You are on page 1of 9

1 Charismatic & Transformational Leadership Chapter 9

Charismatic and Transformational leadership (TL for short) originated in an interest in learning more about how leaders get followers to make self-sacrifices and put the needs of their organization above their own material self-interests. This chapter describes the major theories of charismatic and TL, provides an evaluation of these theories, and then offers guidelines for TL. TWO EARLY THEORIES Charisma. Charisma is a Greek word that means ""divinely inspired gift". A sociologist, Max Weber, used the term to describe a form of influence based not on tradition or formal authority, but rather on follower perceptions that the leader has exceptional qualities. According to Weber, perceptions of a leader as charismatic usually occur when there is a social crisis. A leader who is seen during such a crisis as providing a "radical" vision, with a convincing and achievable solution to the crisis, is seen as charismatic. A key aspect of this leadership influence is getting followers to believe in, and passionately embrace, the vision. Newer versions of this theory have developed. They are called "neocharismatic" theories. Transforming Leadership. This theory originated from a political scientist, James McGregor Burns. As originally conceived, TL engages the moral values of followers, raises their consciousness about ethical issues, and mobilizes their energy and resources to change institutions. Burns contrasted this TL with transacting leadership, which motivates followers, not by appealing to a "higher" morale cause, but rather, by appealing to their self-interests. For example, politicians promising to lower corporate taxes if elected (seeking campaign donations and votes from the corporate elites). Transactional leadership is of the form, "if you do this, then I will give you this". Followers follow to obtain something that benefits them directly and personally. (Notice, there is no self-sacrifice here for any higher, "moral cause"). Incidentally, transactional leadership may involve values, such that the follower may be treated by the leader with honesty and fairness, for doing good quality work (like in LMX theory). ATTRIBUTION THEORY OF CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP Attribution theory refers to theory that tries to explain how and why people come to perceive their leader as charismatic. What determines whether I see you as a charismatic leader? The attribution theory of leadership suggests that whether we see another as a charismatic leader is determined by the leader's behavior, skill, and aspects of the situation, and the attributions we make regarding this behavior (e.g. how we interpret this behavior). Leader Traits and Behaviors. Whether we perceive another as charismatic depends on their behaviors, but not all charismatic leaders are seen to have all the same behaviors. The importance of any one behavior in determining perceptions of charisma will depend to some extent on the leadership situation. First, leaders are most likely to be seen as charismatic if their vision is quite different from the current way things are being done, but is not too different (e.g. radical). Non-charismatic leaders, however, typically support the "status quo" (the way things are currently done), or advocate only small, incremental changes.

Second, leaders are more likely to be seen as charismatic if they act in unconventional (new) ways to achieve their mission. Innovative strategies are associated with charismatic leadership. Thirdly, leaders are more likely to be seen as charismatic if they make selfsacrifices and take personal risk to achieve their vision. A leader who risks substantial personal loss in status, money, leadership position or organizational membership in efforts to achieve his/her mission is more likely to be viewed as charismatic. Fourthly, leaders who appear confident about their vision are more likely to be seen as charismatic, then are leaders who project a lack of confidence and self-doubt. Followers who believe the leader knows how to achieve the shared objective will work harder and increase the probability of success. Fifthly, leaders are more likely to be seen as charismatic if they use "visioning" and persuasive appeals to motivate others, than if they use authority or rely too much on consensus-seeking participative decision processes.

Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-Hwa has been criticized greatly in the media for lacking "charisma". Can you explain this media perception of Tung, based on the categories above? When coming up with new vision, and new ways to achieving that vision, leaders take risks. To minimize risks, leaders must make realistic assessments of environmental constraints and opportunities before implementing their strategies. Timing is very important, as the same strategy may succeed at one time, but fail if implemented at another time. Leaders need to be sensitive to the needs and values of followers as well as to the environment, in order to come up with a vision that is innovative, relevant, timely and appealing. Influence Processes. Why do followers of charismatic leaders become so strongly committed to the task and the mission? We have come to learn that the primary reason is that followers personally identify with the leader. That is to say, followers desire to please and to imitate (model/copy) the leader. Charismatic leaders seem so special, due to their strategic insight, strong convictions/beliefs, selfconfidence, unconventional behavior and dynamic energy, that subordinates idolize (praise and respect) these leaders and want to become like them. Receiving "approval" from the leader, followers sense of "self-worth" is increased. Leader approval is usually expressed as praise and recognition of subordinate behavior and accomplishments, which builds self-confidence and a deeper sense of obligation to meet their leader's expectation of them. Leader approval becomes a prime motivation for followers to make extraordinary contributions to achieving organizational goals. Also, subordinates are motivated by fear of disappointing the leader and being rejected by him/her. The influence of a charismatic leader is also due to internalization of new values and beliefs by followers. It is more important for followers to adopt the leader' attitudes and beliefs about the work they do than merely to imitate superficial aspects of the leader, such as in mannerisms, gestures and speech. To internalize values, attitudes and beliefs of the leader means to accept them as your own. A charismatic leader who can inspire others to accept his/her vision as their own, provides much intrinsic motivation among followers to work toward achieving organizational objectives.

Facilitating Conditions. Leaders are most likely to be perceived as charismatic under certain conditions: (a) when there is a crisis. Sometimes leaders will create a crisis in order to provide for themselves more favorable conditions for being seen as charismatic. They can do this by increasing subordinate dissatisfaction with current conditions, and presenting convincing arguments why embracing change is mutually beneficial. The change the leader advocates, however, must be tied to a vision that appeals to followers. For example, leaders in Hong Kong who argue strongly for a merger between HKUST and Chinese U. seek to win support for the idea by emphasizing what they consider to be weaknesses and inefficiencies in keeping the two institutions separate. They argue that it is critical for the two institutions to come together for Hong Kong to have a university that can seriously compete internationally. SELF CONCEPT THEORY OF CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP. Charismatic leadership influences subordinates to work hard toward achieving organizational objectives by appealing to their self-concept. Charismatic leadership is working when the sense of self-worth of subordinates is increased by behaving in ways that contribute to the leader's mission and objectives. Indicators of Charisma. We know that charisma is working when followers perceive the leader's beliefs are correct, they are willing to obey the leader, they feel affection for the leader, are emotionally involved in the mission of the group or organization, they have high performance goals, and they believe that they can contribute to the success of the mission. Key Traits and Behaviors. Firstly, lets deal with traits. Charismatic leaders are likely to have a strong need for power, high self-confidence, and hold strong beliefs and ideals. Now, with regard to behaviors . Charismatic leaders do the following. They. Articulate an appealing vision Use strong, expressive forms of communication when communicating the vision Take personal risks and make self-sacrifices to attain the mission Communicate high expectations Express confidence in followers Model behaviors consistent with the vision Manage follower impressions of the leader Build identification with the group or organization

Influence Process. Since we know that leaders who get their followers to personally identify with them can increase their influence over followers, it is important to know how leaders can get their employees to personally identify with them. They can do things that make them appear very attractive, heroic and exceptional (articulate an appealing vision, display self-confidence, make selfsacrifices, demonstrate courage and conviction). However, unlike the attribution theory of leadership, which emphasizes identification with the leader (personal identification) as the key motivating force for followers, self-concept theory emphasizes social identification, internalization, and enhancing individual and collective "self-efficacy" (sense of competence). When there is a strong social identification, people take pride in being part of a larger group and mission. They see how their efforts and work roles are related to a larger cause or purpose, making their work more meaningful and important. They put the needs of their work group above

