Charisma Today

Effective Communication: How to Speak with Charisma & Flair

2012-01-27T17:27:00.001-08:00

How to Make Money Using the Tactics of Charismatic Leaders

2012-01-22T14:16:00.000-08:00

Chief executive officers (CEOs) who exude intelligence,optimism and leadership don’t necessarily help their companies perform betterthan less charismatic counterparts – but they do tend to draw higher salariesand better perks (Tosi & Hoover, 2002). Tosi and Hoover suggested that the University of Florida study comparingthe salaries of charismatic CEOs versus non-charismatic CEOs showed thestrength of a charismatic CEO in affecting his or her salary. However, Tosi and Hoover did not articulate thenecessary optimism and skills charismatic leaders bring to a company that breedsa large degree of trust, confidence, and productivity within employees. Thereare few things that charismatic leaders do to increase profitability withintheir companies that you can emulate to increase your earning potential.

1--- Charismaticleaders are innovative. Charismatic leaders are relentless in discoveringinefficiencies and ways for improving them. These leaders have a preternaturalway of finding gaps within companies as well as the marketplace. The late SteveJobs of Apple is an excellent example of charismatic leaders’ ability toinnovate. By looking at the marketplace and the emerging needs of consumers,Apple’s invention of I-Tunes transformed the music industry into marketing andselling music online differently. If you scour inefficiencies within yourcompany, industry or marketplace looking for products or services that meet theneeds of customers, but have not be invented yet, you have hit on a potentiallymoney making venture. You don’t even have to invent a product or service.Merely tweak existing products and services to improve on functionality and it canlead to profitability.

2--- Charismaticleaders lead missions and crusades. Since 1982, the Susan G. Komen for the Curehas raised more than $1.5 billion towards breast cancer research. Thisfoundation and mission was started as a result of Susan Komen dying of breastcancer at the age of thirty-three. As ofMarch 2009, Komen CEO Hala G. Moddelmog earned a salary of $459, 406.00 (Yahoo!Voices, 2010). Obviously, The Cure was ahumanitarian mission devoid of personal financial gain. However, charismatic leaders use personalhardships, setbacks, and failures as a springboard to immersing themselves intoa crusade. In this vein, charismaticleaders can do good and well simultaneously. If there is a cause you believe in that wouldenhance your life, designate yourself the CEO and create a foundation aroundyour cause. With the right message that taps into a core need within a specificpopulation, you can help eradicate a social or health issue as well as create acomfortable living.

3--- Charismaticleaders develop alliances that are mutually beneficial. During the 1990’s,Multilevel Marketing (MLM) was hugely popular for individuals looking for waysto gain financial freedom. Mary Kay, ACN, Amway, and host of other MLM opportunities paved the way forindividuals to create income at the ground level. Unfortunately, many participants becamedisillusioned because financial returns were not immediate and expectationswere not met. Charismatic leaders are effective at picking up the ball whereothers have dropped it. By creating a product or service where participants areable to make money through partnerships or the selling of your product/servicesfor a fee, you can use the same business model as MLMs and attract individualslooking for such business opportunities.

4--- Charismaticleaders are effective at finding hidden opportunities. As visionaries, charismatic leaders seeopportunities where others may see despair. A friend recently reported herdaughter buying inexpensive items at consignment shops and selling these itemson EBay for 200% above the originally purchased price. By leveraging theauctioning platforms on the Internet, you can begin selling items that formerlywould have merely rested on the shelves of second-hand stores.

Charismatic leaders make a decision on whatthey want in life and doggedly pursue their aspirations until they haveachieved their objectives. If you set your mind to making more money followingthe tactics of charismatic leaders, you can build a profitable organization thatprovides your desired lifestyle.

References

Szabo, L. (2010 Sept. 29). A ‘promise’ spurred Susan G.Komen breast fight. USA Today (online). Retrieved from: http://www.usatoday.com/yourlife/health/medical/breastcancer/2010-09-30-Promisebook30_CV_N.htm

Tosi, H. and Hoover, A. (2002 July 2). UF study: Charismaticceos more effective…at snaring higher pay. University of Florida News. Retrieved from: http://news.ufl.edu/2002/07/02/ceocharisma/

Yahoo! Voices (2010). Nonprofit ceo salaries: Jobs that paywell over 300k a year. Retrieved from: http://voices.yahoo.com/nonprofit-ceo-salaries-jobs-pay-well-over-300k-5826210.html?cat=31

Leadership Training for Aspiring Charismatic Leaders

2012-01-16T20:05:00.000-08:00

Leadership training has and always will be a significantpart of organizational development. Unfortunately,organizations are not becoming more effective with the onslaught of newleadership models, because many, if not most, fail to consider the model thatbest fits the personality of the manager. There may be consensus among researchers about what components should gointo a leadership program, but very little feedback on dissecting the manager’spersonality and the leadership model best suited for that personality. Amisano(n.d.) asserted that an effective leadership program should have thesecomponents in the curriculum:

· Effective Communication—Learning the essentialparts of effective communicating, includes: active listening, paraphrasing, andmotivation.

· Influencing People—Enlisting positivereinforcement and persuasive techniques that inspire employees towardcontributing to the mission of the organization.

· Management—Outlining and implementing how eachperson fits into the structure of the organization.

· Build Trust—Being reliable by leading withopenness and competence.

· Delegate—Sharing tasks and responsibilities thataffect the long term benefits of the organization.

Although Amisano outlined the essentials for a generalleadership development training program, charismatic personalities may requireextensive self-study supported by the disciplines within the Humanities. The psychodynamics of historical figures fromNapoleon Bonaparte to Bill Clinton suggest that charismatic leaders have apreternatural curiosity about human nature and leadership training for aspiringcharismatic leaders should focus on subjects within Liberal Arts (Literature,philosophy, history, social sciences, etc…). Charismatic leaders are shaped and formed by their heroic deeds and needto connect with historical figures that embody their aspirations. Specialized training for aspiring charismaticleaders should entail the following components.

---Charismatic leaders are case study driven. The missionary zeal that charismatic leaderspossess necessitates training that point to epic heroes and triumphs inhistory. Reportedly, Alexander the Greatwas influenced by the hero in Homer’s “Iliad.” Julius Caesar and NapoleonBonaparte were believed to have been influenced by Alexander the Great. Training for aspiring charismatic leadersshould tap into their vivid imaginations and great ambitions. Charismatic leaders do not merely want toexcel within an organization; they want to transform the industry.

---Charismatic leaders have advanced oratorical skills. Amisanospoke about the need for effective communication skills that involved active listening,paraphrasing and motivation. However,charismatic leaders use advanced oratorical skills, not only to arouse emotionswithin audiences, but to transform initiatives through direct action byemployees. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. might have listened to his Civil Rightscohorts behind closed doors, but his tool for transformation came from hisoratorical skills at the podium. Charismatic leaders are well versed atcreating imagery that inspires and encourages audiences to achieve a mission. Leadership training for aspiring charismaticleaders should focus on persuasive speaking. The ability to speak with passion, clarity, and specificity are thepowers that charismatic leaders possess that make them iconic.

-----Charismatic leaders are known for beingvisionaries. Actually, charismatic leaders are excellent at dissectingand deciphering inefficiencies within an organization. The visionary traitsattributed to charismatic leaders are often a result of compiling facts,critical thinking, and finding solutions to various problems. The lateSteve Jobs of Apple is an excellent example of a charismatic leader’s abilityto discover inefficiencies within the marketplace. By looking at themarketplace and the emerging needs of consumers, Apple’s invention of I-Tunestransformed the music industry into marketing and selling music online differently. Leadership training for aspiring charismatic leaders should include problemsolving exercises that enhance their critical thinking skills.

Like any leadership development program,curriculum should be created that invigorates and motivates aspiringcharismatic leaders to flourish where they exhibit the greatest strengths. Bydeveloping leadership training that addresses the visceral aspects of anindividual, more leaders will emerge, generally, and more charismatic leaders,specifically.

References:

Amisano, C. (n.d.). Components of leadership training.eHow(Money). Retrieved from: http://www.ehow.com/list_6054344_components-leadership-training.html

How to Start Your Own Business Using the Strategies of Charismatic Leaders

2012-01-09T10:40:00.000-08:00

Some experts suggest that the best time to start a businessis during recessionary times as a means of personal fulfillment and a way tojump start the economy. Severalsuccessful companies got their starts during economic upheaval. Strauss (2003) noted that:

16 of the 30 corporations that make up the Dow Jones industrial average got their starts during recessions.
Disney began during the recession of 1923-24.
Hewlett-Packard was begun during the Great Depression (in 1938).
Microsoft began during the 1975 recession.

However,starting a business during a recession as well as times of prosperity is achallenging task requiring prudence and effective planning. Since most aspiringbusiness owners will most likely begin their business with limited capital andpaltry business contacts, personality, passion, and persistence will be yourgreatest resources. Charismatic leaders operate most effectively when they lackthe necessary capital and connections that would prevent traditional leadersfrom attempting the task. By followingthe strategies of charismatic leaders for starting your own business, you canthrive during recessionary times. Here are a few strategies of charismatic leaders.

---Charismaticleaders are known for being visionaries. Actually, charismatic leaders are excellent at dissecting anddeciphering inefficiencies within the marketplace. The visionary traitsattributed to charismatic leaders are often a result of compiling facts,critical thinking, and finding solutions to various problems. The late Steve Jobs of Apple is an excellentexample of charismatic leader’s ability to discover inefficiencies within themarketplace. By looking at themarketplace and the emerging needs of consumers, Apple’s invention of I-Tunestransformed the music industry into marketing and selling music differentlyonline. If you see businessopportunities that are either being underutilized or could be done more efficiently,this is the area you should take advantage. Charismatic leaders create missions and crusades around problems theyobserve in society. Starting yourbusiness should be pursued as if it’s your life’s mission to solve a compellingproblem with your products or services.

---Charismatic leaders temper passion with relevancy. It isfallacious to believe that “If you build it, they will come.” Many businesseshave failed because the owner believed that because he or she liked the productor service everyone else would like it also. In the last few years, Starbucks has begun shuttering underperformingstores to increase its revenue and curtail “over growth.” Starbucks attemptedto rival the growth of McDonald’s and found that its passion for coffee neededto be tempered with its corporate mission. Starbucks was designed to be a “third place” away from home andoffice. By attempting to retail coffeeas McDonald’s retails food, it became slightly irrelevant. As you start your business, be passionateabout your product or service, but also be passionate about serving the needsof the population you want to attract.

---Charismatic leaders use current technology to lessenlabor intensity. Charismatic leaders arehighly versed in managing people for increased productivity. However, charismaticleaders develop advanced people skills as a means of accomplishing a missionthrough human labor. At the end of theday, accomplishing the mission is what charismatic leaders define themselvesby. Consequently, the emergence of software technology has allowed businessowners the ability to accomplish tasks with less human capital. Theself-service checkout lanes in Kroger and Publix supermarkets are excellent forcustomers who wish to pick up a few items (usually 20 items or less) andhurriedly leave the store. These stores could hire more personnel, but theautomated check-out system encourages customers with limited shopping needs tofeel as if picking up a few items does not expend a great deal of time. Shortershopping times encourage return customers. As you start your business, becomeacutely aware that your ultimate goals are creating a quality product orservice and making a profit. If thelatest software allows you to increase your profitability with less humancapital, invest in the latest software.

Personality, passion, and persistence are the core traits ofcharismatic leaders. By emulating the traits of charismatic leaders as youstart your business, you are not only on the road toward financial success, butpersonal fulfillment.

Reference

Strauss, S.(2003 March 3). Time to start your business may be now. USA Today (online). Retrieved from: http://www.usatoday.com/money/smallbusiness/columnist/strauss/2003-03-03-start_x.htm

4 Charismatic Leadership Lessons for Developing Your Leadership Skills

2011-12-26T14:21:00.000-08:00

The charismatic leadership model is the predominantleadership model where sheer personality, imagination, and tenacity reaprewards. As you create new resolutionsfor meeting your future business and professional goals, consider these lessonscharacterized by charismatic leaders.

1. Charismatic leaders are known for being visionaries.Actually, charismatic leaders are excellent at dissecting and decipheringinefficiencies within organizations. The visionary traits attributed tocharismatic leaders are often a result of compiling facts, critical thinking,and finding solutions to various problems. If you observe organizational lapses in your company, where revenue canbe improved, begin formulating strategies and proposals that address theseinefficiencies. Charismatic leaders create missions around solving problems andwill implement solutions inside the current organization or create a new organizationaltogether.

