Charismatic,ideological, and pragmatic leaders: An examination of leader–leader interactions

Although a number of researchers have examined and demonstrated the unique relationships different types of leaders develop with their followers (Dansereau, F., Graen, G.B., & Haga, W.J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 46–78.; Dienesh & Liden, 1986; Mumford, 2006), relatively little is known regarding how outstanding leaders interact or work together (Hunter, Bedell-Avers, Mumford, 2009-this issue). Given the particular importance of such questions, especially when considering leaders who have the potential to influence national and worldwide developments, the intent of the present study was to examine the leader–leader exchange relationships of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders. Due to the difficulty associated with examining high-level leader–leader exchanges, a hybrid qualitative–quantitative approach was taken to assess the interactions of Frederick Douglas, W.E.B. Dubois, and Booker T. Washington – three high-level leaders who responded to the same crisis, in the same time period, in the same region of the world. The results provide preliminary evidence regarding the interactions of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders; in fact, they indicate that leaders interact in a manner consistent with their mental model.     

How outstanding leaders lead with affect: An examination of charismatic,ideological, and pragmatic leaders

Frameworks for understanding outstanding leadership have flourished in the past decade. Research into the charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic (CIP) model of leadership in particular has examined how leaders develop mental models, frame visions, communicate goals, and utilize political tactics to form relationships with followers and impact society in meaningful ways. However, a discussion of how these types of leaders use emotions and influence tactics to influence followers and affect society is notably absent in the literature. To fill this gap, the current effort focuses on how charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders differ in their use of emotional displays and influence tactics. Results suggest that the emotional displays and influence tactics that leaders use successfully discriminate between CIP leader types and create expected leader styles. Implications of these findings are also discussed.     

Development of outstanding leadership: A life narrative approach

Developmental events of a sample of outstanding leaders experienced in early life were examined. Relevant sections of 120 biographies of outstanding leaders in the 20th Century were content coded using a life narrative framework. The results indicated that individuals evidencing a particular leadership type (charismatic, ideological, or pragmatic) and orientation (socialized or personalized) were linked to certain types of developmental events. Similarly, event content was found to vary between the leader styles. Specific kinds of experiences were also related to various indices of leader performance. Practical and theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.     

Assassination and leadership: Traditional approaches and historiometric methods

Research on the assassinations and attempted assassinations of leaders seems warranted, as leaders and their interactions with extreme followers (e.g., fanatics) and non-followers (e.g., assassins) can have tremendous consequences not only for the leaders but also their larger collectives (e.g., nations, social movements). Based on the traditional and established leadership approaches of power orientation and outstanding leadership, we explored whether particular types of leaders were more likely victims of assassinations and targets of assassination attempts. Using historiometric methods, we found that socialized as well as pragmatic and ideological leaders were the most frequent victims of assassinations; but personalized as well as pragmatic and ideological leaders were the most frequent targets of assassination attempts; and for U.S. Presidents, socialized charismatics were the most frequent victims of assassinations and targets of assassination attempts. Results regarding leader paranoia, regions of the world, and assassins operating alone or as a group in relation to assassinations and leadership approaches also are presented. Implications of these findings for future leadership research involving leaders and their extreme followers, non-followers, and larger collectives are discussed.     

Crisis,charisma, values,and voting behavior in the 2004 presidential election

This study extends Pillai and Williams [1998, Pillai, R., Williams, E.A., Lowe, K.B., & Jung, D.I. (2003). Personality, transformational leadership, trust, and the 2000 U.S. presidential vote. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 161–192] and examines leadership in the context of the 2004 U.S. presidential election. Data were collected at two time periods from respondents in three locations across two major regions of the U.S. Our results indicate that respondents' perception of crisis was related to charismatic leadership in the negative direction for the incumbent George W. Bush and in the positive direction for the challenger John Kerry. For Bush and Kerry the relationship between crisis and voting behavior was mediated by charismatic leadership. For Bush, decisiveness was related to charismatic leadership, which in turn predicted voting behavior. For Kerry, decisiveness and charismatic leadership predicted voting behavior. Implications of the findings for leadership research, in particular with respect to an incumbent and the challenger to an incumbent leader, are discussed.     