individual needs and make self-sacrifices to advance the interests of the group of which they are a part. Social identification of this nature strengthens shared values, beliefs and behavior norms among members of the group. Charismatic leaders increase social identification by relating a follower's self-concept to shared values and role identities associated with the group. Social identification can also be increased by use of slogans ("we're number 1"), symbols (flags, uniforms) rituals (singing, saluting), and ceremonies (initiation of new members), telling stories about past successes etc.. Internalization occurs when attainment of tasks objectives becomes a way for followers to express their values and social identities. Charismatic leaders communicate a vision that appeals to follower values, and links these values to task objectives. By emphasizing the symbolic and ideological aspects of the work, the leader makes it more meaningful. Internalization is in full-force when followers come to view their work role as closely tied to their self-concept and sense of self-worth. Motivation to perform tasks to achieve objectives also depends on individual and collective self-efficacy. Self-efficacy refers to the belief that you are competent and capable of achieving difficult task objectives. People with high self-efficacy are willing to put our more effort and persist longer to overcome obstacles to achieving these objectives. Collective self-efficacy refers to the perception of group members that they can accomplish exceptional things by working together. A charismatic leader can increase the self-efficacy of followers by showing confidence in them and celebrating follower accomplishments. Facilitating Conditions. Charismatic leaders will be more effective when their vision is consistent with the values and identities of their followers. Therefore, they need to understand the values and needs of their followers. They should be able to define task roles in ideological ("moral") terms that appeal to followers. This is more difficult to do for some tasks than for others (your book provides for very good examples here, pg. 245, bottom paragraph). Also, while self-concept theory does not say that a crisis is a necessary condition for charismatic leadership to emerge, it does say that charismatic leadership is more likely to occur when an organization is in serious trouble, there is ambiguity about what should be done to resolve the crisis, and there is anxiety and panic among followers. Such conditions favor the emergence of a leader who is able to interpret the crisis and offer credible strategies for coping with it. The current situation in Hong Kong with regard to SARS present ideal facilitating conditions for the emergence of charismatic leadership, but which of the political leaders has embraced this opportunity to emerge as a charismatic leader in the eyes of the public? Can you think of a leader in the recent past who has emerged as a charismatic leader during a time of crisis? What were the conditions? What did this leader do? Interestingly, the charismatic effects of a leader will be temporary unless their vision continues to be relevant after the immediate crisis. Have perceptions of George Bush as charismatic leader changed since just after the 9-11 crisis? OTHER CONCEPTIONS OF CHARISMA There are other explanations of how charismatic influence works. Above we said that charisma influences others through (a) favorable attributions people make of leader traits and behaviors, and the personal identification we develop with the leader based on these attributions; (b) linking the self-concept and sense of selfworth of followers to accomplishing the mission and objectives of the organization. The first refers to attribution theory of charismatic leadership, and the second refers to the self-concept theory of leadership. In this section, we discuss other processes

