What is leadership?
Leadership can be many things. According to Bennis (1999) The concept of a single hero
such as Paul Revere galloping through the country calling men to arms distorts the
collective view of leadership away from reality. Of utmost importance is that leaders
cannot lead without a set of willing followers. Though this concept sounds obvious, it is
not, at times great leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr. are drafted into that position by
their followers. What Bennis calls top-down leadership is a leadership style where the
enumerated leaders enforce their power on subordinates. This top-down leadership only
works for well-defined problems. An example of a well-defined problem is that
shipments are not making it to a sight on time via OTR trucks. But with adaptive
problems, this top-down leadership fails. An order from “on-high” will not work with an
adaptive problem. An example of an adaptive problem is the clean up of an oil spill.
Emotional Intelligence as a key component of effective leaders.
Effective leaders are alike in one crucial way; they all exhibit a high degree of as
emotional intelligence. IQ and intelligence do matter, but these aspects are merely entrylevel requirements for executive positions. Without emotional intelligence, a person can
have the best training in the world, an analytic mind, and an endless supply of great ideas,
but he will still not make an effective leader.
Intellect is a driver of outstanding performance. Cognitive skills such as ‘big-picture’
thinking and long-term vision were particularly important. In calculations done by Daniel
Goldman of the ratio of technical skills, IQ, and emotional intelligence as ingredients of
excellent performance, emotional intelligence proved to be twice as important as the
others for jobs at all levels of work. Also, emotional intelligence played an increasingly
important role at the highest levels of the company, where differences in technical skills
are of negligible importance. Other researchers have confirmed that emotional
intelligence not only distinguishes outstanding leaders but also can be linked to strong
performance. As an example, David McClelland showed in a 1996 study of a global food
and beverage company that when senior managers had a critical mass of emotional
intelligence capabilities, their divisions outperformed yearly earnings goals by 20%.
Meanwhile, division leaders without that emotional intelligence under performed
expectations by almost that same amount. McClelland’s findings held true not only in the
company’s U.S. divisions but also in its divisions in Asia and Europe. (Goldman, 1998)
What are the components of emotional intelligence?
There are five components of emotional intelligence: self-awareness, self-regulation,
motivation, empathy, and social skill.
Self awareness means having deep understanding of one’s emotions, strengths,
weaknesses, needs and drives. It is the ‘know thyself’ property of a person. People with
strong self-awareness are neither over-critical nor unrealistically hopeful. Rather, they are
honest with themselves. Self awareness extends to a person’s understanding of her values
and goals. Someone who is highly self-aware knows where she is going and why. One of
the hallmarks of self-awareness is a self-depricating sense of humor. Self-awareness can
also be identified during performance appraisals. Self-aware people know, and are
comfortable talking about, their limitations and strengths and often demonstrate a thirst
for constructive criticism. Self-aware people can also be recognized by their selfconfidence. They know, when to ask for help. They will not ask for a challenge that they
know they cannot handle alone. They willl play to their strengths, and protect their weak
areas.
Self-regulation is the component of emotional intelligence that “frees us from being
prisoners of our feelings.” Everyone suffers from bad moods and emotional impulses –
they key is to have the ability to control them and even channel them in useful ways.
People who are in control of their feelings and impulses are able to create an environment
of trust and fairness. Corporate politics and infighting are sharply reduced and
productivity is high. Talented people feel attracted to the organization and are not
tempted to leave. Self-regulation is important for competitive reasons. People who
master their emotions are able to roll with company changes. When a new change
program is announced, they don’t panic. Instead, they are able to suspend judgment (and
often anger), seek out information, and listen to explanations of the new program. Selfregulation is important to effective leadership because it enhances integrity. In the
corporate world, integrity is not only a personal virtue but also it is an organizational
strength. The signs of emotional self-regulation, therefore, are not hard to miss: a
propensity for reflection and for thoughtfulness, comfort with ambiguity and change, and
demonstrated integrity. These signs correlate with the ability to curb impulsive urges.