The leadership of pragmatism: Reconsidering Franklin in the age of charisma

In recent years, our quest to understand outstanding leadership has focused on the characteristics of charismatic or transformational leaders. In this article, however, we will argue that outstanding leadership need not always involve charisma but may instead be based on a functional, problem-centered approach we refer to as a pragmatic leadership strategy. Initially, certain key propositions pertaining to the nature of pragmatic leadership are described. Subsequently, these propositions are evaluated with respect to 10 cases of noteworthy leadership evidenced by Benjamin Franklin. It is argued that pragmatic leaders, such as Franklin, exercise influence by identifying and communicating solutions to significant social problems, working through elites in solution generation, creating structures to support solution implementation, and demonstrating the feasibility of these solutions. The conditions under which this pragmatic approach can effectively be applied are discussed and contrasted with current views of the conditions calling for charismatic, transformational, and transactional leadership.     

Self-sacrificial behavior in crisis situations: The competing roles of behavioral and situational factors

As charismatic and transformational leadership theories have broadened their perspective to include situational factors (i.e., crisis), it is important to understand how specific leader behaviors might interact with such situations. Recently, Choi and Mai-Dalton [Leadersh. Q. 10 (1999) 397; Leadersh. Q. 9 (1998) 475] have given both empirical and theoretical attention to the behavior of self-sacrifice, which is an important facet of both Transformational [Organ. Dyn. 13 (1985) 26] and Charismatic Leadership Theories [Acad. Manage. Rev. 12 (1987) 637; House, R. J. (1977). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership: The cutting edge (pp. 189–207). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press]. The present experimental study investigates the effects of self-sacrificial behavior, along with the effects of situational crisis on followers' perceptions of their leader's charisma and organizational commitment. Leaders are perceived particularly well when exhibiting self-sacrificial behavior in times of crisis.     

Leadership ambiguity in universities and K–12 schools and the limits of contemporary leadership theory

This paper explores the differences in context, assumptions, and behavior of leaders both in modern American universities and in elementary and high schools. The paper's main section examines the utility of five leadership theories (situational, charismatic, transformational, path–goal, and leader–member exchange [LMX]) in explaining leader behavior in each educational sector. We show that while each theory has some merit, none adequately incorporates the larger internal and external “system” pressures on leaders whose institutions are undergoing changes. The paper concludes with a recommendation for a reformulation of the leadership dilemmas in education that sets the five theories in a broader, systemic conceptual framework.     

Beneath the mask:: Examining the relationship of self-presentation attributes and impression management to charismatic leadership

We tested several hypotheses derived from Gardner and Avolio's [Acad. Manage. Rev. 23 (1998) 32.] self-presentational theory of charismatic leadership. We collected multisource field data in an information technology (IT) consulting firm and examined linkages among managers' self-system attributes (i.e., desired charismatic identity, self-monitoring), pro-social and self-serving impression management of managers, charismatic leadership of managers, and two measures of performance. Eighty-three managers provided self-reports of self-system attributes. Six months later, 249 subordinates rated the focal managers' impression management and charismatic leadership styles. Superiors of the focal managers provided performance ratings 7 months after collecting the subordinate ratings. Results indicated that complexity of desired charismatic identity was positively related to self-monitoring. Self-monitoring was negatively related to ratings of pro-social impression management and positively related to ratings of self-serving impression management. Pro-social impression management related positively to charismatic leadership, which predicted managerial and unit performance.     

Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed?

This study focuses on culturally endorsed implicit theories of leadership (CLTs). Although cross-cultural research emphasizes that different cultural groups likely have different conceptions of what leadership should entail, a controversial position is argued here: namely that attributes associated with charismatic/transformational leadership will be universally endorsed as contributing to outstanding leadership. This hypothesis was tested in 62 cultures as part of the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) Research Program. Universally endorsed leader attributes, as well as attributes that are universally seen as impediments to outstanding leadership and culturally contingent attributes are presented here. The results support the hypothesis that specific aspects of charismatic/transformational leadership are strongly and universally endorsed across cultures.     

