory Of Charismatic Leadership

Psychological empowerment is an important perception for both practitioners and researchers (Spreitzer, 1995). The concept of empowerment has been developed and advanced by several researchers. Many academics and practitioners over the past decade have embraced empowerment as a means of increasing decision-making at lower organizational levels while at the same time inspiring the worklives of employees (Chebat & Kollias, 2000; Conger & Kanungo, 1988; Spreitzer, 1995; 1996; Thomas & Velthouse, 1990). Beyond the power sharing condition of empowerment, Conger and Kanungo (1988) insisted that there is also a psychological experience of empowerment for individuals. The psychological experience is one of motivational self-efficacy.

The charismatic leadership model is similar to the transformational style of leadership; they focus on treating the followers as a whole person that is a vital part of the organization. The leader will be proactive with problems and find solutions before the problems arise. They will assess the situation, identify the possible problems, analyze the environment for solutions, and verbalize the plan to the team members to produce an effect of on boarding. The leadership model is said to be effective based on the fact that the leader is building on self esteem and self worth issues from the

employee what needs to be done and how much effort will need to be made.

In this paper, we will review four leadership models: charismatic, servant, situational, and transformational. A separate discussion describing

Competent leadership is important to establishing a climate in which empowerment can occur. Key to employee empowerment is creating an environment for positive communication, shared decision-making, and trust (Ongori & Shundra, 2008). An organization’s management must nurture employee empowerment; that is, employees must be able to recognize that empowerment is a priority in the organization.

leader, charismatic leader team members would show up to work all the time and would have little to no turnover rate. One downside of having a charismatic leader is that they can believe in themselves more than they believe in their team (www.mindtools.com). A charismatic leader might believe that she can do no wrong, while carrying great responsibilities. An effective leadership is the extent to which a leader continually and progressively leading and directing his/her followers to the agreed destination which is defined by the whole group (Bhati, Matilo, Shaikh, and Hashmi, 2012).

According to Bishop (2009), in transformational leadership, ‘motivational power’ is seen when the leader shares information and involve the subordinates in decision making, recognise the accomplishments, and rewards the behaviour. Furthermore, the leader openly shares the information with the team as to be aware of the problems and the need for action (Jones, 2007). Unlike the charismatic and situational theories that were mentioned, one makes the subordinates aware and understand that they are an internal part of the group; and to establish an effective relationship by building self-esteem and developing trust (Ellis and Hartley, 2008).

The role of the “Leader” I believe sometimes relates to the individual to delegate the set goals or mission to the followers and believe the “Followers” have the belief and confidence in the “Leader” in how he/she has decided to execute the set goals and missions. Therefore the leader has to demand structure and organise how the followers must or should complete the task laid out to attain the success or victory of the mission. From a scientific perspective the only measurement tool here is the success or victory of the mission, regardless of ethics or principles, step by step quantifiable measurement, morals and wider impacts. Also the question into, is the “Leader” acting in the best of everyone’s interest, is there compassion and total unbiased approach and is there room for the “Follower” to openly call into question the methods employed and approach; ultimately is the leader able to take on-board concerns and alternative views to change/alter the course /route in delivering the success needed. Some of the definitions of the “Leader” I have observed reads; A leader has a vision. Leaders see a problem that needs to be fixed or a goal that needs to be achieved. It may be something that no one else sees or simply something that no one else wants to tackle. Whatever it is, it is the focus of the leader's attention and they attack it with a single-minded determination. From a scientific background and

Charismatic leaders are able to inspire emotion and passion in their followers by being optimistic and enthusiastic. Without passionate and emotional employees, an organization will be crippled and unable to face

Which shows the multiple regression of charismatic, human-oriented and task oriented leadership on leader’s communication styles and it significantly describe the data about human behavior and qualities under leadership and task orientations, however gender significantly was related to both leader’s expressiveness and knowledge collecting behaviors, the analysis with gender as a control variable. The relation of leader’s expressiveness with knowledge collection, which was extra noticeable with gender the equation. The calculation also depicts that leader performance, satisfaction with the leader and sub-ordinate’s team commitment were the outcome variables. Same data were found for satisfaction with the leader and subordinate’s team commitment. However not charismatic leadership was totally counted.

Many great leaders have one thing in common and that is charisma. Charismatic leaders are those that have the capability to inspire and encourage people to do more than they would normally do, despite obstacles and personal sacrifice. (Daft, R.L, pg. 364) Charisma is what provokes energy and commitment out of its followers. These leaders possess the power to motivate their followers to do almost anything. They create an atmosphere of change and express an ideal vision of a better future. The most common characteristics of the charismatic leader involve maturity, communication, humility, and inspiration. These unique qualities impact their followers and conduct themselves in such a way that allows for remarkable results. Then

to the leader’s beliefs and willing to obey him or her. Jesus showed His disciples who He had

The charismatic manager approach is dependent on the captivates and articulateness of the manager; charismatic managers are compelled by their passions and dedication to their reason. Charismatic managers correspondingly are occasionally known as transformational managers since this type of manager shares several relationships. Their principal dissimilarity is emphasis and audience; charismatic managers frequently attempt to make the present circumstances pleasanter, whereas transformational managers emphasize on converting corporations into the manager’s visualization. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a charismatic manager who utilized compelling grandiloquence, an interlocking disposition, and steadfast devotion to constructive transformation in the exist of millions of people. (Spahr, P., 2016)

Job involvement is an issue that plagues almost every organization as there will always be employees who may be physically at work, but not there mentally. Job involvement is defined by Robbins and Judge (2009) as “the degree to which a person identifies with a job, actively participates in it, and considers performance important to self-worth” (p. 79). It is not uncommon to meet someone who talks negatively about their job and who is not “all in” as I like to tell my Sailors. I believe that leadership and the correct application of it in our workplace is what determines the level of job involvement that will be exhibited by our employees. A charismatic leader who applies the situational leadership theory in the workplace has a very high chance of increasing the overall job involvement of all personnel.

This authority rests on the appeal of the leader. At the same time this form of authority has its own drawbacks. It is unstable and it deteriorates if the leader is unable to bring about the changes he promised to bring. This is what we concluded from the case study by Rakesh Khurana as well. John McCoy, the CEO of Bank One was a very charismatic leader. He brought about a huge change in the Bank's financial and economic position. His attitude helped the bank to expand and take over First Chicago. But as and when McCoy's attitude changed, people saw a change in the services of Bank One which had started faltering. His laid-back attitude finally led to his removal from the post of CEO by his own board of members.