Paper Example: Charismatic Leadership - a Complicated Topic

Part 1

Charismatic leadership seems to be a complicated topic that researchers find hard to explain. Efforts to define and assess charisma have regularly portrayed the term as a complex one that consists of many elements. In the article "Charismatic leadership: Eliciting and channeling follower emotions," Sy, Horton, and Riggio (2018) examined how charismatic leadership is eliciting and channeling follower feelings. This study was conducted in the year 2018 and was carried out in the US. Whereas the article produced substantial results indicating ambiguity in defining charismatic leadership, there are limitations related to the generalizability of findings and sample.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Sy et al. (2018) conducted this research to address issues surrounding charismatic leadership. They use some of the studies on the ethical emotions to frame followership-relevant emotions (FREs) theory that defines how leaders use emotions like anger, feelings, admiration, and compassion to compel their followers to act in a particular way. Sy et al. (2018) also discuss Elicit-Channel (EC) paradigm of charismatic leadership, stating that the charismatic connection is divided into 5 phases which is a cyclical process. For the entire findings, the researchers have treated several impacts of charismatic leaders as secluded protuberances in theoretical space devoid of developing a frugal arbitration model that takes into consideration their underlying classification (Sy et al. 2018). Evidence exists in these findings that emotion must be considered a candidate for a dominant protuberance in the system, arbitrating the connection between attributes of charismatic leadership and more distal impacts.

The researchers discussed a vital topic and used the model that positions emotion as the main variable in the charismatic procedure. First, the authors assessed the controversy that surrounds charisma and discussed the best way to address it. However, Sy et al. (2018) failed to provide information regarding how the controversy has been resolved. This is because, without a charisma concept or model that indicates how these components fit together, it is hard to state a valid reason these traits are among the charismatic group whereas others are not. This lack of clarity makes it hard for the learners to treat charismatic as a style of leadership but just a character trait of an individual.

Significant results were identified in the research, but there were some limitations. The authors used ten different literature reviews to come up with their findings. However, with such a small sample size, it is hard to generalize these results to a larger context of the researches carried in the state (Parry 2013).

Leadership Questionnaire was used to collect data in one of the literature reviews. The problem is that while developing the questionnaire, charisma was comparatively new subject and scholars had not yet distinguished qualities or traits of charismatic leaders. As such, with the successive upsurge in the research of transformational leadership as well as leadership questionnaire, charisma increased its fame while lingering underdeveloped hypothetically. Task 2:Option 1

Where Appropriate

Article 1 offers two theoretical models that attempt to explain the basis upon which leadership traits can be viewed as charismatic or not, and how the charismatic leadership characteristics come together to create charismatic effects. First, it presents the follower-relevant emotions (FRE) theory that depicts the use of emotions like anger, admiration, and compassion by leaders to compel action from their followers. Secondly, the article uses the Elicit-Channel (EC) model to depict the cyclic nature of a charismatic model. Similarly, Article 2 uses two theories to classify and explain organizational leadership styles and how they influence creativity. First, it uses the Amabile model, which largely categorizes perceived leadership behaviors as neutral, negative, and positive. It also uses the "classic" triad model to classify leadership approaches as laissez-faire,) democratic, and authoritarian.

Are they Seen as Human Beings?

Both articles view both leaders and followers as human beings, capable of selectively eliciting emotions and creatively responding to behaviors of others. However, in Article 1, the Follower-relevant emotions theory only focuses on how leaders can influence the emotions of followers through their behavior but are silent on whether followers can also produce such action from their leaders. Therefore, it undermines the role of free-thinking on the part of followers (Conger, Kanungo & Menon 2000). The Elicit-Channel model, unlike the FRE which presents charisma as a one-way influence, views charisma as an interactive process. EC acknowledges that leaders can influence the emotions of followers through their leadership behavior and communication, but they have to go further to direct follower action based on the elicited emotions to ensure they produce certain outcomes. In turn, the outcomes can also influence the behavior and communication patterns of the leader (Hayibor et al. 2011). Comparatively, Article 2 concluded that the leader's style of leadership and behavior influences the creativity of the followers. Hence, it shares a similar view of leaders and followers as Article 1.

