Charismatic Leadership

Hi everyone,

Yesterday in class, Ed mentioned the relationship between charisma and leadership as one that is controversial. According to the lecture given in class, we were told that there is a belief that charismatic leaders destabilise organisations, more specifically family businesses (Khurana, HBR, 2002). I am not sure about you but I have only ever defined charismatic leadership along the lines of positive attributes, such as an effective leader that maintains a compelling vision of the future, which is expressed through their confidence in promoting their beliefs with boundless energy.

In the article posted below by Howen and Avolio (1981), the authors highlight a key aspect of the controversial debate around charismatic leaders. They argue that although charismatic leaders are effective, their ethical standards can vary. For example, Hitler and Roosevelt were both labelled charismatic leaders. Both leaders were complete opposite in their moral stance but are still labelled charasmatic, which suggests that such a label should be applied neutrally. Thus, the term charisma should not be used to distinguish between good/moral and evil/bad/immoral leadership, which is the assumption I previously held.

I now understand that the argument linking charismatic leadership and destabilisation could be due to of the great deal of risk involved. Such risks can result in either a leader marinating in dangerous values or striving to achieve heroic services.  

Growing up in a country (Nigeria) where ethical issues are at the epicentre of most family businesses (and businesses in general), this is really important for me to understand so that I can make informed decisions about what type of leader I want to be and what type of leaders I want around me if I ever want to take part in my father's business (or any business). 

Charisma Article