by which charisma influences followers: (a) psychodynamic processes; (b) social contagion. Psychodynamic Processes. Whether leaders are perceived as charismatic is most related to psychological characteristics and states of the followers. These psychological states may be brought on by prevailing social and economic circumstances. I will not devote attention to this, as the focus here is on psychological vulnerabilities of followers, than make them search out a charismatic leader for purposes of assuaging (improving upon) their negative psychological states. You are referred to pg. 246-247 if you are interested in learning more on this. Social Contagion. How is it that some leaders are perceived as charismatic among followers who do not directly and personally interact with the leader? Followers sometimes work at great distances from the leader. In the extreme, they might not even observe the leader at a distance or on television. These conditions can prevail with religion, for example. Sometimes people obtain perceptions of charismatic leadership, not from leader traits or behaviors, but rather from observing how others act toward, and speak about their leader. That is, followers influence the perceptions and beliefs of each other, and this we call social contagion. Here, followers seek social identification by adopting the views and beliefs of others, who represent a cause they personally believe in. The others with whom they identify with on this larger cause, usually have a symbolic leader. The leadership influence is much more based on the followers' worship of the leader, than on anything the leader actually says or does. Accordingly, the leaders' role is likely to be "fleeting" (of short duration), as they are only a leader symbolically. With social contagion, the qualities attributed to a leader may become highly exaggerated as rumors and stories spread among people who have had no direct contact with the leader. By the way, this is where "contagion" comes from. Contagious means to "spread". Again, I don't spend much time on this, because the influence on followers comes less from the leader, and more from other followers. Close and Distant Charisma. Do the attributions individuals make of a leader differ based on whether they are in close or distal contact with them? Followers with minimal contact with their leaders tend to describe their charismatic leaders in terms of their achievements, and their impact on their political attitudes. Followers with more extensive contact with their leaders tended to describe their charismatic leaders in terms of their influence on follower motivation, task behavior, and identification with the leader. This suggests that attributions of charisma for distant leader are affected more by performance cues and shared stereotypes, whereas attributions of charisma for close leaders are affected more by leader behavior and personal skills. However, these findings are tentative, and more research is required to determine what impact close versus distant contact with a leader has on subordinate perceptions and attributions. Routinization of Charisma. How do you make the impact of charismatic leadership last, when the leader is suddenly no longer with the organization (e.g. dies, moves on to work for another employer). What can the organization do to protect itself and ensure some degree of continuity in leadership effects? There are a number of things that can be done. (1) succession planning. Groom a leader as a replacement and have this person ready to take over at a moment's notice; (2) build an administrative structure (procedures) that will sustain the influence of charismatic leadership when the leader is not present; (3) embed the leader's vision in the culture of the organization by internalizing it among followers. That is, to create a powerful and lasting culture (e.g. as Jack Welch at G.E. did).

CONSEQUENCES OF CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP Charismatic leadership can have both positive and negative outcomes. Positive and Negative Charismatics. Negative charismatics have a personalized power orientation. They emphasize personal identification over internalization. That is, they emphasize personal devotion to self more than devotion to ideals. They seek to dominate and subjugate others by keeping them dependent. Authority for important decisions is centralized in the leader, rewards and punishments are used to manipulate and control followers, and information is restricted and used to maintain an image of leader infallibility (flawlessness), or to exaggerate perceptions of external threats to followers. Decisions of these leaders reflect a greater concern for self-glorification and maintaining personal power than for the welfare of followers (sound like Sudam Hussein?). Positive charismatics, however, emphasize socialized power. They stress internalization of social values over personal identification. They want devotion to the ideology rather than devotion to themselves. Authority is largely delegated, information is shared openly, participation in decisions encouraged, and rewards given for behaviors that advance the collective mission and objectives. The Dark Side of Charisma. There are some potential negative consequences to charismatic leadership. Charismatics tend to make more risky decisions, exposing the organization to greater risk of failure. While optimism is important for charisma, over-optimism makes it difficult for the leader to recognize flaws in the vision. The leader may develop a sense of infallibility, ignoring objective indications that their vision may be flawed or require revision. See Table 9-2 (pg. 252) for other potential negative consequences of charismatic leadership. Effects of Positive Charismatics. Positive charismatics tend to create many more favorable and lasting outcomes for an organization than do negative charismatics. This is because they have been successful in getting others to internalize the mission, and empowered them to achieve it. However, there can be some drawbacks (negatives). People who are energized, and highly committed to the organizational cause, may simply overwork themselves, to the detriment of their own health, and to their family. The constant stress of a high-achievement work environment, with much social and self-pressure for organizational success can cause health problems (physical and mental) and family problems. Practical Implications for Organizations. Charismatic leadership is not always required. It is most suitable when radical change in strategy and culture is called for. Such need of radical change is not always present. Also, research has shown that transformational leadership processes (institutionalized within the organization) can bring about significant change in strategy and culture, without the need for a specific charismatic leader as such. Also, sometimes transformational leadership can come from groups of individuals rather than from a single charismatic leader. TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP The most popular theory of transformational leadership is the one espoused by Bernard Bass. He distinguishes transformational leadership from transactional leadership. The transformational leader motivates followers by (a) making them more aware of the importance of task outcomes: (2) inducing them to transcend their own self-interest for the sake of the organization or team; and (3) activating their higherorder needs. In contrast, transactional leadership involves an exchange process that