Mission impossible? Effects of crisis,leader and follower strain on health-oriented leadership

Previous studies underline positive effects of health-oriented leadership for follower well-being. However, it is not clear whether and to what extent situational and personal factors influence health-oriented leadership behavior towards employees (i.e., staff care). We examine the effect of crises and the moderating role of strain for the relationship between strain and staff care in two studies. The first study investigated main and interactive effects of crisis and leader strain on staff care in a cross-sectional survey (N = 201). To test for causality, we complemented our findings with an experimental vignette study (N = 169) and extended our findings with regard to the influence of follower strain. As expected, results of both studies showed negative effects of crisis and leader strain on staff care. Furthermore, crisis effects on staff care were contingent on both leader strain (Study 1 and 2) and follower strain (Study 2): While leader strain strengthened the negative relationships between crisis and staff care, follower strain served as a buffer. These findings support the assumption that staff care is at risk in crises particularly when leaders are strained. However, it is a positive finding that staff care is still feasible on a moderate and relevant level and that leaders respond to follower strain with additional efforts regarding staff care even in crises. The study contributes to the clarification and better understanding of situational contingencies of leadership behavior.     

A chronotype circadian model of charismatic leadership expressions and perceptions

We investigate the impact of the circadian process (24-h biological cycles that influence sleep/wake periods) and chronotypes (individual differences in the timing of those cycles) in charismatic leadership. We theorize that the expressions of charismatic signals by leaders, and the perceptions of those signals by followers are influenced by the circadian process. Moreover, considering that individuals vary in their sleep awake preferences (larks vs. owls), we argue that chronotype interacts with time of day to influence expressions and perceptions of charismatic leadership. In Study 1, we found that synchrony between leader chronotype and time of day affects expressions of charismatic leadership. In Study 2, we turned our attention to the followers' circadian process and found that synchrony between a follower's chronotype and time of day affects follower's perceptions of charismatic leadership. Our new model highlights how charismatic leadership can be driven by circadian process.     

Predicting followers' preferences for charismatic leadership: the influence of follower values and personality

Existing research on charismatic leadership focuses primarily on the traits and behaviors of charismatic leaders and the effects of charismatic leaders on their followers. One issue that has been neglected, and others, is the disposition of the followers who form charismatic relationships with their leaders. To investigate this topic, we conducted a laboratory study in which participants' values and personality dimensions were used to predict participants' preferences for charismatic leadership vs. two other leadership styles: relationship-oriented and task-oriented leadership. The results showed that values and personality were useful in predicting leadership preferences. More research is needed to gain further insights into the active role of followers in the formation of charismatic relationships.     

When leaders victimize: The role of charismatic leaders in facilitating group pressures

We present a conceptual model exploring the process by which employees seek out and process information from their social context in response to victimizing behaviors from their leader. In particular, we explore how charismatic leaders with personalized values can facilitate group processes whereby group members pressure the target into conforming. Followers of charismatic leaders have been found to ingratiate themselves with, and revere, their leader. This creates the potential for followers to prematurely comply with destructive behaviors from their leader. Research on social influence is drawn upon to theorize how targets who experience confusion about victimizing behaviors can become particularly susceptible to group pressures to conform. Through our theoretical model, we advance theory on the potential dark side of charismatic leadership, specifically how personalized charismatic leaders may trigger negative consequences for the target, group, and organization. We conclude with theoretical and practical implications and propose avenues for future research.     