The one trait that all effective leaders have is motivation. Leaders are driven to achieve
beyond expectations (personal and organizational) and find a way for others to do it as
well. External factors, especially large salaries, do not drive effective leaders. Instead the
deeply embedded desire to achieve for the sake of achievement does drive them. The first
sign of motivation is a passion for the work itself. Driven people seek out creative
challenges; they love to learn, and they take great pride in a job well done. They also
display great amounts of energy to do things better. They are eager to explore new
approaches to their work. People who are driven to do better also want a way of tracking
progress at multiple levels: their own, their team’s and their organization’s. People with
high motivation remain optimistic even when the score is against them. Self-regulation
combines with achievement motivation to overcome the frustration and the depression
that come from setback or from failure. To recognize high levels of achievement
motivation, people can look for one more piece of evidence: commitment to the
organization. Committed employees are likely to stay with an organization even when
they are pursued by others waving money.
Of all the dimensions of emotional intelligence, empathy is the most easily recognized.
Empathy means thoughtfully considering other employees’ feelings along with other
factors in the process of making intelligent decisions. Empathy is particularly important
as a component of leadership for at least three reasons: the increasing use of teams, the
rapid pace of globalization, and the growing need to retain talented workers. Leaders with
empathy do more than sympathize with people around them: they use their knowledge to
improve their company in subtle but important ways
The first three components of emotional intelligence are all self-management skills. The
last two, empathy and social skill, concern a person’s ability to manage relationships with
others. People with high levels of social skill are rarely mean-spirited. Social skill, in
leadership terms, is friendliness with a purpose: moving people in the direction you
desire. Socially skilled people tend to have a wide circle of acquaintances and they have a
knack for finding common ground with people of all types. That does not mean they
socialize continually, it means they work according to the assumption that nothing gets
done alone. Social skill is a culmination of other dimensions of emotional intelligence.
People tend to be very effective at managing relationships when they can understand and
control their own emotions and can empathize with the feeling of others. Even motivation
contributes to the social skills. People who are driven tend to be more optimistic. Because
it is the outcome of the other dimensions of emotional intelligence, social skill is
recognizable on the job in many ways. But sometimes social skill shows itself in ways the
other emotional intelligence components do not. This could be the manner in which a
person talks with colleagues who are not even connected to their ‘real’ jobs. The socially
skilled person will tend to build bonds for the sake that they may need help someday
from people they are becoming acquainted with today. Is social skill considered a key
leadership ability? Yes, especially when compared with the other components of
emotional intelligence. People seem to know intuitively that leaders need to manage
relationships effectively. No leader is an island. The leader’s task is to get the work done
through other people, and social skill makes that possible. Social skill allows the leaders
to put their emotional intelligence to work to benefit the company and the team.
Can emotional intelligence be learned?
People have debated for ages if leaders were born or made. The best answer is both.
Scientific inquiry suggests that there is a genetic component to emotional intelligence.
Psychological and developmental research indicates that nurturing plays a role as well.
Research and practice clearly show that emotional intelligence can be learned.
One thing is certain: emotional intelligence increases with age. It is called maturity. Even
with maturity, some people still need training to enhance their emotional intelligence.
Emotional intelligence is born largely in the neurotransmitters of the brain’s limbic
system, which governs feelings, impulses, and drives. These are all components of
emotional intelligence. Through research, the limbic system learns best through
motivation, extended practice, and feedback. It is therefore largely a learning process
with natural ability. To enhance emotional intelligence, people must break old habits and
establish new ones. With persistence and practice, such a process can lead to lasting
results. It is very important to emphasize that building one’s emotional intelligence
cannot and will not happen without sincere and concerted effort. A brief seminar or a
‘how-to’ manual will not help.
Charisma
Definition- “translating innovative ideas into socially conventional ideas”
Charismatic leaders have been defined as persons who by the force of their personal
abilities are capable of having profound and extraordinary effects on followers. (House
& Baetz, 1979). Bass & Avolio defined it in terms of the leader’s behavior, such as role
modeling and the follower’s reaction such as trust, respect and admiration for the leader’s
ability.
The difference between charismatic and non-charismatic leaders in an organization is the
charismatic leaders’ ability to actively search out existing or potential shortcomings in the
existing environment. Charismatic leaders are seen as organizational reformers or
entrepreneurs because of their emphasis on deficiencies or poorly exploited opportunities
in the market place.
Charismatic leadership may be further broken down into two types: Visionary
Charismatic Leadership, and Crisis-responsive Charismatic Leadership.
