Routinization Of Leadership Essay

To be sure, Weber’s description of charismatic leadership does not account for all of the forces at play during the election, but his theory does shed light on why many individuals view Trump’s style of leadership as different and necessary in this current political moment. Weber’s discussion of the charismatic leader as an infallible authority with a perceived legitimate claim of power highlights why Trump supporters endorsed his rhetoric despite its many logical, political, and ethical flaws. Yet, according to Weber, Trump’s current style of leadership and authority cannot last in the long-term. This may be a comforting or concerning notion, but nonetheless, sheds light on what may occur during the Trump

In the changing business environment, leaders of all organisations may face unprecedented uncertainty, especially the technology advancement and changes among the employees. To survive and succeed, leaders should have some necessary attributes. Meanwhile, some changes for leadership skills have to be made to confront the challenges.

Firstly, background to the rise of the Soviet Union is examined. Keenan states that the Communists rose to power on ideas which denounced capitalism and

In Weber’s article he claims that there are specific types of domination, which stress the importance of establishing “legitimacy” as a leader, within a group of people. He supports this opening claim in his introduction paragraph, in which he defines the authority of domination “classified” by the “kind of claim” demanded (2). He ultimately supports his by breaking down the types of legitimacy in domination in three distinct categories: Legal authority, traditional authority, and charismatic authority (3). He supports his argument through theoretical examples in which he assumes the reader has a background in. The assumptions include: knowledge of basic authoritative environments such as work setting or school that are applied to his

It is undeniable that Stalin had a profound impact on the Soviet Union following Lenin’s death. His rise to power within the Soviet Union has provided historians with a hotbed of political intrigue for many years. He was an opportunist, coming to dominance by manipulating party politics and influential figures in the politburo to eliminate his opposition by recognising and exploiting their weaknesses thus becoming the dominant leader of the Soviet Union. He was severely underestimated by other members of the Politburo about his potential within the party, leading to missed opportunities to ally and stand against him- a mistake that Stalin never made. He gained support from the public by exploiting the idea of ‘the Cult of Lenin’ in 1924 at Lenin’s funeral, and then adopting this concept for himself, thereby likening himself to Lenin; and, more importantly, gained support from other party members by following the wishes of Lenin, for example, initially supporting the continuation of the NEP and supporting the idea of factionalism. This essay will also argue that he was ideologically flexible as he was able to change his ideas for the party according to who he needed as an ally, in order to achieve dominant status in the party. He sought out which individual was the biggest threat, and eliminated them before they could stand against him.

Antonakis, J., Fenley, M., & Liechti, S. (2011). Can Charisma Be Taught? Tests of Two Interventions. Academy Of Management Learning & Education, 10(3), 374-396. Antonakis et al starts off research by posing a question. “Can leadership, and in particular charisma, be taught? The authors set out to prove in fact that training can training managers a specific set of charismatic leadership tactics not only improves their charisma, but their effectiveness as leaders. Charismatic leadership is defined as by Antonakis et al as being a sub element of transformational leadership. In the first study researchers assigned 34 middle managers from a Swiss company into two groups randomly. One group received training in charisma and the others received no training. The group receiving training were trained in principles on charismatic leadership. In the second study focused on 41 MBA students enrolled in a leadership course at a Swiss public university monitor charismatic leadership. The students were videotaped giving a 4 minute speech addressing problems within the company while also giving a plan of action to staff. After, speech was done, each participant received training in charismatic leadership and was asked to deliver the same speech 6 weeks later by videotape. Results reveal that improvement and effectiveness as a leader were made in both research groups. This study concluded that feedback is important to the growth and development of leaders and must be provided to

Transformational leadership are classified into four components which are pointed out by Bass (1990, p. 28), ‘charisma, idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration’. Apart from these basic roles, charisma leadership, a collection of personal characteristics, has its own role of literature since it has similarity with transformational leadership and they are contribution to each other (Bertocci, 2009, p. 43; Judge & Piccolo, 2004, p. 755). Leaders’ behaviour reflects them being role models for their followers. Followers respect, admire and trust their leaders who have charismatic effect on their followers to an extremely high grade are willing to take risks

According to Weber, “sociological analysis will treat [people] on the same level as...men who are the "greatest" heroes...according to conventional judgements,” that addresses the subject of authority (Types of Legitimate Domination, 242.) In other words, those who display a charismatic, genuine nature as leaders, will receive a different admiration from their followers that resonates with that character that they’re putting forward.

Bryman, A., 1993, ‘Charismatic leadership in business organisations: some neglected issues’, Leadership Quarterly, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 289-304.

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

Weber’s second type of influence is charismatic authority. Charismatic authority is characterized by a leader with rare personal features that attract others to them. Charismatic leaders have qualities that are powerful and challenging

Finally, charismatic authority arises in periods of social unrest and change and thus depends not only on the existence of this `exceptional' individual but a social context which produces large numbers of individuals who are `disenchanted' with the present social institutions. Charisma, is in Weber's view ` a great revolutionary force' for social change. Charismatic movements always seek to dismantle or overthrow existing/traditional forms of authority and power. Finally, Weber suggests charismatic authority as inherently unstable since it is usually based upon a `personality cult' of the leader. When the leader dies then the movement will `die' with him/her or ossify and institutionalise itself into what Weber refers to as `the charisma of office': bureaucracy! Look at Fig. 1, (at the bottom of page 2 of this document) which I have taken and adapted from Bryan Turner's book. To understand the historical process we will need to begin with the `magician' and move `clockwise' towards `secular man'.

Charisma theory is described as a “gift”, or a unique superiority of an individual character. This is set by an advantage of which the individual is set apart from the common man and treated as a gem with supremacies (Charismatic vs. Transformational, 2011). Whereas the transformational theory is defined as leaders who enthuse followers to use their own egocentricities to benefit the organization (Charismatic vs. Transformational, 2011). These leaders also possess a gift of having a great impact on their followers (Charismatic vs. Transformational, 2011). Theories are apprehended around the world and almost every aspect of life possesses a theory behind them, whether there is action or unfolding someone’s personality. There are two leadership theories that will be conveyed, Charismatic Leadership and Transformational Leadership. Behind each theory is a founder that explains these concepts, James MacGregor Burns the founder of Transformational leadership (Conger, n.d.) and Karl Emil Maximilian "Max" Weber the founder of Charismatic leadership ("Transformational," n.d.). Over the course of time, movies have been made, demonstrating these theories, for example an old classic “The Lion King” ("Leadership Movies," 2008). This movie coveys both MacGregor Burns and Karl Emil Maximilian "Max" Weber’s theories.

The Political scientist George Mac Gregor Burns, has been one of the first one to take the challenge for a throughout analysis of this topic. He has developed Max Webber’s thinking on the sources of authority and charisma by bringing a distinction between transactional and transformational leadership.

Since Weber’s first suggestions of a charismatic theory of leadership, many others have built upon his work. Some felt that a charismatic theory of leadership should remain within the confines of a religious context. As more social, political, and organizational scholars adopted and built upon Weber’s work, the religious-only context fell by the wayside. Before proceeding further, the tenets of charismatic leadership theory must be explained.