Charisma
Charisma is a key element in establishing the credibility of a communicator/leader, particularly in an
intercultural setting. Charisma as an element in the communication/leadership process occurs when a
leader’s extraordinary claim is present to remedy a distressful situation and when responsibility for
resolving that stress situation is accepted by the communicator/leader. When people believe that a person
has special gifts or power to lead them out of a crisis, the potential for charismatic leadership is present.
Seminal Research on Charisma by Max Weber
During the mid-twentieth century the work of Max Weber provided the seminal research on the concept of
charisma that remains valid to the present. Weber described the effectiveness of a leader/communicator not
in terms of rules, traditions, or position, but from the extraordinary characteristics of an individual person.
Weber defined charisma as
a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is considered
extraordinary and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman or at least specifically
exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as not accessible to the ordinary person,
but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary and on the basis of them the individual
concerned is treated as a leader. . . . What alone is important is how the individual is
actually regarded by those subject to charismatic authority by his followers or disciples.
(Weber 1947, 358–359)
Weber’s view of charisma, as present in the dynamics of leadership and communication, was
contrasted with rational and traditional authority. Rational authority was viewed as impersonal formalized
bodies of rules found in bureaucratic organizations and traditional authority was viewed as legitimized
leadership through established custom found primarily in feudal and preindustrial traditions.
Weber believed that the legitimacy of charisma was based on two major conditions: (1) there would
be a need, aspiration, or goal among followers that remained unfulfilled by an existing social order; and (2)
there would be a leader to whom followers would submit based on their belief in his or her possession of
charisma—qualities that fulfilled their expectations. Simply stated, charisma emerges most vividly when
people in crisis want a leader.
Weber affirmed that the rise of bureaucracies moved people in society away from personal freedom
and creativity toward an ever-increasing depersonalization and routinization. So the foundation of the
charismatic leader/communicator was to oppose the status quo and process of routinization.
Communicator/leaders who exhibit a vibrant expression of charisma do not gain prominence through
influence from institutional position or traditional authority. They are highly regarded by followers and
therein lies the foundation for their effectiveness.
Charisma as It Functions in Social Structures
Charisma that emerges within any social structure will exemplify some generally predictable expressions.
Usually, there is very little delegation of power and authority by a leader to the followers in the
organization. Followers are directly accountable to leaders and this absolute type of relationship means that
leaders who function with a high level of charisma hold complete control over the allocation of positions
and responsibilities of followers in the social structure. Because charismatic leaders emerge when there is
dissatisfaction with the status quo, the resulting organization under the influence of the charismatic leader
has few formal rules and procedures. All judgments are made by the charismatic leader on a case-by-case
basis as proclaimed in decrees that carry authority that is not to be questioned. As long as the followers
continue to believe and support the leader’s charisma, the whole of the structure can be changed by the
decree of the leader. But, in reality, charismatic leadership can be a temporary and unstable phenomenon,
always contingent upon the leader’s ability to prove his or her charismatic powers to followers. The
continued effectiveness of charismatic leadership in any social structure also assumes certain attitudes in
those leaders. For example, there is usually an expression of extreme self-confidence, high expectation for
followers, a strong need for power and a deep conviction in the validity of the personal beliefs held.
Usually the themes of loyalty and “facing the enemy” provide a symbiosis of motivation between the leader
and followers.
Charisma: More than a Function of Context?
The degree to which charisma may be at work in a social structure may be determined by considering some
of the following indicators:

The followers’ trust in the correctness of the leader’s beliefs

The similarity between the followers’ beliefs and those of the leader

The unquestioning acceptance of the leader by the followers

The followers’ personal affection for the leader

The willing obedience to the leader by the followers

The emotional involvement of the followers in the mission of the organization

The heightened performance goals of followers due to the influence of the leader

The continuing belief by the followers that they are able to contribute to the success of the
group’s mission
Leaders in organizations that exhibit high levels of charisma frequently have a strong need for
power. Self-confidence and strong convictions by the leader usually result in the followers’ trust in that
leader being increasingly strong. The continued credibility of a leader who exhibits strong charisma is
predicated on a strong impression by followers that the leader is competent and successful.
The continued effectiveness of the charismatic leader also necessitates the articulation of
ideological goals related to the mission of the group or organization being led. Inspiring enthusiasm and
raising hopes and engendering vision in the followers are crucial to the maintenance of effectiveness in
leaders who rely heavily on charisma. Charismatic leaders in religious contexts often have characteristic
styles of rhetoric that brand them as unique. Trademark gestures and even clothing may “brand” a
charismatic religious leader.
The tendency of most charismatic leaders is to act in accordance with the motives supportive to the
group’s mission. This serves to set an example for followers to imitate. Research on the “Pygmalion effect”
and “self-fulfilling prophecy” indicates that followers perform better when the leaders model the behaviors
and attitudes that the organization values and then commends followers for their imitation of those
attributes. These characteristics then comprise an emphasis on being the best that serves the continued
effectiveness of the organization and the continued influence of the charismatic leader.
Charisma and Transformation
Recent research has begun focusing on the overlapping qualities of charisma and transformation as applied
to the study of leadership in organizations. While some researchers now tend to use the two terms
interchangeably, others have moved to differentiate between the two concepts. The research that is
distinguishing between the two concepts inevitably sees transformation as a broader term for long-term
influence of people and social structures. Charisma is seen as a necessary ingredient of transformational
leadership, but by itself is not adequate to account for the transformation or change process in a social
structure or organization. For example, rock stars, movie stars, and professional athletes may have
charisma, but may not have a systemic transformational influence on a social structure. Transformation as a
quality expressed in leaders of organizations is not just about clear identification between leaders and
followers. Transformational leaders usually include a promise of tangible benefits for followers that add
value to the ideological elements that are mutually affirmed. Transformation as a dynamic in the discussion
of leaders in organizations creates a sense of destiny for all participants in the organization’s mission. There
is a sense by most participants that “I was made for this purpose or task.” Identification with a mission and
its complementary provision of positive personal identity for participants is crucial. Such identification is a
significant reinforcement to belonging to the organization and potentially strengthens support of the
charismatic leader by organizational participants.
Charisma as Applied to Media Influence
The dynamic nature of charisma in social structure takes on unique characteristics when placed in close
proximity to mass media. Media have the capability to create awareness in different kinds of events in
which charisma may be exhibited by those being observed and reported on. News events, sports figures,
economic developments, or political realities, when highlighted repeatedly, can create awareness in which
charismatic figures are prone to be highlighted. Because media also have the capability to set agendas, the
charismatic figures being focused on can become larger than life. Whether they are movie stars, athletes,
politicians or religious leaders, the reality is that they are being created in “the eye of the beholder,”
receiving from media an accelerated exposure and a resulting breadth of influence. The broad exposure of
the media can accelerate the image of the “star” such that the influence of the bearer of charisma enhanced
by media exposure creates a virtual reality of relationship between leader/star and follower/admirer. When
the leader/star and follower/admirer do connect, for example, in a rock concert, music video, or motion
picture the relationship between the two is a function not only of charisma, but of the capability of media to
accentuate the factor of charisma exponentially. In addition, the media-enhanced “star” leads to another
function of the charismatic leader and that is the influence of their opinion outside their field of endeavor.
Billy Graham serves as an example of a Christian leader whose influence has broadened due to the
enhancement of media. In addition, U2’s lead sinner Bono and his consciousness-raising about the global
AIDS crisis is a further example of the combination of media influence and charisma to express powerful
opinions about issues of significance beyond a discussion about rock music.
The Dark Side of Charisma
The study of great historical leaders will yield both the positive and negative aspects of charisma. Franklin
D. Roosevelt led the United States out of a serious financial depression and implemented major social
programs that still have influence in American life more than a half century after their start. Yet at the same
time the dark side of charisma was reflected in the charismatic leadership of both Adolf Hitler and Josef
Stalin.
Power that accompanies the dynamic of charismatic leadership is a two-edged sword. Power’s
potential for influence can be used to create a significant betterment of a culture or organization. But the
temptation of that power can also be used by some leaders who seek to dominate and subjugate followers
by keeping them weak and dependent and the position of the leader impenetrable and protected. Religious
cult leaders can use rewards and punishments to manipulate and control followers. When information is
restricted and decision making is centralized, the dark side of charisma can be displayed. Here is where the
dissonance of extreme narcissism in a leader may be accompanied by considerable skill in communicating
the “cause” to a needy constituency. Such a combination can be lethal and create the possibility of
organizational and personal dysfunction.
Charismatic leaders rise naturally in incipient stages of religious movements for renewal. However,
time usually sees the inevitability of organizational maturation. Institutional authority and its accompanying
leadership can replace charismatic leadership. Routine and pragmatism stem the continuing free flow of
charisma. It is in the inevitable transition from incipient vibrancy to expected legitimacy that the
charismatic leader can wander into the dark side of charisma. The natural tendency to want to preserve the
advances of the incipient episodes of the religious renewal can yield leaders who protect the center they
now represent and defend with fear against loss of identity and purpose. The religious leader, falling prey to
the traps for success in public roles, can easily forget to nurture those dimensions of personal life which
keep mission and purpose externally rather than internally focused.
Continued Need for Serious reflection
Charisma is a quality that is doubled-edged and hence requires continual reflection upon its utility and
value. If charisma is perceptual on the part of followers, then it is incumbent upon leader and followers
alike to critically evaluate credibility that may or may not exist in the relationship. If charisma is contextual
and charisma is most obvious in times of crisis, then charisma must rise above politics to the realm of
morality and to have lasting spiritual influence that refuses the downward spiral to self-serving leaders and
organizations. If charisma is unstable over time then the long-term good of charisma must be understood in
terms of character and not skill alone. Research on charisma must move beyond descriptive reports to
prescriptive assertion as to the long-term benefit of charisma in organizations and social structures.
Byron D. Klaus
Printed edition available at:
Klaus, Byron D. “Charisma.” In Encyclopedia of Religion, Communication, and Media: A Religion and
Society Encyclopedia. Edited by Daniel A. Stout, 71-74. NewYork: Routledge, 2006.
Further Reading
Avilio, B. L., & Yammarino, F. J. (2002). Transformational and charismatic leadership. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Science &
Technology Books.
Bass, B. (1987). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free.
Bates, D. A. (2003). Executive charisma. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Bradley, R. (1987). Charisma and social structure. New York: Paragon House.
Conger, J. A. (1989). The charismatic leader: Behind the mystique of exceptional leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1989). Charismatic leadership: The elusive factor in organizational effectiveness. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1998). Charismatic leadership in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Dodd, C. (1998). Dynamics of intercultural communication (5th edition). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
McIntosh, G., & Rima, S. (1997). Overcoming the dark side of leadership: The paradox of personal dysfunction. Grand Rapids,
MI: Baker.
O’Roark, A. M. (2001). The quest for executive effectiveness: Turning vision inside-out: Charismatic-participatory leadership.
Nevada City, CA: Blue Dolphin.
Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization. New York: Free.
Weber, M. (1952). On charisma and institution building. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Willner, A. R. The spell binders: Charismatic political leadership. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Winter, D. G. (1973). The Power Motive. New York: Free.
Yukl, G. (1984). Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.