2. Charismatic leaders create disciples within organizations.The passion and clarity of focus demonstrated by charismatic leaders stem fromtheir need to implement initiatives by persuading others to participate. Charismaticleaders gain loyalty by tapping into latent or hidden needs. Your ability to be more persuasive isdirectly related to your ability to understand the desires and motivation ofpeople around you. As you fulfill theseneeds, loyalty and participation by others grow.

3. Charismatic leaders are extremely introspective. Althoughcharismatic leaders are known as “people persons,” their greatest mentalreplenishment comes from solitude and self-reflection. Charismatic leaders are visceral thinkers andrequire large chunks of time to ponder on their thinking process as well as theissue at hand. Begin spending more time in scheduled solitude to allow yourthoughts to flow that hinge on solving problems or creating alternatives tobrighter horizons.

4. Charismatic leaders are performance driven and relentless. Oncecharismatic leaders set their course on a mission, nothing can thwart themoutside of accomplishing the mission. In fact, charismatic leaders often definethemselves by immersing themselves in the mission. Charismatic leaders do not see failure as anoption. They may change gears, but will never give up the mission until it iscompleted. If you want to become more effective within your professionalendeavors, create a plan and relentlessly stick to it until you either lack thecapacity to go any further or you complete it. Failure should never be anoption for you.

Learning to extract the traits that make charismatic leadereffective is an ongoing process. But, if you begin emulating how charismaticleaders transform organizations and fulfill professional aspirations, you canachieve similar results.

How to Use Charisma During Job Searches and Interviews to Increase Your Hiring Opportunities

2011-12-20T00:12:00.000-08:00

In November 2011, the unemployment rate reportedly dropped to 8.6% from 9% (Izzo, 2011). For those who were able to secure a job, this was good news. However, for the millions of Americans still searching for employment, the news did not move the needle one iota. The pain and despair of perpetual unemployment for job seekers can be disheartening to say the least. However, there are a few tips and tactics job seekers can enlist to enhance their charisma during job searches and interviews. Although many employers take the “Don’t call us, we’ll call you” approach, job seekers can obtain an edge by developing their charisma. Historically, charismatic leaders have performed best during times of uncertainty.

During job searches, seize any opportunity for personal contacts and connections. Employers go to luncheons, business forums, and conferences to network and share their knowledge. Job seekers, who stay informed by perusing calendars in business newspapers and chronicles for upcoming events, can establish connections by merely going to these venues. Comedic film maker Woody Allen reportedly said that Ninety percent of life is just showing up. Over time, this statement has been transformed to say 90% of success is merely showing up. If you relentlessly show up and creatively engage employers, your odds of landing a job increase.

When making contacts, use charisma and the art of engagement. It is understandable that an individual who has been out of work for a considerable amount of time will not be the most confident and engaging. However, if you are attempting to impress employers, it is imperative that you become a great actor when lacking enthusiasm. People respect strength over weakness and empowerment over begging. Mentally determine that you are in business for yourself and create inexpensive business cards highlighting your expertise. By operating as a free agent, you stress your abilities as a contractor looking for opportunities, which provides you leverage in creating alliances. By asking “open-ended” questions that require extensive responses, as you represent yourself as a problem solver, you create memorable experiences that tap into the employer’s emotions and intellect.

During job interviews, give employers a snap shot of what working with you would be like. When President Obama was campaigning to get elected, he created images that gave the American people a sense of what he would be like as president. Obama’s airplane had his logo attached to it reminiscent of Air Force One. He would create opportunities to go abroad where throngs of crowds would gather to hear him speak creating the image of having Foreign Affairs experience. Every Obama campaign tactic allowed Americans to feel comfortable with a potential Obama Administration. By conducting yourself as if you are already a part of the company (Having done your research about the company), you give the employer a sense of the benefits for hiring you.

Use stories, animation, and passion to persuade employers. Typical interview questions begin with “Tell me a time when you…” prompting you to share relevant experiences that speak to your job qualifications and ability to fit into the corporate setting. By realizing that your performance is an audition for a part in the company, you should make every effort to draw an employer in with your enthusiasm. Many individuals operate at the bare minimum, but energetic people inspire and motivate others toward excellence. By demonstrating a proven track record of accomplishments, you encourage employers to want to hire you as an asset to the company.

During these uncertain times, there are no quick fixes to securing a job. However, by embracing the notion that charisma entails adopting the rules of engagement and a strategic mindset separates you from competitors. Throughout the annals of history, charismatic leaders have used sheer personality, determination, and fortitude to achieve a mission when no one else believed in the feasibility of their efforts. By following the precepts used by charismatic leaders, you can accomplish your mission of finding your ideal job.

References:

Izzo, P. (2011 Dec. 2). Why did the unemployment rate drop? Wall Street Journal (online). Retrieved from: http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/12/02/why-did-the-unemployment-rate-drop-5/

How to Develop Charismatic Leadership Skills

2011-12-12T19:09:00.000-08:00

Although there is a shortage of effective leaders in the marketplace, there is even more of a shortage of charismatic leaders. The recent death of Apple’s Steve Jobs not only represented an end of an era, but the passing of a charismatic leader who made technology sexy. To be able to add personality to inanimate objects could only stem from the imagination of a charismatic leader. However, there are a few things an aspiring leader can cultivate in developing charismatic leadership skills.

1. - Charismatic leaders are great innovators. Innovation comes through having a preternatural curiosity about how systems work and uncovering the gaps that make systems less efficient. Using Jobs as an example, he saw that Pop culture was influencing the behavior of individuals. Although technology had to have a utilitarian value attached to it, it also needed to be attractive and engaging. Taking cues from the fashion, entertainment, and automotive industries, charismatic leaders discover the latent desires of consumers and fulfill these desires with objects of affection. To develop your charisma, passionately focus on a challenge within your industry and turn solving problems into a mission. You will gain a following by evangelizing, writing, and developing practical solutions to problems.

2. - Charismatic leaders are introspective. Charismatic leaders spend a lot of time reading, thinking, and synthesizing disparate ideas. Although, charismatic leaders are viewed as “great people” persons, a lot of their time is spent pondering ideas in solitude. Charismatic leaders define themselves by their performance. In the movie, “A Beautiful Mind” with Russell Crowe, John Nash had an insatiable desire to create an idea that would gain him recognition and distinction. Many charismatic leaders are similarly motivated. By pondering and sharing the ideas of personal unresolved and unfulfilled aspirations, charismatic leaders become more engaging to adoring participants. By spending more time reveling in the field of ideas, you become more imaginative and heroic in your pursuits.

3. - Charismatic leaders speak with specificity. Although charismatic leaders are noted for passionate and effective oratory, it is their ability to speak with specificity and detail that makes them magnetic. By providing clear, precise, and practical information, employees are able to see their role in an overarching vision. If you begin breaking a mission down step-by-step with passionate oratory that speaks to the long term manifestation of an idea, you will not only free the employee of ambiguity, you will inspire the employee to create options to the mission you may not have considered. In the end, clear and concise communication is used as a motivational device.

Steve Jobs created Apple using many of these traits. If you see your role on the world’s stage as either transformational or merely trying to positively affect your department, using the strategies of charismatic leaders will allow you to have an edge within your industry.

How to Use Charisma to be More Persuasive

2011-12-05T12:05:00.000-08:00

Charismatic leaders have a preternatural way of influencing and getting people to do things for them. When taking to extremes, these talents can be viewed as manipulative. However, when accomplished with a sense of mutuality, all parties can benefit from the relationship. The following techniques are used by charismatic leaders to persuade others.

1. Charismatic leaders seek to fulfill hidden as well as expressed needs of others. Charismatic leaders are versed in human nature and know that individuals will generally respond to requests when these requests are tied to a core need within the individual. Charismatic leaders ask questions to determine these needs by tapping into the emotional as well as mental dynamics of individuals. Open-ended questions such as “That’s interesting, what is the greatest challenge you regularly experience in your company?,” help charismatic leaders determine a person’s motivation. By empathizing and sharing experiences that relate to the individual, charismatic leaders create initiatives that recruit people who have a vested interest in a mission.

2. Charismatic leaders speak with passion and specificity. Contrary to popular beliefs about charismatic leaders, they are not “pie in the sky” visionaries who spout impractical and lofty ideas. Charismatic leaders are adept at spotting opportunities and speak directly about the benefits as well as the challenges surrounding a mission. The passion by charismatic leaders stem from their willingness to “own” or personalize initiatives. The personalization of a mission takes on a crusade-like zeal that becomes infectious to potential supporters. Also, Charismatic leaders articulate the completion of tasks within a step-by-step plan that inspires followers to embrace the feasibility of a mission.

3. Charismatic leaders are relentless. Because of personalization and the feasibility of a challenging mission, charismatic leaders judge themselves by their performance. For charismatic leaders, achieving a goal is not merely meeting an objective, but a self-defining opportunity to prove their worth. The tireless efforts of charismatic leaders stem from their identity being wrapped into the mission. As a result, followers are inspired by the leader’s commitment.

To emulate the leadership qualities of charismatic leaders, determine what your core needs are, adopt a mission as your own, commit to it, and execute activities until the mission is complete. By demonstrating and implementing these traits, you will not only find your passion for projects, but people will follow you based on their self-interest.

How Charismatic Leaders Become Influential within Companies

2011-11-28T02:04:00.000-08:00

The charismatic leadership model is fundamentally the only leadership model where the leader’s sheer personality, tenacity, and vision garner respect, adulation, and power. There are a few ways that charismatic leaders become influential within companies.

1. Charismatic leaders have a larger vision past the current company. When the late engineer John DeLorean designed the Pontiac GTO, Firebird, and Grand Prix for General Motors, it was almost certain that he would one day have to form his own company. The ego and drive for self-determination by charismatic leaders assures that they will become contentious with the managers of the organization. Later DeLorean would form the DeLorean Motor Company, maker of the DeLorean DMC-12 sports car. By having a compelling vision and marketable skills, Charismatic leaders are able to wield power inside and outside of a company. The fact that charismatic leaders have talents that can be leveraged for optimal positioning allows them to gain influence within a company until he is either forced out or leaves the company on his own.

2. Charismatic leaders recruit and attract disciples within a company. Employees who admire a charismatic leader’s personality and ambition will emulate his style as well as jockey for roles on projects led by the leader. Through these disciples or supporters within the company, charismatic leaders create internal networks that facilitate the acquisition and distribution of information. Such information allows the charismatic leader to be knowledgeable about upcoming threats and opportunities. Because charismatic leaders are agile and mobile when exploiting opportunities, they can determine if an opportunity allows them to play a larger role within a company or leave to set up operations elsewhere. In this vein, supporters might be inclined to leave with the charismatic leader causing a potential drought of skilled workers within a company.

3. Charismatic leaders create innovative initiatives and are great self-promoters. The keys to exploiting a great idea include the creation and implementation of a marketing plan. Through formalized communication structures like internal memos and newsletters or informal communication structures like disciples and supporters, charismatic leaders are able to self-promote within a company. Often this marketing strategy complements the overall goals of the company, which allows the charismatic leader to maintain influence.

Charismatic leaders create personal systems within an overarching corporate structure to gain influence as well as execute plans. A charismatic leader’s ability to see the gaps within an organization, thus allowing innovation, creates the perception of indispensability. The converts of a charismatic leader feel a sense of attachment and significance and are willing to invest their resources to be a part of a vision larger than themselves. As long as the charismatic leader’s vision aligns with the corporate mission, there is synergy. However, when the two are not aligned, the charismatic leader is fired or leaves the company to facilitate his vision elsewhere.

How Charismatic Leaders Handle Difficult People

2011-11-21T02:24:00.000-08:00

Although charismatic leaders are skillful at handling people in general, they are strategists at handling difficult or hard to get along with people who may be impediments to their goals. Charismatic leaders handle difficult people by:

1. Making an assessment about the social environment they enter. Before any actions are made, charismatic leaders determine the personalities and behaviors of the individuals within an environment. If for example, a manager micromanages a department, the charismatic leader is observational and cautious before interacting with the manager. In this instance, difficulty often stems from the manager’s need for control. The charismatic leader does not give up personal power, but is willing to share power by establishing non-verbal communication boundaries with the manager. The charismatic leader “picks his battles” by determining which issues to address and which issues to ignore.

2.Choosing to be respected rather than to be loved. Charismatic leaders adore being admired, but never at the behest of being disrespected. Difficult people often prey on the weak and will continue exercising disempowering behavior as long as the conditions allow. Charismatic leaders do not thrive in weak relationships, particularly if they are the ones being preyed upon. In this vein, charismatic leaders command respect by never horsing around, pandering, or acting from a position of weakness. Charismatic leaders choose to be professional rather than being nice when dealing with difficult people.