may result in follower compliance with leader requests, but is not likely to create enthusiasm and commitment to task objectives. According to Bass, effective leaders are both transactional and transformational (they use a combination of both). Leader Behaviors. Transformational leadership involves the following types of behaviors: idealized influence. Behavior that arouses strong follower emotions and identification with the leader intellectual stimulation. Behavior that increases follower awareness of problems and gets followers to see problems from a new perspective individualized consideration. Providing support, encouragement and coaching inspirational motivation. Communicating an appealing vision and modeling appropriate behavior.

Transactional leadership involves the following types of behavior. Contingent reward. Clarifying the work required to obtain rewards and use of incentives and contingent rewards to motivate Active management by exception. Looking for mistakes and enforcing rules to avoid mistakes Passive management by exception. Use of contingent punishment and other corrective action in response to poor performance.

Influence Processes. It is assumed that the effectiveness of transactional leadership comes from instrumental compliance (people comply because they receive valued rewards in exchange), and that the process explaining transformational leadership is internalization (linking of task objectives to values and goals of the leader). Facilitating Conditions. Transformational leadership (TL) is considered to be effective for any situation and for all cultures. However, the effects of TL may be greater in some situations than in others (e.g. unstable environments, organic/flexible organizational structures, entrepreneurial cultures). Research on the Theory. Generally, research supports the theory. In particular transformational leadership appears more related to leadership effectiveness than does transactional leadership. Of the transformational leadership dimensions, the ones most related to leadership effectiveness are: charisma, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. Contingent reward, a dimension of transactional leadership, is also related to leadership effectiveness. However, the effects seem to be stronger when leadership effectiveness is measured as followers self-reports of effort than when measured with more objective measures. Support for Bass's transformational leadership theory has come from survey research, laboratory experiments, field experiments, comparative studies and case studies. Examples of the type of support coming from each type of study is provided in your text on pages 255-260.

TRANSFORMATIONAL VERSUS CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP The essence of charismatic leadership lies in being perceived as extraordinary by followers who are dependent on the leader for guidance and inspiration. However, the essence of transformational leadership is to inspire, develop and empower followers (encouraging independence from the leader). Transformational leaders delegate authority, develop follower skills and selfconfidence, create self-managed teams, provide direct access to sensitive information, eliminate unnecessary controls, and build a strong culture for selfinitiative. Charismatic leaders do more to nourish an image of themselves among followers: an image of extraordinary competence. This often involves impression management, information restriction, unconventional behavior and risk taking. Bass argues that transformational leaders can be found in any organization at any level, and that this type of leadership is universally important for all types of situations. In contrast, charismatic leaders are rare, and their emergence is more dependent on favorable (facilitating) conditions. The reactions of people to charismatic leaders are usually more extreme and divided than is the case for transformational leaders. Bass proposed that charisma is a necessary component of transformational leadership, but also noted that a leader can be charismatic but not transformational. A great question emerges here! Contrast and compare transformational leadership to charismatic leadership, and provide examples to illustrate their similarities and differences. EVALUATION OF THEORIES The theories in this chapter have emphasized the importance of follower emotion in leadership effectiveness. Theories of leadership covered in earlier chapters emphasized rational-calculative aspects of leader-follower interactions. The neocharismatic and transformational leadership theories also underscore the importance of leaders making tasks and events meaningful (tied to a "higher cause') to followers. There are several areas of future research identified on pages 262-263 - research required to fill existing gaps in what we know about transformational and charismatic leadership. GUIDELINES FOR TRANSFORMATIONL LEADERSHIP Articulate a clear and appealing vision! Explain how the vision can be obtained! Act confidently and optimistically! Express confidence in followers! Use dramatic, symbolic actions to emphasize key values! Lead by example! Empower people to achieve the vision!

ill Clinton, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Albert Einstein