Leadership: Charismatic Individuals or Contingent Characteristics?

Leadership is, and always has been, a vital aspect of social and economic constructs. It is essential to the survival of societies, industries, organizations, and virtually any group of individuals that come together for a common purpose. However, leadership is difficult to define in a single, definitive sense. As such, theories of leadership, what constitutes a great leader, and how leaders are made have evolved constantly throughout history, and still continue to change today in hopes of improving upon our understanding of leadership, its importance, and how it can be most effective in modern organizational cultures.

Leadership has been described as the “process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task”...

Classical organisational theorist defined leadership in terms of achieving a group’s objectives R.C Davies (1942) referred to leadership as “the principle dynamic forces that motivates and coordinates the organisation in the accomplishment of its objectives.” Similarly, Urwick (1953) stated that the leader is “the personification of common purpose not only to all who work under taking, but to everyone outside it.” K. Davies (1962) defined leadership as “the human factor which binds a group together and motivates it towards goals.” Cattell (1951) took the extreme position that leadership is whatever or whoever contributes to the group’s performance. To measure each members Leadership, Cattell noted, removed him or her from the group, one at a time, and observe what happens to the group’s performance. Calder (1977) and Pfeffer (1977) “stated that leadership is mainly influence and is even attributed to participants after the fact.

The principal aspects of leadership are oft debated; to attempt to define what leadership is would most certainly result in broad and varied definitions dependent on who is queried. Nonetheless, in the preeminent

The book begins by exploring reasons for the interest in leadership today. The authors suggest a variety of reasons, including the rapid pace of change, and they also set out some parameters for understanding leadership, including the question of ‘leader’ or ‘leadership’. Here, as throughout the book, what I found most stimulating was the way in which the authors take a step back and ask questions which are not always being asked elsewhere.

Leadership, eluded to by Daft (2011) as one of the most observed and least understood phenomena on earth, is an evolving discipline that is an influence relationship among subordinates and followers who intend real changes and outcomes that reflect their shared purpose (pp. 4-5). But with the study of leadership comes along the different aspects and theories as to which is more appropriate for an organization. Initial traditional theories recognized that leaders are born with

There has been vast amounts of research done on the topic of leadership, and yet despite this it continues to be ‘‘riddled with paradoxes, inconsistencies, and contradictions’’

Precisely identifying what it takes to be an effective leader can be a difficult task. Which is likely the reason that almost all who have attempted to define leadership have provided somewhat different descriptions (Grossman & Valiga, 2012). Therefore in order to develop a personal leadership philosophy the review of others writing on the subject of leadership was conducted. Maxwell concluded leadership is the ability to influence others, and while we may be unaware of it we are all leaders in one way or another due to the influence we have on others (2012). Further Maxwell went on to state, it is the responsibility of each individual leader to

Leadership has been studied extensively and many varying definitions exist. Hughes, Ginnett and Curphy (2015, p.4) review many of these definitions and consequently describe leadership as ‘the process of influencing an organised group towards its goals’. Leadership involves the interplay of a range of different factors, not least the leader themselves, the followers and the situation. For

The term leadership has many different definitions and is perceived in different ways. Common core concepts of leaderships are that it “involves a process of intentional influence that is exerted by one person over other people to guide or facilitate activities in a group or organization” (Yukl, 2006). A leader is defined as a “person or thing that leads” or “a guiding or directing head” while leadership “is a person who guides or directs a group” (Webster). Leaders influence individuals in order to accomplish a common goal. Qualities found in effective leaders are that have exemplary character, analytically thinkers, enthusiastic about their work, function in an orderly manner, remain calm in situations, and are committed to the main purpose, and to excellence (White, B., 2014). Leaders are able to influence other individuals which result in a commitment by the followers. They inspire followers to sacrifice their own interest for a higher cause. These higher causes can be for the purpose of a group as a whole or for the sole purpose of the leader. Leadership can be a specialized role or a shared influence. It can be direct and indirect. While a direct leadership is shown by the transmitting or information to an individual, the cascading effect it has is seen as the indirect leadership (Yukl, 2006).

Max Weber, German sociologist, introduced the concept of social authority into sociology and defined three main types of it: traditional, rational and charismatic authority. Since the first is strongly connected with (remaining of) feudal era and rational autority is predominant in capitalist society, charismatic authority from time to time emerges in every society. Scope of analysis of charismatic authority was further extended by Sigmund Freud's second essay Group Psychology and Analysis of the Ego (Massenpsychologie und Ich-analyse), which joined sociology with (social)

In today’s vibrant and difficult environment, upcoming business models are surfacing and an important aspect of all these new models is leadership. Leadership has never been emphasized so much as before more than ever leadership is recognized as central to determine the success or failure of any organization. (Sadler 2003) According to Achua and Lussier, “Leadership is the influencing process of leaders and followers to achieve organization objective through changes”. With this growth in importance of leaders, the numbers of theories about leadership has increase as well. With these new theories and ideas about

This chapter identifies and critically reviews past postulations that are deemed relevant in the context of this study. The chapter first explores the notion of leadership discusses several types of leadership. In doing so it also looks at some the strengths and weaknesses of the leadership style.

Numerous of leaders especially in the church are considered charismatic. Before the 1980’s, charisma was not a major topic of discussion. The Charismatic approach is measured to reflect a particular kind of leader. They are usually strong self-confident individuals that portray competency. Their followers tend to mimic the goals and leadership style of the charismatic leader. They are gifted in articulating their ideas, “plans and goals to others while creating an ambiance that says, do as I do. They can articulate a compelling or captivating vision and can arouse strong emotions in followers. Despite the controversy about the originality of the charismatic leader, they are effective in the church, politics, and the business

Today in society we see many leaders in this chaotic world we live in today. Leaders have to deal with tricky situations no matter the circumstances. Everyone including leaders desire to work in a drama free and less negative establishment. However, an effective leader must be able to with handle problems or issues. A leader have to learn how to adapt and adjust, guide their counterparts which leads to productive environment. Charismatic leader helps produces a pleasurable environment to create happiness which motivates subordinates... According to Andrew DuBrin charisma is defined as “type of charm and magnetism that inspires others; important quality for leaders at levels.” The qualities a charismatic leader must demonstrate: communication skills, passion, enthusiasm, and motivating skills A charismatic leader are very skilled communicators and communicate well to their superiors or subordinates on a deep and emotional level.