3.Communicating candidly. Difficult people can be crass and stern. Charismatic leaders have the knowledge and comportment to express discontent behind closed doors. Charismatic leaders speak with precision pointing specifically to lapses in communication and asking for, and recommending future ways effective communications can be established. By setting and controlling the stage, charismatic leaders maintain power in determining the protocol for future interactions.

Essentially, charismatic leaders institute a strong presence within an environment, which disallows debilitating or denigrating behavior. To gain leverage over difficult people, charismatic leaders understand that image management and self-control are the keys to maintaining poise and power. The ability to handle and manage difficult people lies in the charismatic leader’s ability to lead with strength, reason, and open lines of communication.

How Charisma Could Help Occupy Atlanta and Other Protestors Accomplish Their Goals

2011-11-14T14:43:00.000-08:00

To bring about fundamental changes within an industry requires a few rules of engagement:

1. Choose a leader who has compelling speaking skills and can articulate a vision that even opponents can respect. Protestors must be media conscious in selecting a leader who speaks with passion and uses imagery and logic to make a case for the mission. Opponents of protestors will listen and modify behavior if they feel a charismatic leader is a threat to their interests.

2. Create an “Angel vs. Villain” storyline. If financial institutions are the villains, protestors should protest the actual locations of financial institutions or affiliates. For protestors to attack public parks causing destruction where tax payers are on the hook produces enemies. Protestors should use the playbook of historical movements. By updating and replicating the success of past demonstrations shows knowledge of history that is progressive and applicable to current organizational needs.

3. Monetize the organization as well as the event. The perpetuity of a crusade necessitates a nexus between grass roots support and long term financial sustainability. Any organization that does not have a financial and marketing component to its operations is doomed for failure.

4. Begin as a fringe organization, but ultimately become mainstream. Americans typically are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. Consequently, a movement that does not take on some of the characteristics of established institutions will be dismissed as a passing fancy. Protestors, no matter how committed, will not gain credibility if they do not professionalize the organization and the movement.

Charismatic leaders are effective at embodying the message and mission of a crusade as well as creating a detailed strategy. Converse to the idea of charismatic leaders being visionaries, they are excellent strategists in meeting the internal needs of protestors and the general public. Occupy protestors will fail if a leader does not emerge with the star appeal of a Barack Obama and the marketing wisdom of a Steve Jobs.

Did Kim Kardashian Leave Kris Humphries Because He Lacked Charisma?

2011-11-06T23:49:00.000-08:00

In this session, charisma expert and commentator Edward Brown weighs in on the impact of charisma on the celebrity marriage of Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries.

Q: What impact did charisma or the lack of charisma have on the marriage of Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries?

A: Essentially, charisma is a way of gaining power and influence within interpersonal relationships. If you notice, Kim controlled the imagery, dialogue, and direction of the wedding from day one. Kris was a pawn in the power game from the beginning. Had he been more influential and persuasive through charisma, they would be together now.

Q: So, how could Kris have been more powerful?

A: First, he should have been aware of the motivation that drives Kim. She essentially is like actor George Hamilton, famous for being famous. If fame is her driving force, the two could have built a dual entertainment brand like Beyoncé and Jay-Z. Instead, he misread his role in Kim’s marketing machine and thought love would be a saving grace. He married for love, she married for headlines. Second, Kris let Kim dominate the dialogue. The person with the bigger microphone and stronger personality controls the direction and momentum of the relationship. He should have dominated interviews, acted like he had second thoughts to gain leverage, and become emotionally detached about the event.

Q: Interesting. Many would say that love and marriage should have less gamesmanship involved?

A: We have to review and rethink what marriage means in contemporary society. Actor Will Smith said that he and wife Jada got married to create a family-run entertainment empire. Will said they needed something bigger than love and physical attraction to build a marriage on. Their children, Jaden and Willow, are entertainers because of the Will and Jada entertainment machine. People are redefining what marriage means today. As a NBA basketball player, Kris is not a Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, or Blake Griffin. The biggest value to Kim’s marketing machine is Kris’ affiliation with the NBA. Had Kris understood the larger picture, he could have been to Kim what NBA basketball star Tony Parker was to actress Eva Langoria; the merging of two entertainment brands.

Q: Okay. So Kris blew the opportunity because he didn’t understand the game. What should he do now?

A: The best marketing for a non-charismatic man is the connection to a beautiful woman. Kris will be forever linked with Kim, which will allow him access to the world of eligible starlets. Moving forward, he should never again operate from a position of weakness. He should learn to be more witty, self-promoting, and realistic about how the world operates. Real love still exists, but in a media generated society, love is used as a mere storyline to a continuous movie. Kris got married to Kim for love. In the future, love should be in conjunction with a more compelling reason to be married. Today, you are as a powerful as the impact you make on the world stage and as enduring as your ability to leverage opportunities.

What do you think?

Charismatic Leadership in the Public Sector

2011-10-30T21:56:00.000-07:00

Javidan and Waldman (2003) looked at the impact of charismatic leadership in the public sector. They found that leaders who are risk takers in pursuit of their visions instill higher esteem in subordinates. Also leaders who encouraged independent thinking and provided constructive feedback tended to build the esteem of subordinates. Charismatic leadership was perceived within the public sector, but it may not produce the same performance or motivational results typically associated in the private sector. Although there are degrees of uncertainty, crisis, and turbulence within the public sector, conditions in which charisma leaders tend to flourish, these factors do not appear to affect employees the same in the public sector as their private sector counterparts. A possible reason could be the merit system that many public jobs are based, protects workers from being dismissed without cause. Javidan and Waldman ruled that more research was needed in determining the impact of charismatic leadership in the public sector. However, these authors did note that environmental uncertainty manifested itself in the way of political changes, budget cuts, natural disasters, etc… They could not conclusively determine these factors on charismatic leaders’ effectiveness in the public sector.

References

Javidan, M. and Waldman, D.A. (2003 Mar./Apr.). Exploring charismatic leadership in the public sector: Measurement and consequences. Public Administration Review, 63(2), 229-242.

Creating Loyalty within Employees & Followers through Charismatic Leadership

2011-10-23T23:41:00.000-07:00

Researchers on the charismatic leadership model often lambast charismatic leaders for being selfish, self-absorbed, and narcissistic in their dealings with followers. The same researchers criticize followers for being, helpless, mindless sycophants who exhibit codependent traits that rob them of their self-identity. However, very few, if any, researchers have embraced the mutually beneficial and symbiotic relationship between charismatic leaders and followers. Philosopher Thomas Carlyle postulated that individuals seem to be hard-wired for hero worshipping. In other words, if there were no demigods to worship, individuals would somehow create their own. Cicero and Pierro (2007) hypothesized that charismatic leadership is positively associated with followers’ work effort, job involvement, job satisfaction, and performance, and negatively associated with turnovers. Cicero and Pierro’s finding agreed with past researchers that charismatic leadership was positively related to work group identification. Also there was a correlation between charismatic leadership and organizational outcomes. Cicero and Pierro results seem to suggest that there is a direct connection between charismatic leadership and employee performance in that employees have a greater proclivity to work optimistically and productively when a charismatic leader is at the helm. De Hoogh et al. (2004) drew a correlation between charismatic leadership and subordinates’ positive work attitudes. Employees had a greater willingness to invest in efforts to achieving organizational goals.

Galvin, Balkundi, and Waldman (2010) discussed the ability of charismatic leaders to develop disciples or surrogates within an organization. The authors said these surrogates promote, defend, and model behavior after the charismatic leader. Charismatic leaders identify and train surrogates, either formally or informally, which allows charismatic leaders to have influence in distant areas within an organization. Surrogates create networks, social processes, and flow information within the organization. These networks serve as means for the charismatic leader to influence an organization by dispersing information. Although a rouge surrogate could harm a networked system by sending information oppositional to the goals of the charismatic leader, the authors note that surrogates are selected to occupy their positions based on the supportive behavior they exhibit in line with the desires of the charismatic leader.

In many respects, narcissism is the fuel that prompts charismatics to go farther than the average individual in achieving goals within and without crisis situations. Eminent psychologist Alfred Adler described this aspect of narcissism as the “Superiority Complex.” Maniacci (2007) asserts:

They see others from the vantage point of who is above—or below—whom. If they are not on top, they feel grossly inferior. Others tend to feel inadequate around them. They are overly responsible, too involved, and far too controlling. When confronted with the possibility of not being superior, these people blame, attack, and criticize others. They may be wrong, but others are more wrong than they are. They hate the notion of not having a purpose in life, and they often work too hard and far too long. Winning is everything, and they are willing to cut corners, cheat, or even hurt others if they perceive themselves as losing. Winning is not the only thing: It is everything. They are excessively concerned with their appearance, and while they often take care of their outward appearance through dressing well and superb hygiene, they often neglect their inner health, both emotionally and physically. They are far too busy achieving to be worried about such things, and after all, they are special, so they don't have to worry about diets, sleep, and their health—nothing could ever happen to them (p.138-139).

When these characteristics are exemplified within charismatics, it is often seen as “missionary zeal” and “the love and concern” for people. In actuality, people are mere pleasantries utilized to implement and bring to fruition an ultimate goal. “In advance of performance, narcissists seem to care most about attaining desirable rewards associated with meeting or exceeding performance goals, and they typically show less concern about the prospect of failing to achieve the desired goal” (Wallace, et al, 2009. P. 79). It is important to note that these vainglorious acts are cultivated by an enabling culture. Western culture, which relishes and embraces its Judeo-Christian leanings, inherently support the narcissism of individuals generally and charismatics, specifically. A tenet which espouses man being created in the image of an omnipotent God-head, by definition relegates man to a superior position. If everything is created by a superior being than how did man become the inheritor of this largesse? Man’s self-importance, through scriptural edict or ethnic domination, saw fit to find self-defining roles to pit his esteem against real or perceived adversaries. “Throughout history, the pretense of masculine superiority has had to be continually reinforced by patriarchal laws, religion, and cultural rituals and ceremonies that elevated men and made woman subservient, all too often through the application of brute power and violence. The appearance of harmony between the genders was more often the experience of subjugation by fear, male dominance followed by the submissive acts of women who had been stripped of power and status in the world” (Bitter, 2008, p.271).

Essentially, the symbiotic relationship between charismatic leaders and followers is based on the need of charismatic leaders to be adored by followers and the need of followers to adore charismatic leaders. In this sense, both parties are getting their needs met. Researchers who denigrate this notion rely on an over-idealistic, extremely sanguine reality of human nature. To deny the personality, experiences, and environmental influences of charismatic leaders is disavowing the evolutionary process that brings these individuals into existence. In addition, the inherent need of followers to achieve hope and certainty in their lives via religious affiliation or charismatic leadership is also disavowed by researchers who attempt to intellectually disconnect an emotional connection.

Instead of researchers attempting to divide the needs of charismatic leaders and followers as a means of establishing some utopic idealism, it would be better to allow the intellectual and emotional relationship to exist between charismatic leaders and followers. In short, allow the charismatic leader to be loved by adoring followers and followers to find encouragement, inspiration, and hope within the ideals of the charismatic leader. Invariably, researchers cannot have it both ways---organizational development, social cohesion, and collectivism at the behest of rugged individualism, hopelessness, and barbarism. The idea of the fully-contained individual devoid of the need for external support, emotional attachment, and unadulterated self-confidence is illusory. Such understanding by researchers suggests a naiveté and myopia about human nature and the world that is counterproductive to social progress.

References

Bitter. J. (2008 Fall). Reconsidering narcissism: An Adlerian-feminist response to the article in the special section of the journal of individual psychology. The Journal of Individual Psychology, 64(3), 270-279.

Cicero, L., and Pierro, A. (2007 Oct.) Charismatic leadership and organizational outcomes: The mediating role of employees’ work-group identification. International Journal of Psychology, 42(5), 297-306.

De Hoogh, A., den Hartog, D., Koopman, P., Thierry, H., van den Berg P., van der Weide, J., and Wilderom, C. (2004 Dec.). Charismatic leadership, environmental dynamism, and performance. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 13(4), 447-471.

Galvin, B., Balkundi, P., and Waldman, D.A. (2010 Jul.). Spreading the word: The role of surrogates in charismatic leadership. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 477-494.

Maniacci, M.P. (2007 Summer). His majesty the baby: Narcissism through the lens of individual psychology. Journal of Individual Psychology, 63(2), 136-145.

Wallace. H.M., Ready, C.B. , and Weitenhagen, E. (2009 Jan-Mar.). Narcissism and task persistence. Self & Identity, 8(1), 78-93.