What is Vision:
Webster defines it as an object of imagination or foresight. In the field of I/O Psychology
one definition is: A mental image that a leader evokes to portray an idealized future for
an organization (Conger, 1989). Restated, vision is an idealized goal that a leader wants
the organization to achieve in the future. Visions are typically ambitious; they defy
conventional wisdom, challenge existing norms and policies, convey expectations of high
performance and instill confidence in followers that can achieve the vision. (Conger &
Kanungo, 1987; House, 1977;Tichy & Devanna, 1986)
An idealized vision is considered a pre-requisite for a leader to become charismatic or
transformational. (Bass, 1990; Conger, 1991; Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Tichy
&Devanna, 1986)
From experiments by Kirkpatrick & Locke, (1996) vision was found to contribute to
positive follower attributions, increased trust in the leader and positive congruence
between the leader and followers’ beliefs and attitudes. They concluded that vision
motivated followers to set quality goals and raised their self-efficacy which in turn raised
their performance.
How does a visionary leader achieve his goal?
Once formulated, a vision must be articulated in a manner most likely to mobilize
followers to pursue it. Message content and delivery are the two-steps whereby
charismatic leaders plan and articulate their idealized visions. The message is formulated
in such a way that only the positive features of the future vision and only the negative
features of the status quo are emphasized, or the cards are stacked for the vision. This
vision is presented in clear and specific terms as the most attractive and attainable
alternative to the status quo. The goal is to create a strong identification among followers
and the future goals and a strong desire to be lead in the direction of the goal in spite of
environmental hurdles. The leader must finally build trust by showing that these goals
can be achieved, by demonstrating total dedication and commitment to the cause and
vision; by engaging in exemplary acts that are perceived by the followers as involving
great personal risk, cost and energy (Conger & Kanungo)
Studies suggest that the leader’s choice of words, symbols, and expressions form critical
content elements that determine the extent to which the followers become aroused,
inspired, and committed to his vision. (Conger, 1991; Den Hartog &Verburg, 1997;
Shamir, Arthur & house, 1994)
The visionary charismatic leader creates a new and different world by linking followers’
needs to important values, purposes, or meanings through articulation of visions and
goals. (Boal and Bryson, 1998)
What is a Crisis?
A crisis is a state of affairs whose outcome will make a decisive difference for better or
for worse.
A crisis condition as described by Boal and Bryson (1988), is a condition where a system
is expected to handle a situation for which existing resources, procedures, policies,
structures or mechanisms are inadequate. In a crisis condition, the linkage between
follower behavior and its positive consequences is severed. Restated, if an employee
performs her job adequately, she still may be laid off due to reduced profits. The crisisresponsive charismatic leader acts to re-establish this link between the followers’
behaviors and the positive consequences during this period.
Comparing both types of leadership styles, the visionary charismatic leader starts with
new interpretive schemes or theories of action that they convert into action. In contrast,
the crisis-charismatic starts with actions to deal with the crisis, and then moves toward
interpretive theories or schemes to justify their actions. Baol & Bryson (1988) describe a
drawback to the crisis-charismatic style of leadership. This leader must remain in a key
position and can relate the handling of the crisis to a new level of awareness to which the
followers can continue to identify; else the charismatic attributes of the followers will be
short lived. A typical example in the field of politics was George Bush, who had an
approval rating of over 90% during the Gulf War and was voted out of office in
November of that year. Bush neglected the “Vision Part” after establishing crisisresponsive charisma. Another example, taken from the business field, a district
superintendent of education who was seen as charismatic during a major educational
crisis, was seen as non-charismatic after being promoted. (Roberts & Bradley,1988).
What happened all the charismatic qualities of this of this superintendent? Most likely,
the superintendent was promoted from the position that allowed charisma to be effective.
From a study done by Roberts and Bradley, another variable was introduced into the
understanding of charisma, the role of context. Context affects charismatic leadership in
two ways. The first contextual effect is that an environment in crisis is more receptive to
the ideas of charismatic and transformational leadership for drastic change. The second
effect is that the characteristics of an organization lending itself to an individual to take
initiatives on the job allow the leader to build personal relationships that result in shaping
the perception of being a charismatic leader. The district superintendent’s initial context
was in the environment of the school district, which was in crisis. In contrast the
superintendent’s final context was in the state government. The state government was not
in crisis. So, the public’s perception was that the schools were in good shape. Also
characteristics of the organization at this level did not provide the latitude for the
superintendent to take the initiative to build any personal relationships compared to being
at the district level.
Although crisis plays a major role in charisma, it alone does not create charisma. Leaders
must respond to a crisis. If leaders respond to a crisis, they will always be perceived as
charismatic.