The Role of Context for Leadership

In both FRE and EC theories, the context plays a major role in determining the behavior and communication patterns of the leader. Leaders have to consider whether their actions target insiders or outsiders (Sosik, Juzbasich & Chun 2011). Similarly, whether elicited emotion should be compassion, self-conscious, admiration, or condemnation depends on the context of leadership. In Article 2 models, the extent of a leader's influence on follower creative behavior depends on the context, which the article refers to as environmental factors. Based on Amabile's theory, the context of leadership may occur in three ways. If it originates from joint group activities, it may occur as inhibition or social facilitation (Sharma & Grant 2011). The place of influence may be intrinsic or extrinsic. Similarly, the motivation may occur through modeling or imitation of observed behavior. Task 3Part 1

Charismatic leadership development

One of the leadership theories discussed in this course is the Charismatic Leadership theory. It is true that being a charismatic leader requires possession of exceptional interpersonal skills. Based on the discussion, the possibility of developing a charismatic leader is debatable, depending on the perceived origin of its leadership and communication traits. Weber's (1947) definition of charisma describes it as an exceptional personality characteristic of divine origin that can be found in a few. This view has two implications: first, it implies that charismatic leaders cannot be developed because its qualities occur naturally (Lovelace et al. 2018). Secondly, it suggests that only those who naturally have charisma can be developed into charismatic leaders. Nevertheless, as Chung et al. (2011) state, not everybody may be born with the personality characteristics of charismatic leadership, but anybody can be trained to portray its characteristic behaviors mostly through modeling.

Transformational leadership development

Transformational leadership is characterized by charisma, inspirational motivation and intellectual stimulation (Walter & Bruch 2009). This kind of leadership also requires natural motivation to influence others. However, most of its attributes can be developed or at least improved through practical training and experience. The most important qualities to learn in transformational leadership are the ability to create a vision that inspires followers, motivating others to own the vision, managing its delivery, and building trustworthy relationships with people.

Part 2

I own a small business and the way I behave influences the behavior of my staffs. The kind of relationships that leaders establish with workers play a critical role in how they conduct themselves (Cockburn 2017). To create a conducive environment with a productive and positive work atmosphere, as a leader of the business, I always pay attention to how my own leadership style affects my daily operations and make adjustments if necessary.

I use a participative approach that assumes workers can do the tasks I expect them to do. According to Cockburn (2017), participative leadership is a democratic style of leadership. However, I sometimes pull away and become more of a manager with an employee-manager relationship which has proven productive for the reason that it puts me in the role of a trainer instead of a friend.

To improve their security as well as perceived survival at the place of work, I always keep in touch with employees to assure them of my protection of their interests. Besides, I always encourage my employees by giving them the attention they deserve. Through this approach, I have seen my staffs getting closer to me and even sharing what they think about the company.

In my daily operations, I try as much as possible to be a flexible leader. I find ways to communicate and connect with workers in style likely to attain the desired outcomes. Being flexible in how I relate to my employees has decreased tension and mistakes, leading to a smooth flow of operation (Cockburn 2017). I have seen that my workers are responding well to instruction because I give detailed and direct explanations. I also try to understand each employee's behavioral style where I place them in groups to get the necessary encouragement and support.

References

Chung, A., Chen, I.H., Yun-Ping Lee, A., Chun Chen, H. and Lin, Y., 2011. Charismatic leadership and self-leadership: A relationship of substitution or supplementation in the contexts of internalization and identification? Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24(3), pp.299-313.

Cockburn, T., 2017. Dynamic Leadership Models for Global Business-Micro Lecture# 2: Leadership and Complexity (Presentation Slides). SSRN Electronic Journal.

Conger, J.A., Kanungo, R.N. and Menon, S.T., 2000. Charismatic leadership and follower effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 21(7), pp.747-767.

Hayibor, S., Agle, B.R., Sears, G.J., Sonnenfeld, J.A. and Ward, A., 2011. Value congruence and charismatic leadership in CEO-top manager relationships: An empirical investigation. Journal of business ethics, 102(2), pp.237-254.

Lovelace, J.B., Neely, B.H., Allen, J.B. and Hunter, S.T., 2018. Charismatic, ideological, & pragmatic (CIP) model of leadership: A critical review and agenda for future research. The Leadership Quarterly.

Parry, K.W., 2013. Addendum: Social Processes of Transformational and Charismatic Leadership-Progress and Future Research into this Important Challenge. In Transformational and Charismatic Leadership: The Road Ahead 10th Anniversary Edition (pp. 433-436). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Sharma, A. and Grant, D., 2011. Narrative, drama and charismatic leadership: The case of Apple's Steve Jobs. Leadership, 7(1), pp.3-26.

Sosik, J.J., Juzbasich, J. and Chun, J.U., 2011. Effects of moral reasoning and management level on ratings of charismatic leadership, in-role and extra-role performance of managers: A multi-source examination. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(2), pp.434-450.

Sy, T., Horton, C., And Riggio, R. (2018). Charismatic leadership: eliciting and channeling follower emotions. The Leadership Quarterly 29(1), pp. 58-69.

Walter, F. and Bruch, H., 2009. An effective events model of charismatic leadership behavior: A review, theoretical integration, and research agenda.