How Corporate Boards Choose Charismatic Leaders

2011-10-16T22:12:00.000-07:00

Often the board of directors is not an effective auditor for recruiting and monitoring the actions of charismatic leaders. Greve (2004) pointed to Khurana’s (2002) work on the irrational search for charismatic CEOs. Board of directors of major corporations believe strongly in the ability of a CEO to rescue a troubled firm. This irrational enthusiasm stems from: 1. Directors taking cues from securities analysts and business journals prompting directors to believe that a celebrity CEO can turn around a company’s low performance, 2. Directors evaluating CEOs based on past performance and viewing social traits characterized as charisma as a panacea, and 3. Directors and analysts being complicit in choosing a CEO based on these preconceived notions of CEO value. Invariably, there is no voice of reason between directors and analysts in auditing and objectively searching for a CEO with the best overall fit within a company’s corporate culture. Once a board sets its sights on a specific CEO, analysts follow suit. Greve’s reported that this favoritism toward charismatic CEOs has impact on organizational development. First, by choosing a CEO based on past performance or celebrity status before searching inside the company for qualified candidates causes low morale within the company. Second, directors operate from a position of weakness in contractual negotiations with a highly sought-after CEO. Inflated expectations of the new CEO is a recipe for failure when expectations do not materialize based on high expectations, risky strategic decisions, and the exorbitant power of the new CEO. Corporate challenges may be more complex than originally defined or take longer to solve than anticipated.

References

Greve, H. (2004 May). Searching for a corporate savior: The irrational quest for charismatic ceos reviewed work(s). American Journal of Sociology, 109(6), 1542-1544.

Khurana, R. (2002). Searching for a corporate savior: The irrational quest for charismatic ceos. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Charismatic Leaders Spark Innovation Within Followers

2011-10-09T22:51:00.000-07:00

Michaelis, Stegmaier, and Sonntag (2009) said that charismatic leadership is related to innovation implementation behavior and plays a significant role in followers demonstrating behavior characterized as innovative. Second, this innovative-oriented environment allows followers to create a greater trust for the leader, particularly as it relates to the opportunity for followers to be change agents in that environment. Third, followers had to feel trust in the innovative aspirations of top managers as well as immediate managers. It was more important for followers to trust in top management because top management is where the fundamental changes within an organization take place. If top management was not committed to change initiatives, it logically follows that trust in immediate managers would be limited.

References

Michaelis, B., Stegmaier, R., and Sonntag, K. (2009 Dec.). Affective commitment to change and innovation implementation behavior: The role of charismatic leadership and employees’ trust in top management. Journal of Change Management, 9(4), 399-417.

Charismatic Leaders Develop Disciples to Influence Organizational Development

2011-10-02T21:32:00.000-07:00

Galvin, Balkundi, and Waldman (2010) discussed the ability of charismatic leaders to develop disciples or surrogates within an organization. The authors said these surrogates promote, defend, and model behavior after the charismatic leader. Charismatic leaders identify and train surrogates, either formally or informally, which allows charismatic leaders to have influence in distant areas within an organization. Surrogates create networks, social processes, and flow information within the organization. These networks serve as means for the charismatic leader to influence an organization by dispersing information. Although a rouge surrogate could harm a networked system by sending information oppositional to the goals of the charismatic leader, the authors note that surrogates are selected to occupy their positions based on the supportive behavior they exhibit in line with the desires of the charismatic leader.

References

Galvin, B., Balkundi, P., and Waldman, D.A. (2010 Jul.). Spreading the word: The role of surrogates in charismatic leadership. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 477-494.

Environments for Charismatic Leadership

2011-09-25T20:58:00.000-07:00

Shamir and Howell (1999) spoke about the environmental conditions best suited and most ill-suited for charismatic leaders. Shamir and Howell said charismatic leaders are more likely to emerge in weak or uncertain environments where performance is difficult to measure, because emotions run high and individuals are easier to influence in their desire for things to return to normal. Conversely, charismatic leaders are ill-suited when environmental conditions are strong or stable, because individuals are more certain and rational requiring more transactional rewards for increased productivity. The determination of whether environmental conditions are weak or strong is purely subjective and decided by employees.

References

Shamir, B., and Howell, J.M. (1999 Summer). Organizational and contextual influences on the emergence and effectiveness of charismatic leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 257.

The Transactional Nature of Charismatic Leadership

2011-09-18T23:22:00.000-07:00

Often researchers who view charismatic leaders as expert manipulators do not investigate the transactional relationship between the charismatic leader and followers. Kallis (2006) discussed the impact of leaders and followers who benefited within the German and Italian military under Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. To suggest that the German and Italian citizenry followed the dictates of Hitler and Mussolini out of fear would undermine the strengths of the charismatic leadership model. Although each man articulated and exemplified an ideal for his respective country, a transactional relationship existed between the leaders and followers. Followers supported Hitler and Mussolini, because these leaders instilled the self-respect and integrity within their followers lost in World War I. Both leaders represented the glory and esteem that their fellow countrymen saw within themselves. Kallis suggested that this intangible exchange created an unqualified psychological contract between the leaders and followers. In essence, if Hitler and Mussolini could restore their respective countries to greatness, they could garner continual support from constituents. Loyalty among followers grew incrementally as the charisma of the two leaders created a mythology of future prosperity. Hitler and Mussolini became prophets and messiahs to their followers.

References

Kallis, A. (2006, June). Fascism, ‘charisma’ and ‘charismatisation’: Weber’s model of ‘charismatic domination’ and interwar European fascism. Totalitarian Movements & Political Religion, 7(1), 25-43.

The Charismatic Leader's Speaking Style

2011-09-11T17:20:00.000-07:00

DeVries, Bakker-Pieper, and Oostenveld (2010) noted the dynamics of charismatic leader’s communication style. They submitted that a charismatic leader’s communication style is characterized as assured, supportive, argumentative, precise, and verbally non-aggressive. These authors also found that expressiveness was not believed to be related to charismatic leadership. DeVries, Bakker-Pieper, and Oostenveld said that expressiveness is not a necessary trait for charismatic leaders to reach their goals. Mahatma Gandhi is an example of a less expressive charismatic leader, yet effective. In addition, preciseness of a charismatic leader’s communication style had a significant effect on the leader’s performance and satisfaction by subordinates. A charismatic leader’s preciseness, together with the leader’s supportiveness, lent greatly to enhancing subordinates knowledge collecting from the leader.

References

DeVries, R., Bakker-Pieper, A., and Oostenveld, W. (2010 Sep.). Leadership=communication? The relations of leaders’ communication styles with leadership styles, knowledge sharing and leadership outcomes. Journal of Business & Psychology, 25(3), 367-380.

Charismatic Leadership Versus Transformational Leadership

2011-09-04T22:15:00.000-07:00

Researchers disagree about charismatic leadership and transformational leadership being synonymous or two distinct leadership models. Den Hartog, House, Hanges, Ruiz-Quintanilla, and Dorfman (1999) stated in their study that several attributes reflecting charismatic/transformational leadership are universally endorsed as contributing to outstanding leadership. These attributes include: motive arouser, foresight, encouraging, communicative, trustworthy, dynamic, positive, confidence builder, and motivational.

However, Yukl (1999) drew a distinction between the two leadership models. Yukl stressed that transformational leaders seem more likely to take initiatives that empower followers and make followers partners in an endeavor. Contrarily, charismatic leaders seem more likely to emphasize the need for radical organizational changes that can be accomplished if followers place their trust in the charismatic leader’s abilities. The core behavior, motivation, and traits make transformational and charismatic leadership unlikely to occur at the same time.

Dubrin (2010) noted that a key component of transformational leadership is the leader’s ability to inspire people and make major changes within an organization. Although charismatic leaders are inspirational, they do not bring about major changes within an organization (Dubrin, 2010). Johnson (2012) argued that charismatic leadership and transformational leadership were not interchangeable terms. Johnson suggested that charismatic leadership is more individual or personality centered in that followers had emotional ties to the leader that approached idol worship. The transformational leader encouraged followers to be independent of leadership; whereas the charismatic leader encouraged followers to rely on the leader.

Johnson postulated that transformational leaders raise the morality of both leaders and followers and serve as a model for ideal behavior. On the other hand, charismatic leadership is more results focused. Johnson believed emphatically that transformational leaders are charismatic, but that charismatic leaders are not necessarily transformational. Charismatic leaders are more concerned about what works as opposed to what is right. Johnson appeared not to disagree that charismatic leaders affect organizational development, but inherently believed that the moral barometer within charismatic leaders is ethically skewed toward achieving successful results at any cost. Johnson appeared suspicious of the charismatic leader’s motives and seemed to suggest that impure thoughts produce impure results.

References

Den Hartog, D.N., House, R.J., Hanges, P.J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S.A., and Dorfman, P.W. (1999 Summer). Culture specific and cross culturally generalizable implicit leadership theories: are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed? Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 219.

Dubrin, A. J. (2010). Leadership: research, findings, and skills, 6th edition. Ohio: South-Western Centage Learning.

Yukl. G. (1999 Summer). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285.

Is the Charismatic Leader a Super Hero?

2011-08-31T15:50:00.000-07:00

The Charismatic leadership model offers other challenges to researchers. Often charismatic leaders are viewed as superheroes that swoop down in a moment of need, reminiscent of fictional characters such as Batman and Superman. Within organizational development, finding these heroes becomes even more challenging during times of crisis. Jacobsen (2001) showed that all the conditions that should create the charismatic leader’s appearance, does not. Shamir, House, and Arthur (noted within Jacobsen’s study) mapped the conditions when charismatic leaders appear. The charismatic leader’s appearance is most apt when: 1. The situation is perceived to threaten important values, 2. The relationship between performance and goal achievement is nebulous, 3. The situation is unstable, and 4. The task requires exceptional effort. Attempting to reconcile some sense of pragmatism between the superhuman traits under Jacobsen’s concept with the realism under Callan’s views makes identifying the traits, conditions, and environment that much more problematic to uncover.

Jacobsen tried to bridge the gap empirically by identifying six historical figures deemed charismatic by their transforming an organization, country, or movement. Some individuals included John F. Kennedy, Lee Iacocca, and Adolf Hitler. The biggest challenge with attempting to gauge the charismatic leadership models’ impact on organizational development under Jacobsen is that it happens after the fact. Once the event is over and recorded by history, researchers are tasked with attempting to analyze and articulate what happened. This is more the challenge with monumental events. The impact of the event cannot be thought until it transpires. Contemporary CEOs such as the late automotive designer John DeLorean and Hewlett Packard’s (HP) Carly Fiorina, who was ousted by HP, are not emblematic of the invincibility attributed to the charismatic leadership model. Though they were rising stars at one point of their careers, they could not maintain the luster of the charismatic leader. The subjectivity of the charismatic leadership model makes it such that success is measured far into the future compared to the objective standards ascribed to the traditional leadership model. With the traditional leadership model, the CEO enhances stakeholder profitability, cuts costs, and expands into new markets or does not.

References
Jacobsen, C. (2001 Spring). Dynamics of charismatic leadership: A process theory, simulation model, and tests. Leadership Quarterly, 12(1), 75.

The Impact of Charismatic Leaders Founding Organizations

2011-08-21T23:03:00.000-07:00

Though the impact of the charismatic leadership model is often discussed within established organizations, there are other challenges with charismatic leadership when the leader is the founder or owner of an organization. Hernandez and Leslie (2001) identified some challenges of charismatic leaders who founded organizations and the leaders’ inability to move forward or select a successor. The potential void left by the charismatic leader’s departure creates a degree of insecurity throughout the organization. Anxiety is developed among frontline personnel as well as organizational stakeholders become overly dependent or ambivalent over the potential void left by the charismatic leader who produces split loyalties. At the end of a charismatic leader’s reign, such uncertainty and fractured loyalties could divide the organization. Hernandez and Leslie went on to say that an organization’s continuity is better served when the charismatic leader exerts influence in creating a vision for the future of the organization as opposed to allowing frenzy within the infrastructure. Also the natural fear of the unknown within individuals could be ameliorated through clear and consistent communication. Additionally, the board of directors could be proactive in identifying potential concerns in operations before these concerns trickle down to the lower echelon of the organization.

References

Hernandez, C.M., and Leslie, D.R. (2001 Summer). Charismatic leader the aftermath. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 11(4), 493.

The Charismatic Leadership Model is Difficult to Measure Objectively

2011-08-14T22:28:00.000-07:00

Researchers are challenged with developing instruments to measure the impact of charismatic leadership on organizational development. At first look it would seem logical that the same measures that apply to measuring other leadership models should be apropos for measuring charismatic leadership. Rowold and Laukamp (2009) reported that existing empirical support highlights the positive relationship between charismatic leadership and subjective indicators as important to organizational success. However, there are few studies that have examined the relationship between charismatic leadership and objective measures. Rowold and Laukamp asserted that this lack of measuring objectivity makes it difficult to view charismatic leadership through objective lenses. Following Rowold and Laukamp’s perspective to its logical conclusion suggest that charismatic leadership is difficult to validate because of its subjective nature. If charismatic leadership is founded on the vagaries and capriciousness of individualized responses, it becomes not only challenging to quantify its effectiveness but also to decipher the immutable principles that can be taught to budding leaders and managers within corporate structures.