With all the positive outcomes associated with charisma, it would seem that there are no
negative consequences, but charismatic leadership does carry some potential dangers.
Since the bases for charisma tend to be emotional, irrational, and risky, these bases pose
an inherent danger for businesses and organizations with practical objectives. (Trice &
Beyer, 1993) An ambitious or aspiring leader may exaggerate the perception of a crisis or
the opportunities to introduce change. The enthusiasms generated by these perceptions
may heighten emotions to the point where cautions are discarded and large risks are taken
without attention to the possibility of failure. The radical vision may be incorrect, but the
strong emotions attached to the situation and the magnetism of the charismatic leader,
may prevent the collection of relevant information that will reveal the weaknesses of the
vision. Restated, a charismatic leader may lead the business down an incorrect path based
on emotion and enthusiasm rather than taking it on a prudent path based on facts and
rationality.
Another reason that charisma may be dangerous to business organizations is that its
results are unpredictable. The results achieved might not be what the company’s
stockholders desire. Sometimes an organization cannot provide a setting conducive to
charisma’s development and its continued existance. For charisma to be fully effective,
then all the elements (vision, crisis, context) must converge. Despite the exceptional
qualities of a leader, without the perception of crisis, then she may not be able to ignite
change. This limitation is relevant in the case of Lee Iacocca. Henry Ford Jr prevented
Iacocca from making large-scale changes at Ford since there was no evidence of a crisis
at Ford Motors. But when Iacocca went to Chrysler, where there was a crisis situation, he
became a successful charismatic leader.
New View on Leadership
Bennis(1999) promotes some new views on leadership.
The new leaders will understand and practice the power of appreciation. These people
will attempt to gather talent and then will make sure that people know that their
leadership appreciates their talent and their work. The new leader should strive to hire
people smarter than she is. She should surround herself with people who are better than
she is. Bennis uses the term curator to describe the new leader. A leader should always
make the lead person feel empowered and appreciated.
The new leader will maintain a direction by reminding others what is important. The
initial development of nuclear weaponry is used to illustrate this point. When scientists
were given mundane tasks without knowledge of their contribution to the development of
atomic weaponry, they performed poorly. When Feynman and Oppenheimer were
allowed to disclose to the scientists that they were constructing a weapon to end the war,
the scientists understood what was important and their work habits and efforts changed
for the better. Another view of this aspect of “new leadership” is to keep people on track.
A professor that is more interested in his research than in his students may have to be
reminded that the students make the school, and the professors are there to serve the
students.
Leaders should foster trust. Because the led feel that they have a one-on-one relationship
with the leader or that they identify with the leader, they must feel that they trust her. The
components of a leader that foster trust are competence, constancy, caring, fairness,
candor and authenticity. The leader must empathize with her subordinates’ desires and
drivers. If trust is violated, the feeling of the one-on-one relationship held by the led is
shattered. Confidence in the leader may be maintained, but the subordinates may not
disclose needed information to the leader now due to mistrust.
Leaders and members are intimate allies. A small team of two should be formed between
the leader and the member. This team and its goals should then mesh with the entire
team’s goals. It is the responsibility of the leader to merge the sets of 2-person teams’
goals with the overall team goals. An example of intimate allies: if a subordinate wishes
to be promoted to a related position in a year, a leader should start preparing that
subordinate for that position by giving him similar tasks as the new position requires or
training him for the new position in the context of his current duties for the team. The
leader may shift responsibilities in the group toward or away from this member to prepare
him for promotion. In this manner both the group and the two-person team benefit.
References:
Awamleh, R; Gardener, W. L. ; Perceptions of Leader Charisma and Effectiveness: The
Effects of Vision Content, Delivery, and Organizational Performance. Leadership
Quarterly 10(3) 1999.
Conger, J. A. Charismatic and Transformational Leadership in Organizations: An
Insider’s Perspective on these Developing Streams of Research. Leadership Quarterly
10(2) 1999
Hunt, J.G.; Baol, K. B.; Dodge, G. E. The Effects of Visionary and Crisis-Responsive
Charisma on Followers: An Experimental Examination of Two Kinds of Charismatic
Leadership. Leadership Quarterly 10(3) 1999
Beyer, J. M; Taming and Promoting Charisma to change Organizations. Leadership
Quarterly 10(2) 1999