Reviewing Leadership Styles: Overlaps and the Need for a New ‘Full‐Range’ Theory

A central topic in leadership research concerns the impact of leadership style – the pattern of attitudes that leaders hold and behaviors they exhibit. Since the year 2000, several new leadership styles have been proposed to capture important missing aspects beyond the dominant charismatic/transformational and transactional framework. The authors review the emerging literature on these new styles – ideological leadership, pragmatic leadership, authentic leadership, ethical leadership, spiritual leadership, distributed leadership, and integrative public leadership – as well as the recent work on servant leadership. They also comment on the Ohio State studies on leadership, and then discuss the ways in which these many styles overlap with transformational leadership and each other, and issue a call to leadership researchers to collectively develop a new ‘full‐range’ model of leadership that encompasses and distills what is unique about these various styles. The authors argue that such an integrated full‐range model is necessary for research on leadership style to progress.     

Making sense of pragmatic and charismatic leadership stories: Effects on vision formation

For some time, it has been argued that stories articulated by leaders are an important vehicle for exercising influence, but stories of leadership might also serve as a means for developing leadership potential. One critical activity involved in leadership is vision formation, which involves constructing and communicating a future state that guides followers in “making sense” of complex organizational events. Like leader visions, analyzing stories also, by nature, evokes sensemaking processes. As a result, analyzing stories of leadership may provide a natural means for practicing the art of sensemaking. In the present investigation, undergraduates were asked to read six short stories about incidents of either pragmatic or charismatic leadership in business settings. After reading each story, questions were asked to encourage sensemaking of story events, causes, and emotions. Participants were subsequently asked to formulate visions for leading a secondary school –– a transfer task. It was found that stronger visions were produced when participants were asked to analyze both story events and the causes of these events. The implications of these findings for the use of leadership stories in leader development initiatives are discussed.     

Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insider's perspective on these developing streams of research

Over the last decade and a half, the topic areas of charismatic and transformational leadership in organizational settings have undergone a significant evolution in terms of both theory development and empirical investigations. As a result, our knowledge about these leadership forms has deepened, and there are several dominant theories that are now established paradigms in the leadership field. At the same time, despite advances, there are numerous dimensions of these leadership forms about which we still know very little. Given this moment in the field's evolution, it is only appropriate that we take stock of where we have been and where we need to go into the future. We therefore provide an overview of the evolution of charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations. We examine progress along the following dimensions: 1) leader behaviors and their effects; 2) follower dispositions and dependency dynamics; 3) contextual factors; 4) institutionalization and succession forces; and 5) the liabilities of charismatic and transformational leaders.     

Attachment and leader's development via experiences

Apart from biographies and memoirs of outstanding leaders, studies on the development of leaders in everyday life from childhood to maturity are rare. We propose a developmental model of leaders in which certain variables formed in early childhood are the basic components for leadership development in later life. These are a low level of trait anxiety [Spielberger, C.D. (1972). Conceptual and methodological issues in anxiety research. In C.D. Spielberger (Ed.), Anxiety: Current trends in theory and research. New York: Academic Press, vol. 1] and openness to experiences [Costa, P.T. Jr., & McCrae, R.R. (1992a). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources]. We argue that secure attachment style [Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books] explains the formation and influence of these basic components, which in turn affect the leader's development through experience in leadership roles. Questionnaires were administered to 286 subjects. The data obtained were analyzed by structural equation modeling (SEM).The findings show that trait anxiety and openness to experience affect leaders' development via experiences. Alternative models in which formative variables may affect the magnitude and intensity of leadership experiences are discussed.     

Self-concept based aspects of the charismatic leader: More than meets the eye

This research examines the relationships among leader self-concept based dispositional attributes (i.e., self-consciousness, self-monitoring, and purpose-in-life) with ratings of charismatic leadership. Questionnaires were used to collect data from different sources: 64 managers rated themselves on self-concept based dispositional attributes, while 194 subordinates assessed their manager's leadership style. Results indicated that leader private self-consciousness, self-monitoring, and purpose-in-life were positively related to charismatic leadership. Leader purpose-in-life was negatively related to both private and public self-consciousness. Private self-consciousness was positively related to self-monitoring. Results are discussed in terms of their theoretical and practical implications.