References

Rowold, J., and Laukamp, L. (2009 Oct.). Charismatic leadership and objective indicators. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 58(4), 602-621

Following Charismatic Leaders

2011-08-07T23:21:00.000-07:00

Yukl (1999) acknowledged the strong personal identification followers have with charismatic leaders as a means of solving problems germane to the needs of followers. Yukl stopped short in his assessment by suggesting that followers identified more with the mission than with the charismatic leader when their needs were tied to the mission. Yukl also pointed to researchers often looking at the socially acceptable behavior of charismatic leaders to achieving a goal and not the manipulative practices sometimes practiced by charismatic leaders over followers. Researchers have preconceived notions about charismatic leadership and followership that often becomes self-fulfilling prophecies. Researchers either believed that charismatic leadership is directly related to organizational advancement or to organizational regression. Yukl suggested that there were opportune times when charismatic leadership was most effective for organizational development as well as providing the most advantageous opportunities for followers. These opportune times for charismatic leaders are: When a visionary entrepreneur overcomes difficulty in establishing a new organization, a guru of a new religion, a passionate revolutionary who transforms a corrupt organization from the ground up, and a manager who rescues a company from the brink of extinction.

References

Yukl. G. (1999 Summer). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285.

Charismatic Leaders as Visionaries

2011-07-30T23:38:00.000-07:00

Waldman and Yammarino (1999) defined Chief Executive Officer (CEO) charisma in two parts. First, CEO charisma is the behavioral characteristics of the leader, including: the articulation of a clear vision based on personal values, a consistent demonstration of these values, high performance expectations of himself and followers, confidence in followers’ abilities to meet the challenges, and the assumption of personal risks. Second, CEO charisma involves a relationship between the CEO and one or more followers. Relationships must be close in proximity as well as distant within the organizational structure. In addition, followers must internalize their commitment to the vision of the leader.

Nadler and Tushman (1990) asserted that vision and charisma are not enough to sustain large system changes. Although charisma is necessary in business for improving interpersonal relationships, a business model must go beyond inspired individuals. Nadler and Tushman cited Don Burr of People Express as an example of the pitfalls of visionaries under the charismatic leadership model. Burr had a far reaching dream to expand the markets of People Express Airline; however, fell short based on his inability to translate a vision into a cohesive senior executive team as well as make the necessary organizational changes to flourish. This incapacity for improving People Express’ infrastructure caused its demise. The complexities in a global market call for business expertise and operations not often attributed to charismatic leadership. To this extent, charismatic leaders are viewed myopically. Researchers tend to focus on the emotional impact charismatic leaders often exude rather than charismatic leaders being strategist for implementing far-reaching plans.

(Excerpts from Strengths & Weaknesses of Charismatic Leaders on Organizational Development) by Edward Brown

References

Nadler,D., and Tushman, M. (1990 Winter). Beyond charismatic leader: Leadership and organizational change. California Management Review, 32(2), 77-97.

Waldman, D.A., and Yammarino, F.J. (1999 Apr.) Ceo charismatic leadership: Levels-of-management and levels-of-analysis effects. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 266-285.

Charisma & the 90 Day Rule for Women

2011-07-25T00:12:00.000-07:00

Dear Mr. Brown:

Recently, I read comedian Steve Harvey’s book, “Act Like a Lady, Think Like a Man….” He gave some good pointers for women to follow in attracting and maintaining the man of their dreams. One suggestion Steve provides is for a woman to wait 90 days before engaging in physical intimacy with a man. Do you think rules work on charismatic men or do women need a different manual for dealing with charismatic men?

Sharon Johnson
Chicago, IL

Dear Ms. Johnson:

Thank you for your inquiry. First, Steve Harvey has done a great job of extended his brand into relationship expert, game show host, TV and radio celebrity, and bestselling author. Any man who has lived over 50 years has learned a few lessons along the way. However, any notion of a “one size fits all” approach to dealing with men should be viewed carefully. There are instances when a couple has had sex on their first date and spent the rest of their lives together. Conversely, there have been couples who have waited until marriage to have sex and the marriage ended in divorce. Harvey’s idea is admirable for women to gain men’s respect before having sex. But, it is quite possible for a man to wait 90 days to have sex with a woman, while having sex with a series of other women in the interim. For women to control the sexual habits of men, women throughout the world have to agree on the same agenda. In other words, every woman in the world has to agree and communicate the conditions in which sex will be expended to men. Since the self-interest of women will always take precedent over collective interests, women will not wield any true power in this arena. Women exercise the greatest amount of power and influence over men when men are in love with them, not because they are necessarily having sex.

Better advice for women would be to study the psychological make-up of men and the ways men gain and leverage power. Again, a woman cannot control a man by withholding sex unless every woman in the world has agreed to withhold sex from the same man. A woman can maintain her moral standards by refusing to indulge in sex with certain men, but this is where her control ends.

In addition, charismatic men often wield a certain degree of power---perceptually and realistically. Consequently, charismatic men do not have to wait any amount of time to have sex when they desire. Every man has experienced some form of rejection from women. The issue is not how often a man fails to achieve his sexual objectives, but how often he achieves his objectives despite rejection. For every three women who reject a handsome, smart, and charismatic man (due to insecurity, mistrust or disinterest), another woman will provide all the comfort he needs.

Books, movies, and symposiums can be great empowerment opportunities for women, but these tools should serve as a basis for self-mastery and understanding the core of human nature.

Edward Brown
Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute

Charisma, Pleasure & Pain

2011-07-18T00:22:00.000-07:00

In this session, charisma expert and commentator Edward Brown provides insights on the privileges and objectives of the charismatic personality.

Q: What are the privileges of charismatic personalities?

A: The world stage is the charismatic personality’s playground and he enjoys playing the game of life for self-pleasure. People are mere conduits to his pleasure.

Q: So, does the charismatic personality use people to achieve his ends?

A: Yes, but not in a malicious sense. The typical charismatic personality is not trying to harm or annihilate anyone. He realizes that life is a mere game and people serve as conduits for pleasure or pain. The charismatic personality’s reality and choices are to receive more pleasure. Pain is not an option.

Q: Interesting. Given the fact that we can’t control everything in life as individuals, how does a charismatic personality wield so much power and control?
A: Well, he views himself as smarter than the average person. He views life as an introspective scientist using intellect over emotions. He is generally aware of everything that is going on around him and has developed a lifestyle where studying human nature is part of his work as well as his entertainment. Nothing is left to chance and the idea of a balanced life is laughable. People who see life as altruistic, exchanging pain for equal amounts of pleasure, is oppositional to a charismatic personality’s worldview. The thinking of the average person is viewed by the charismatic personality as a recipe for victimization. The charismatic personality pays less for pleasure than the average individual.

Q: Okay. Under these circumstances, why would an individual want to be associated with a charismatic personality?

A: Why wouldn’t anyone want to associate with a charismatic personality? In Western culture, power and control are desired aspirations. The charismatic personality is a representation of the often unstated, but understood objective of most people—the acquisition and maintenance of power. Again, people and things provide a level of pleasure. There is no place in the world where power is not an aspiration. The difference between the objectives of the charismatic personality and the average person is that the charismatic personality is keenly aware of calculated actions to affect a specific outcome. The average person has moments when he is calculating to achieve a desired outcome, but the average person is hindered by the psychological barriers he places upon himself. He really doesn’t like the idea of being calculating. It sounds manipulative.

Q: So, the fundamental difference between the charismatic personality and the average person, is courage?

A: Courage is a big part of the charismatic personality’s existence, but it is how the charismatic personality interprets, analyzes, and implements strategies for getting more pleasure in life. Gaining pleasure through strategic maneuvers is the life of a charismatic personality based on his experiences and worldview. The average person does not think in perpetually strategic terms. The calculating, bold, and audacious mind of the charismatic personality is different from the emotionally-driven and short-term thinking of the average individual. The mind and manifestations of the charismatic personality sets him apart from the average individual.

Charisma for Geeks

2011-07-11T01:08:00.000-07:00

In this session, charisma expert and commentator Edward Brown will provide information to those self-described “Geeks” on how to be more engaging in social settings.

Q: What is the biggest challenge Geeks face in acting more charismatic?

A: Actually, the challenge is not attempting to transform a socially inept individual into someone else’s ideal, but to make whatever the individual is, work for them.

Q: That’s very fine and well, but how do you make a Geek, say, become more successful with women?

A: Since, all women are different. The first challenge is to determine what common needs do most women share? Based on my experience, most women want to feel physically and emotionally safe, comfortable with their object of desire, mentally stimulated, and a desire to laugh. If a socially inept person can create his own distinctive style that is not outlandish, intellectually stimulate women, and make them laugh, most of the job is done.

Q: Interesting. Is it that simple to transform a geek to chic?

A: Yes, if we are trying to encourage the person to be authentically themselves in ways that they don’t have to be self-conscious. If you give individuals a philosophy for success rather than steps for success, they are allowed to be creative in the process. They won’t have to think about doing, they can just be. In some respects, I am a geek. But, I rolled my academic proclivities, urban upbringing, and law enforcement experiences into becoming a firm, funny, intellectual. I could not have become a force to be reckoned with by adhering merely to some steps.

Q: Okay. What advice would you give a geek in a business setting to attract more clients?
A: In a business setting, it is important to assess the reason for the occasion and what are the basic needs of the people attending. If many of the people in the room are businesspeople looking for contacts, it is important to determine whether this venue is the best place for what you offer in products and services. Actually, determining the correct venue for one’s products and services should have been established before attending the venue. Assuming the venue is correct for what one has to offer, the task is to casually create conversations concentrating efforts at connecting with attendees and making mental notes about what they want.

Q: What happens next?

A: You’re not trying to make a sell, but merely gathering information and establishing connections. By the time you leave with collected business cards, follow up later with reference to the conversation you had with them. If you heard the potential client mention a problem he/she is having, begin the consultation process by demonstrating that you have the solution to their problem.

To be more engaging, lead with the personal attributes that are the most effective in influencing people.

Charisma & The Single Man

2011-07-04T01:00:00.000-07:00

Dear Mr. Brown:

I recently had a spirited discussion with my boyfriend about a man we know that can be best described as good-looking, educated and charismatic. Over the years, Chad (not his real name) has dated many women, but has repeatedly claimed to have not met the right woman to marry. How is it possible for a man to have so much going on, but can’t find the woman of his dreams?

Janice McArthur
New York, NY

Dear Ms. McArthur:

For a minute, I thought you were talking about me. (Just kidding). I am firm believer that if a man wants to be married, he will be married. It has been often said that women control who has sex, but men control who gets married. Women, who ask men why they are still single, view marriage through their own eyes, not the eyes of men. Earlier this year, I watched an episode of the Oprah Winfrey Show about a woman who married a man sentenced to life in prison without any chance of parole. I sat there wondering what could a convicted man, serving a life sentence, say to a woman that would make her say “I do” to that man in marriage. If a convicted man could find a wife given his limited choices, why couldn’t a single, free, handsome, educated, and charismatic man not find a wife if he was truly looking for one?

I suggest that men who are handsome, educated, and charismatic want the freedom that goes along with being single and free. Chad is not looking for marriage, because whatever a potential wife is willing to offer him, there are countless women willing to do the same without the necessity of marriage. Many contemporary men, while valuing the institution of marriage as a concept, do not see the long-terms value of marriage unless children are involved. If Chad is over 40 years of age, he has run the gamut of women. Some women were marriage material and others were mere opportunities to have fun. Do not ever believe a heterosexual man who says he cannot find a woman to marry. It is a ploy to throw you off his real intentions, which is to remain single and free until there is no more value in it. Once the bloom begins to diminish from his rose, he’ll seek and find a wife. On the upside, she will be getting a man who is more settled and wiser due to age. On the downside, he is giving her a diminished version of his past self, which he would never have shared when he was at his best.

Edward Brown
Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute

Charisma & the Virtue of Selfishness

2011-06-27T01:10:00.000-07:00

Dear Mr. Brown:

I either read or saw a video where you promoted the importance of being selfish to acheive success. How do you reconcile people being selfish and charismatic at the same time? Is this an oxymoron?

Theresa Wildenmore
Salt Lake City, Utah

Dear Ms. Wildenmore:

Thank you for your inquiry. Yes, I have talked about being selfish to achieve personal and professional goals. Unfortunately, people connote selfishness as a negative term. Researching the lives of acclaimed individuals from Alexander the Great to Barack Obama has led me to believe that raw, unadulterated ambition by men labeled charismatic is steeped in selfishness. Reportedly, basketball great Michael Jordan said you had to be selfish to achieve greatness, but become less selfish as one achieved their goals. I am not sure how that is done authentically. Microsoft’s Bill Gates was ruthlessly selfish and ambition according to various reports. However, his philanthropic initiatives are unparalleled on the world stage. Does Gates give to worthy causes because he has achieved his aspirations and can afford to do so? Or is his giving a ploy to encourage people to buy and support Microsoft products? We can only speculate.

However, I believe that you can do good and well simultaneously. Being selfish only crystallizes what your intentions are. Once you are clear about your objectives, you can align everything in your life with your ultimate goals. Historically, this is how great feats have been accomplished.

The fundamental factor that makes charismatic people so successful is the keen insight into what they are after as well as a clear understanding of human nature to get there.

Everyone has to decide for themselves what is important and what they can tolerate. To date, if I had made different decisions in life, I could not enjoy the life that I have pursued. It came with setbacks, relentlessness, and yes selfishness. I knew of no other way to effectively perform and the selfishness of other people would have destroyed me.

Edward Brown
Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute

Does Transformational Leadership Create Charismatic Leaders?

2011-06-23T16:24:00.000-07:00

In this Q & A session, researcher on charisma and charismatic leadership, Edward Brown of Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute, provides insight into the possible impact of transformational leadership on charismatic leaders.

Q: What is the difference between transformational leadership and charismatic leadership?

A: Actually, the charismatic leadership model predates the transformational leadership model by several decades. Eminent sociologist, Max Weber (1864-1920) is credited for secularizing the concept of charisma and the charismatic leadership model. James MacGregor Burns is credited with developing the transformational leadership model in 1978.

Essentially, the two leadership models share the same traits. Charismatic leaders and transformational leaders are described as visionaries, inspirational, and great orators. The major distinction researchers make between the models is that charismatic leaders are power driven to complete a mission; whereas transformational leaders empower individuals to become more independent and less dependent on the leader.

Q: Why do you think there is so much disagreement among researchers about transformational leadership versus charismatic leadership?

A: I believe some representatives of the charismatic leadership model have given it a negative connotation. Hitler, Mussolini, and Amin come to mind. Proponents of transformational leadership have taken the positive traits of charismatic leadership and made transformational leadership a morality driven model. Transformational leadership is reminiscent of charismatic leadership when charismatic leadership had a religious connotation attached to it under church historian Rudolph Sohm.

Q: What do you think is the connection between transformational leadership and charismatic leadership?

A: My thoughts are premature on this particular notion. However, I hypothesize that transformational leaders create charismatic leaders.

Q: Could you elaborate?

A: I was trying to decide if Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was more of a transformational leader or a charismatic leader. If he was trying to transform the segregated conditions of his time and the people around him, then he was transformational. But, if he had a selfish motive for his cause, he may be closer to the charismatic leadership model. I surmised that he was transformational in that he transformed legislation, race relations and self-determination for black people. However, the people he transformed appear to operate more to the charismatic leadership model. Jesse Jackson, Andrew Young, Ralph David Abernathy, Hosea Williams, John Lewis, and Joseph Lowery fall under the charismatic leadership model. Although they all shared a common experience, each man carved out a niche for himself in the market place. Although they are/were influential, arguably, not one of these men has created an institution bigger than themselves. That is not necessarily a bad thing. I was not attempting to judge the contributions of these men, but determine the difference between transformational leadership and charismatic leadership.

Q: Do any other examples come to mind?

A: Yes, Elijah Muhammad of the Nation of Islam was transformational, but Malcolm X and Minister Louis Farrakhan are under the charismatic leadership model. In this regard, charisma can support the work of the transformational leader (Dr. King and Elijah Muhammad) or create a body of work within itself, Steve Jobs and Apple technology products and Denzel Washington and his body of film work.

A Charismatic Move that Almost Worked

2011-06-12T22:32:00.000-07:00

In this Q & A session, researcher on charisma and charismatic leadership, Edward Brown of Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute, provides insight into Lebron James, Dwayne Wade, and Chris Bosh and their attempt to create a NBA championship team.

Q: What makes this experiment to put an NBA championship team together by Lebron James, Dwayne Wade, and Chris Bosh, a charismatic move?

A: It was the first time in recent history, if ever, the proletariat (players) got together to control the means of production (NBA team owners) by creating a brand that could have upset the balance of power. Charismatic leaders often create a vision contrary to the status quo in their quest for power.

Q: In this trio, who is the charismatic leader?
A: There are no real compelling personalities within this trio, but the idea was a charismatic move. The decision for three basketball stars to get together and basically create a basketball team within the NBA system is tantamount to the good old days in street basketball, where one individual (who had the next game) would try to create a powerhouse team by getting all the best available players to become undefeatable on the court. Generally within the NBA, the team coach, scout, and owner try to structure a franchise that has the best chances for a championship win within the salary caps that are available. The move by this trio upended the current system.

Q: What does it mean that the experiment by these players fell short in that they did not win the 2011 NBA Championship?
A: In a practical sense, there is always next year. Viewing the situation from another angle, the three players proved a point that individuals could make creative, charismatic moves inside a traditionally-oriented organization. To almost win the 2011 NBA Championship on an idea concocted by a group of individuals is a phenomenal feat in itself. The NBA owners have to at least consider what the choice for NBA players forming their own team means in terms of power. On one hand, it would appear that power rests with individual players coming together to create a new reality. On the other hand, allowing players (employees) to become creative within a company does not take away from the power of the organization, it enhances it. It was Art Fry at 3M Company that created the Post-It note pad as an entrepreneurial venture inside the 3M Company. From the success of Post-Its, 3M encouraged employees to become more creative as part of 3M’s operational philosophy. To truly upset the means of production, an employee has to have a compelling idea within his own company that competes against a strong established brand. NBA owners do not envision NBA players starting their own teams and restructuring how business is done. It can happen and maybe this trio planted the seed for other players to look past merely being basketball players, but owners within the NBA system.

Q: What do you think is the chance of NBA players becoming owners within a system they play in?
A: Again, it is a novel idea. Two points come to mind: 1.Rapper LL Cool J said it best when he said that just because you can make a cake, does not mean you can operate a bakery. Playing basketball and operating a basketball franchise are totally different, 2. If a rule within the NBA suggested that players cannot own teams, the idea would die an immediate death. An organization is not going to create rules that will lead to its own demise. It will close its doors first.

Q: Although the trio is not necessarily charismatic, their idea was charismatic. How can ideas be charismatic?
A: The Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute defines charisma as “The creating of perceptions that impact the mind and emotions of others through flair, finesse, and glib language.” Lebron James’ self initiated recruitment tour that prompted NBA teams to audition for his services captured the imagination of the sports industry. The surprising revelation that James, Wade, and Bosh had collaborated behind the scene for all of them to play basketball in Miami was even more surprising. There was a great deal of flair and finesse as well as chicanery for the sake of entertainment. Invariably, this was a great win for the NBA as a whole. When the biggest myth makers and cheerleaders are the employees, you truly have an organization where all the stakeholders are dedicated to the brand. After all, we are still talking about basketball—child’s play.

Researching the Charismatic Mind

2011-06-05T23:49:00.000-07:00

In this Q & A session, researcher on charisma and charismatic leadership, Edward Brown of Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute, provides insight into charisma and the charismatic mind.

Q: What makes you an expert on charisma?

A: Essentially, I’ve written several books, articles and provided numerous interviews on charisma as a result of a decade of research as well as my ongoing study in this area.

Q: Do you have to be charismatic to talk about charisma?

A: No, not necessarily. Interesting enough, people don’t mind putting me on the spot by asking me if I see myself as being charismatic. I think I was more charismatic before I started researching charisma and charismatic leadership. My intellectual pursuits have made me more analytical, which has taken away some of the magnetism I once possessed.

Q: Interesting, how did that happen?

A: By looking within the inner workings of charismatic personalities, I saw that they could be cold, calculating, focused, disciplined, but also great actors for generating support from followers. The more I engaged in the intellectual side of charisma, the less acting I opted to do.

Q: What has been the result of your not being a good actor?

A: I didn’t say I wasn’t a good actor. I merely opted to spend more time in the laboratory and less time manifesting charisma on the world stage.

Q: Is reclusiveness a part of the charismatic mindset?

A: Reclusion can be a part of the charismatic mindset. Particularly, when he is building momentum for a specific mission. As a visionary, the charismatic personality lives in the field of ideas and parlays these ideas into action once the time is right. He spends more time in isolation and thinking than people realize.

Q: Do you have examples when charismatic personalities have sparked their genius in isolation and later astounded the world with their brilliance.

A: Adolf Hitler wrote his autobiography” Mein Kampf” in prison, which is a great treatise on power. Many of Dr. Martin L. King, Jr.’s greatest speeches were written in jail. Malcolm X was resurrected during his stint in prison. Nelson Mandela’s evolution took place while in prison.

Q: So, does one have to be imprisoned to become a charismatic leader?

A: Not necessarily, but isolation forces the individual, who has the traits of a charismatic leadership, to focus inwardly to begin thinking about a far reaching mission. Such insightful thinking would have been difficult with other responsibilities taking priority.

Q: Pundits have panned charismatic leadership as being more show than substance. Is the charismatic personality more show or substance?

A: I would suggest that ostentation or “showiness” is the manifestation of the substance behind a compelling idea. The flair and finesse of charismatic personalities stem from the passion, energy, and imagination of the charismatic personality. Take away the flair and finesse and you merely have a compelling idea that may or may not be acted upon.

Q: If you had to choose between the charisma of President Barack Obama and that of former President Bill Clinton, who of the two men has the more compelling charisma?

A: Although the two men have extraordinary political skills, President Bill Clinton is a bonafide charismatic personality for a few reasons. One, Clinton had a far reaching vision and plan for politics long before running for office. Second, Clinton opponents after meeting with him marveled at his magnetism and political insights. Third, the Clinton Administration demonstrated the highs and lows indicative of charismatic leadership. Clinton brought out visceral emotions within people. Contrarily, President Obama is very likeable, but has been described by insiders as cold and detached. For many, it is difficult to separate Obama’s historical significance as the first black president of the U.S. as well as the most powerful black man in the history of civilization with that of authentic charisma.

The End

Charisma: Men, Women, & the Will to Power

2011-05-30T00:37:00.000-07:00

Dear Mr. Brown:

Recently, I read an article you wrote suggesting that charisma and charismatic leadership were concepts more male-oriented than female- centered. I was livid over your comments! However, after my husband read the article, he gave me a different perspective on charisma, men, and power. I can’t say that I am totally comfortable with this difference, but I can appreciate your candor. For some reason, I still feel a bit of sexism in the distinction of men being more prone to charisma than women. Is there a middle ground?

Wendy Henderson
San Francisco, CA

Dear Mrs. Henderson:

Thank you for your passionate comments. For some time I wrestled with my analysis on how charisma played out between men and women. Initially, I tried to be politically correct by making it equal to both genders, but felt that I was not being totally honest about the research surrounding charisma. Nietzsche spoke of the “Amoral Superman” replacing the concept of a God figure. My interpretation of Nietzsche’s concept suggested that unflinching, ambitious men would capture the imagination of the masses and become the idol that society worshipped. Ultimately, this has happened. In a sense, powerful and ambitious men have become deified replacing God as a figurehead. This will- to- power is evident in a patriarchal world where naked aggression is acceptable among men, but denounced among women. When I ask groups of men and women to name charismatic individuals, names such as: Former President Bill Clinton, President Barack Obama, Denzel Washington, and Oprah Winfrey top the list. As I delve deeper into what makes these individuals charismatic to the audience, terms like: Great communicator, empathy and magnetism are suggested. However, as I inquire further about Oprah’s purported charisma compared to the men on the list, viewpoints begin to change from charisma to engaging, empathetic and inspirational. Although Oprah’s success hinges on media power, her brand is inspirational, not power. She emphasizes strength and empowerment, but not power and control per se. At the core of charismatic men is the acquisition and maintenance of power using communication, engagement and inspiration as a means of achieving it. Rarely would charismatic men appear as accessible and vulnerable as Oprah Winfrey. As a matter of fact, appearing vulnerable to that degree is oppositional to the concept of power in a patriarchal society. Although it may be changing, studies suggest that even women envision men in charismatic leadership roles over other women.

Power, control, mission, aggression, tenacity, crusade, etc… are often terms relegated to the motives of men, which serve as the basis for charismatic men having a deeper interest and proclivity to these terms. Women exercise a different type of power that would not fit within the charismatic leadership model. However, pundits have not stopped placing women like Oprah in the charismatic leadership category. At this point, I respectfully disagree with the experts that opt to do so.

Edward Brown
Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute

Charismatic Leadership: One Size Does Not Fit All

2011-05-22T23:24:00.000-07:00

Dear Mr. Brown:

I came across one of your articles where you suggest that charismatic leadership is most suitable when a company is in crisis mode. If what you say is true, can you draw the conclusion that most companies do not have charismatic CEOs at the helm, because most companies are stable? As a result, are out- of- work charismatic leaders running around looking for companies to save?

Julian Christianson
Montreal, Canada

Dear Mr. Christianson:

Thank you for posing an intellectual challenge. Yes, research suggests that charismatic leaders are most beneficial for companies during crisis situations or times of uncertainty. However, there is a difference between the most ideal time for charismatic leaders to flourish and the basic effectiveness of charismatic leaders in general. If business is about people management and profitability, charismatic leadership is generally effective despite the stability of a company. For examples, let’s say a corporation’s quarterly profit reports have been steadily increasing, but the Research & Development (R&D) division has been slow in creating innovative products and services. Although the overall company is healthy, a charismatic leader may jumpstart the R& D division to create groundbreaking products and services. Charismatic leaders are often passionate about ideas and new challenges. There will never be a shortage of problems and challenges within a company that does not necessitate a charismatic leader rising to the occasion.

At the end of the day, charismatic leaders are not skulking around looking for companies to save. Charismatic leaders are visionaries looking for opportunities to put their ideas to work that are a part of a long-term mission.

Sincerely,

Edward Brown
Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute

Charisma & Self-Love

2011-05-18T11:07:00.000-07:00

Hello Mr. Brown:

I read a recent article where you made a correlation between charismatic personalities and narcissism. Do you believe that all charismatic people are narcissistic?

Phillip Roman
New Haven, CT

Dear Mr. Roman:

Thank you for your inquiry. As I have noted in previous letters, I study historical data to isolate patterns of behavior among charismatic personalities. I try to stay away from absolutes, but one of the major traits I have found with genuine charismatic personalities is a great deal of self-love. This self-love is not inherently a negative characteristic. However, it can become destructive when the charismatic person’s major drive in life is self-gratification at the exclusion of any other considerations. I would go as far as to suggest that narcissism is more pronounced within charismatic people than average individuals. I am comfortable making that sweeping generalization, because the goal of bona fide charismatic personalities is often to complete some overarching mission or crusade. Whether it is creating a new religion or designing a new sports car, the drive, intensity and passion required to complete such a task requires a certain level of self-possession and self-absorption.

In the mind of the charismatic individual, he is the only one who can bring an idea to fruition. The mission or crusade begins in the mind of the charismatic person and will not be deterred by outside influences. Such intensity requires an inner focus that often precludes external considerations. To the charismatic person, he knows more than everyone else, because he has imagined his greatness far before embarking upon his mission.

Edward Brown
Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute

Charisma, Power & Control

2011-05-09T00:16:00.000-07:00

Dear Mr. Brown/Core Edge:

I have read your previous blogs and viewed your You Tube videos on charisma where you focus a great deal of attention on charismatic individuals needing power and control. I’m not sure I totally agree with your philosophy about charismatic people needing the level of power and control you suggest. I would go as far as to say that people like Hitler, Gadhafi and maybe even Fidel Castro may fit this mode, but I personally know charismatic people who appear not to be driven by power. Do you think you have overly generalized in your analysis?

Saul Goldberg
Buffalo, NY

Dear Mr. Goldberg:

Thank you for your insightful observations. When discussing the needs and behavior of charismatic individuals, I tend to look at historical and present day figures qualitatively to assess their paradigms and psychodynamics for pattern formulation. Obviously, charismatic individuals are different in personality as well as overall demeanor, but they do share common traits unique within themselves. For example, basketball great, Michael Jordan had the same cut-throat and relentless desire for power within basketball as Adolph Hitler had for conquering Europe and the world. The colorful stuntman Evel Knievel had the same intensity and drive as the founding father and first Secretary of the Treasury for the United States, Alexander Hamilton. To pierce the veil of what these charismatic individuals were driven by surpasses the conventional thinking of the average citizen. It is easy to confuse charismatic behavioral traits with the genuine charismatic personality. Basketball player Kobe Bryant mimics the skills of Michael Jordan to portray a relentless, charismatic player on the basketball court. However, Kobe Bryant would not be described as charismatic. Individuals may mimic the behavior of charismatic personalities, but not genuinely be charismatic. The manifestation of charismatic traits is different than the inner workings of the charismatic mind. Kobe Bryant is relentless, but does not come from the same core as Michael Jordan. The same would be true of R&B singer Usher versus Michael Jackson or even boxing great Sugar Ray Leonard versus Muhammad Ali. The core of Jordan, Jackson and Ali was to self-actualize or become all they could be within their industries. Whether the dominating effect these individuals had on their industries was motivated by a quest for power or power is a result of a dominating effect, their desire to excel at the highest heights brought about influence they used for business and political interests. To this extent, they were conquerors not unlike Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan.

Arguably, what people view as charisma within others is advanced interpersonal relationship skills. Michael Jordan, Evel Knievel, Michael Jackson and Muhammad Ali used personal power that transformed the industry where they reigned. Their level of power controlled the standard of which individuals afterwards would be judged. Power and control were not only internal motivators, but a means of reshaping worldviews. These charismatic individuals taught the world how to imagine and as a result, how to bring imagination into reality.

There is a huge difference between an individual who draws you in with passion, great stories and advanced oratorical skills versus one who transforms the world.

Edward Brown
Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute

Charisma, Barack Obama & the Death of Osama bin Laden

2011-05-02T01:09:00.000-07:00

By Edward Brown

This Q & A session discusses the impact of strategy for enhancing political charisma on the world stage.

Q: How has the death of Osama bin Laden enhanced President Obama’s charisma?

A: Recent polls suggest that President Obama’s approval rating by Americans is around 47%. At the urging of real estate developer Donald Trump, the White House recently released the long version of President Obama’s birth certificate thwarting the ongoing speculation of Obama’s citizenship, but demonstrating a degree of weakness by divulging this information under pressure. Escalating gas prices and the continued high employment rate necessitated some action that would change the conversation as well as create a sense of achievement for the Obama Administration. Neutralizing Osama bin Laden did that. This one act strengthens Obama’s reelection bid as well as increase his fundraising efforts.

Q: Is the killing of bin Laden merely a political move to curry favor with the American people?

A: If most things are predicated upon a political agenda, killing bin Laden is a political act. Contemporary politics is not only about the distribution of resources, but the marketing of political candidates. Symbolically and inspirationally, neutralizing bin Laden at this time, pays off politically and creates the perception that Americans are safer and that President Obama is a strong, decisive leader. In street vernacular, Obama gets “Cool Points.”

Q: Is charisma about using lives to facilitate an objective?

A: Charismatic leaders are consistently Machiavellian in their actions. Yes, they implement strategies to affect a specific outcome even if lives are expended in the interim. One would be naïve to believe a message of hope does not come with the price of death on occasion.

Q: Why is a Machiavellian notion surrounding charisma difficult for people to accept?

A: People have a hard time accepting the reality that everything in life comes with a price and that there is an upside and downside to everything. Although people understand intellectually that everything has a price, it is problematic for them to accept emotionally.

Q: So, is President Obama’s charisma enhanced when the right person is killed for the right reason?

A: That’s a challenging question. It really depends on the situation. There is talk in journalistic circles that Middle Eastern countries who are allies of the United States are looking towards Russia and China for future alliances, because of the loss of confidence by Middle Eastern allies in American foreign policy. Although Libya is in Africa, cultural and geographic similarities with the Middle East put the neutralization of Libya’s Muammar Gadhafi on the same trajectory. President Obama’s election promise to “reset” global relations was interpreted by some regimes as an act of weakness. Charismatic leadership is weakened without fear and the threat of reprisals for acts against American interests. This goes to show that militarily, there is no difference between a Republican president versus a Democratic president. The rules apply across the board.

Q: So, does charisma exceed merely creating good feelings among people?

A: Charismatic leaders realize that people act on emotions and justify their actions through mental reasoning. Even when charismatic leaders have to exercise the most diabolical and heinous acts for a specific outcome, they have to insulate their message with emotional considerations for the audience they serve. To do otherwise, even when the cause is correct, goes against fulfilling the emotional needs of charisma leaders’ constituency.

Charisma, Discipline and a Balanced Life

2011-04-24T23:18:00.000-07:00

By Edward Brown

This Q & A session explores the inner workings of a charismatic person’s mind and lifestyle.

Q: What would be the most surprising aspect of a charismatic person’s lifestyle to the general public?

A: How simplistic his life is. Contrary to popular perception, a charismatic person would rather read a book, attend an educational symposium or visit a museum rather than frequent events unrelated to his mission.

Q: Is this to say, that a charismatic person is not a social animal?

A: No, he is sociable, but not in the way most people would believe. Most of his activities are mission oriented. The genuine charismatic person relishes power and control. He is less likely to attend functions that do not have some connection to his overall goals.

Q: Is this part of the discipline of the charismatic person?

A: Yes, even when he is being sociable, he is exhibiting a high degree of self-restraint and rectitude.

Q: Where does this extreme discipline come from?

A: Extreme discipline is the outgrowth of a preternatural focus on a mission. Along the way, the charismatic person made a conscious decision to rid himself of any ineffective habits, insignificant relationships, and destructive behavior that would prevent the manifestation of an idea.

Q: So, is having a balanced life important to the charismatic person?

A: A balance life is a relative term. For many people, a balanced life may be attempting to have as much pleasure simultaneously as possible. The charismatic person believes the joy of the mission is a reward within itself. And any pain that comes with furthering the mission is worth it. He is lofty and believes a balanced life is for individuals who truly have not found a compelling purpose to live. In the charismatic person’s mind, there is no such thing as balance when one is bringing a compelling idea to fruition. To be successful requires a focus that becomes skewed to the goals of the mission.

Q: Has the charismatic person relegated himself to becoming a machine?

A: Yes and no. He has become as regimented and relentless as a person can be, which may be machine-like, but he is still human. Through the ongoing process of his mission, he has become a political/ business animal with different emotional responses than the average person. He has an insatiable desire to maximize his performance. For the charismatic person, without a mission, life would cease to be valuable.

5 Ways to Enhance Your Charisma Using Historical Figures as Models

2011-04-18T02:48:00.000-07:00

There are several ways to improve your ability to attract command and maintain success personally and professionally through the examples of historical figures.

Here are five ways to enhance your charisma through these models:

Develop a compelling plan and strategy. A major driving force for charismatic leaders is their ability to implement a plan stemming from an overarching mission. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had a compelling plan to desegregate institutions within the United States and used marketing strategies through the media, celebrities and public outcry to draw attention to his mission.

Become a voracious reader. Charismatic leaders have a preternatural desire for acquiring more and more information and knowledge. Former President Bill Clinton reportedly reads up to five books at a time.

Cultivate your speaking skills. Charismatic leaders speak with a great deal of passion, clarity and action. Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan has the ability to speak to an audience and maintain rapt attention for hours. His use of current events, controversial topics and a clear understanding of the psychodynamics of his audience make his speeches riveting and mesmerizing.

Think and act differently. Charismatic leaders dance to the beat of their own drum. Whether basketball great Michael Jordan was wearing NBA banned multicolored sneakers, sporting a bald head or flying to the basket from the foul line, he consistently demonstrated the power of thinking and acting from one’s own perspective.

Take risks. Charismatic leaders are known for taking calculated risks. The late and legendary engineer and automotive executive John DeLorean created the sports car, the DeLorean. His larger-than-life personality was equal to his ambition. Without great risks, sometimes at great cost, the name DeLorean would be among the pantheon of car designers unknown to the world, but whose designs became iconic.

The State of Charisma in the 21st Century, Pt. I

2011-04-11T00:06:00.000-07:00

By Edward Brown

This Q & A explores the status of charisma in contemporary society.

Q: What is the current condition of charisma in the world today?

A: Currently, there are no seminal or visionary leaders on the world stage to speak about. It does not mean that they do not exist. Somewhere in the world, right now, there is someone trying to get a movement off the ground. He is either attempting to create momentum or maneuvering in his intellectual wilderness planning for the future.

Q: If this charismatic visionary is present, what is taking him so long to reveal his plan?

A: The current political movements in Africa and the Middle East are being mastermind by one or a few individuals. These individuals may be strategists, but not necessarily charismatic figures. Mass movements are often spearheaded by calculating individuals who weigh economic, social and political conditions and foment movement when the time seems ripe. These strategists may be consensus builders rather than positioning themselves for centralized leadership. They may pass the baton on to pockets of interested people rather than become the embodiment of a movement.

Q: So have conditions changed calling for strategists rather than charismatic leaders?

A: Eminent philosopher Thomas Carlyle once said that people were “hard-wired” for hero-worshipping. They inherently need to believe in something or someone bigger than themselves. Strategists can create social movements and change, but in the end, people cry out for a compelling person to articulate and embody their aspirations. Today, it is more difficult for compelling or charismatic leaders to come to fruition, because of the isolation, solitude and extreme discipline it takes to commit one’s life to an idea. It takes a different kind of fortitude to immerse oneself into a mission when less committed individuals may be gaining more attention through the Internet and multimedia.

Q: So if the state of charisma is intact, is it a mere case of the conditions being ideal for charismatic leaders to emerge?

A: Charisma will probably always be intact, because there will always be a compelling personality who seemingly comes out of nowhere and speaks for and outlines a plan to address the unfulfilled needs of a people. The world will never be overrun by charismatic leaders. The time, process and special conditions that align for such individuals to emerge are not prolific. It takes a long time for charismatic leaders to grapple with their role on the world stage as well as the time necessary to embrace a compelling idea that becomes a crusade.

Q: Where is the next challenge in the world that beckons for charismatic leadership?

A: That’s tricky! The sensitivity that charismatic leaders feel for certain
situations is unpredictable. Missions and crusades can last a lifetime. Be rest assured that authentic charismatic leaders are not “fly by night” overnight sensations. Every fiber of their being is geared to a specific cause that has taken a lifetime to align. Look for the person who may be seemingly under the radar, but that a few people have identified as being extremely different in personality and holding passionate, transformational views of the world. He is potentially the next charismatic icon.

When Charisma Isn’t Enough

2011-04-03T22:09:00.000-07:00

By Edward Brown

This Q & A session explores the shortcomings of charisma and its drawbacks.

Q: What are some of the things charisma cannot do?

A: Contrary to popular beliefs, charisma is not the cure for all things. For example, charisma cannot create competence when there is ineptitude. It tends not to be able to replicate itself. And It cannot sustain long lasting success without an ultimate goal or a specific vision.

Q: What is meant by the inability of charisma to replicate or copy itself?

A: The imagination, tenacity and focus within charismatic leaders are aligned, but tend not to be completely transferrable to another person. Secondly, followers of charismatic leaders are fulfilling an internal need within themselves that make creating disciples difficult. Again, the specialness of a charismatic leader leaves a void when his leadership becomes vacant, which is not easily filled through individuals with less charismatic proclivities.

Q: Could a person at least replicate the traits of the charismatic leader although he may not have a charismatic personality?

A: External manifestations like great oratorical skills, enhanced interpersonal communications and phenomenal execution are learnable. However, an overriding desire to compete and take on a missionary zeal requires the synchronization of insecurity, narcissism, imagination and commitment at a heightened level. Children can replicate the actions of their sports heroes, but the level of skill, tenacity and world class performance requires a different level of internal fortitude that imitation merely cannot produce.

Q: Why can’t charisma be sustained indefinitely?

A: The charismatic personality will always be charismatic. Often the initial need for charismatic leadership may change. The change may require less charisma, less innovation and more stability. Also, charisma is situational. There are certain ideal situations where charismatic leadership thrives and other situations where it is stagnant.

Q: What historical cases speak to the stagnation of charisma?

A: Two current political examples come to mind. In Libya, Muammar Gadhafi led a bloodless coup in 1969 that lasted until recently. Gadhafi was like a rock star during the 1980’s. The same existed for Fidel Castro and Che Guevara during the Cuban Revolution. They captured the attention of the world, but diminished as time passed. Well, Castro has diminished, but because Guevara was killed before he became irrelevant, the mythology around him still swirls. The frailty of charismatic leaders is not leaving the scene before they are ruled insignificant. Martin Luther King, Jr. suffered the same plight. His charisma had been usurped by SNCC (Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee) and the Black Panthers. Had he not been assassinated, it is arguable whether his leadership would have taken on mythic proportions.

Q: So, only death can preserve the charismatic leader?

A: Death preserves the mythology at the height of his acclaim. However, a charismatic leader can groom disciples who represent his mission. A good example would be the founder of the Nation of Islam, Elijah Muhammad. By having the likes of Malcolm X and Louis Farrakhan as his spokespersons, his charisma and mystery was preserved. In this instance, Muhammad used budding charismatic leaders to further a compelling concept. Rarely has charismatic leadership been used in this way.

Charisma: Before & After

2011-03-28T00:12:00.000-07:00

By Edward Brown

The manifestation of charisma has changed over the past 40 years. This Q& A delves into what happened and why.

Q: How has charisma changed in the last few decades?

A: Essentially, individuals started focusing on being popular versus being effective. Everyone wants his/ her 15 minutes of fame and entertainment has trumped all other vocations and aspirations.

Q: What brought about this seismic shift?

A: There are many factors to choose from: The expansion of multimedia, the emergence of the Internet, the morphing of art into reality, the transcendence of sports and entertainment as a past time activity to a way of life. Entertainment overtook law, science and education.

Q: How does the desire to be popular impact charisma?

A: Charismatic leaders are motivated by an internal struggle to rewrite history. It is a long and arduous struggle to start from mere imagination to an idea coming to fruition. Effectiveness takes decades where popularity can come overnight. It is the difference between Maurice White, who went from The Ramsey Lewis Trio to forming the musical group Earth, Wind & Fire and Justin Beiber. White created masterpieces where Beiber creates pop art. Both frameworks are conceptual.

Q: If there is a shortage of charismatic personalities and events, how does new technology fit in? Have the inventors of FaceBook, Amazon or Microsoft redefined what charisma is?

A: Zuckerberg, Bezos and Gates would be described as “geeks.” They were the guys in school who were out of favor with the “Cool Crowd” that girls didn’t necessarily like. These captains of industry proved that geeks or “smart” people win in the end. They are not charismatic, but their inventions have a high degree of magnetism. Interesting enough, a medium that would act most favorable to introverts and “cast aways” is also used by the Cool Crowd. These three individuals alone turned conventional wisdom on its ear by having the world come to them as opposed to them going to the world.

But, make no mistake, these three men are polar opposites of the late auto designer John DeLorean, who was charismatic and a great inventor simultaneously.

Q: So, did Zuckerberg, Bezos and Gates create an environment where charisma is null and void?

A: No, they created an environment where charisma could flourish. A charismatic leader has greater opportunities and resources for leading and maintaining a mission/crusade in ways that were not available years ago. The charismatic leader and people with compelling ideas can cut out the middle man. In the same vein, it is also more difficult to get a message out due to the cacophony or “mass noise” of insignificant people trying to gain fame.

The difference between the messages of the charismatic leader versus the masses is that the charismatic leader will spend a lifetime working towards the manifestation of an idea. The masses looking for 15 minutes of fame will quit and move on to something else in a quest to be popular. Today, more than ever, relentlessness and persistency pays off for the charismatic personality with a compelling idea.

Charismatic Leadership Uncovered

2011-03-21T00:24:00.000-07:00

During this Q& A session, typical questions about charisma and charismatic leadership are addressed.

1. Why do many people describe themselves as charismatic?

The short answer is that people often like to consistently think well of themselves. They want to be seen as attractive, smart and engaging. Charisma is an ideal that most people desire and usually draw on one incident where they demonstrated charismatic traits. The fact is that charisma is more than what one does. It is who one is.

2. Why are people delusional about their charisma quotient?

Pundits and opinion makers often characterize charisma as easily attainable through certain behavioral manifestations. By merely developing high interpersonal skills, great oratory and the ability to tell great stories, one may be described as charismatic. Because many pundits do not delve into the inner recesses of the charismatic mind, they do not know what goes on inside the charismatic personality.

3. What actually goes on inside the charismatic personality?

Although charismatic personalities may differ from person to person, there are some similarities that may emerge. For example, the typical charismatic personality sees itself as a “bigger than life” figure. His vainglorious exploits are representative of his passion and missionary zeal for some great task to accomplish. He sees connections that other view as disparate. Charismatic personalities are immersed within the field of ideas as well as a compelling idea that serves as a motivating factor.

4. Is there a distinction between being charismatic and exhibiting charismatic traits?

Yes, anyone can utilize the tools used by charismatic personalities, i.e., engaged eye contact, focused attention and emotion-filled dialogue.
However, charismatic personalities use the aforementioned tools s as well as possess an insatiable desire to understand human nature, a preternatural ability to dedicate one’s life to a specific task and a “big picture” view of the world that has to be brought to fruition. Charismatic traits scratch the surface of a visceral charismatic personality.

5. What influences create a charismatic personality?

Extreme emotional sensitivity, social environment, insecurity, and biological proclivities make for the charismatic personality. Charismatic personalities emerge from the fusion of personal strengths and weaknesses aligning to create a highly motivated, highly imaginative, self-possessed, force of nature.

Can Charisma Help Overcome Personal Preferences?

2011-03-14T00:35:00.000-07:00

Dear Core Edge/Mr. Brown:

I have followed your work on charisma, particularly your blog, radio show and You Tube videos. I’ve found your ideas inspiring, thought provoking and generally on point. However, there is one aspect of human nature I believe charisma can’t overcome---personal preferences. I don’t believe that individuals who are extremely short, unattractive or the myriad of characteristics deemed contrary to an ideal standard can be overcome by being more charismatic. On countless occasions, I have seen where nice guys have finished last and the “jerks” that women say they hate, succeed in numerous ways. How can charisma be used to help the “underdog” succeed?

The Last Nice Guy
Omaha, Nebraska

Dear Last Nice Guy:

It has been my experience that most things in life are relative. Most people do not attempt to objectively determine their marketability within personal and professional settings. In other words, how do you rate against the basic choices and options an employer or opposite sex has at their disposal? If you have something to offer or bring to the table, you are in a better position to ask for and get what you desire. Individuals can be delusional and see themselves in “leagues” where they may or may not fit. But, the ones who have a track record of being confirmed to operate within certain arenas gravitate towards people they believe they have a kinship with. Opposites may attract, but similarities keep people together. Nice guys should attempt to meet nice girls, not necessarily “hot girls.” “Hot girls” are not necessarily negative, but the constant attention they attract creates a self-perception in their minds of being highly valued. Their ideal man has a similar impression of himself. He may be as much of a “monster” as she is. Remember, opposites may attract, but similarities keep people together. Many guys want to be charismatic to attract more women, but never take inventory of what they have to offer and how would those traits tie into the needs of women. For example, if women have a need for emotional, financial and physical security, how do you rank? Does a woman feel comfortable communicating with you (which leads to emotional security)? Does she feel you are fiscally responsible and manage your money wisely (which leads to financial security)? When she’s out in public with you, does she feel protected by the potential for danger (which leads to physical security)?

Guys who merely complain about the attitudes and maltreatment by attractive women have not developed the edge and savvy that life teaches you when you’re paying attention. In a patriarchal society, the totally secure woman is a misnomer. Everything from songs to TV commercials is geared to keeping women insecure (Men have also become targets). From childhood to adulthood, women are indoctrinated into an idealized belief system, which is used against them for manipulative purposes—Beauty, marriage and children. The “bad boys” have decoded this dynamic and consequently objectify women, because they seemingly view women as being cut from the same cloth. In this sense, beautiful women are not necessarily special to these guys. These guys play the numbers knowing full well that the odds favor their winning more than losing. There will be more women who give him what they want than those who reject them.

A man who is self-possessed and makes the world bend to his will is seen as attractive. This trait is often viewed as confidence, but it is also a paradigmatic reality or a mode of viewing people and the world. Nice guys often take a “permissive’” approach to life, looking for acceptance rather than acquiring and maintaining power.

Charismatic people are about achieving power and seeing their mission come to fruition. They are inclined to ask for forgiveness rather than permission. They are preternaturally curious about human nature and use this knowledge to affect their end. They are Machiavellian in that they do what is best for the situation rather than adhering to moral imperatives. The charismatic individual can be both loved and hated by people and understand clearly why both groups feel a certain way about him. In some respect, he created the dichotomy---intentionally.

Does charisma help individuals skew personal preferences in their favor? Yes and no. Charisma is all about pulling out of people what already exists. Effective oratory, storytelling and developing interpersonal communication skills are tools used to fulfill certain needs within individuals. By being a student of human nature and using the tools mastered by charismatic personalities, you can achieve greater personal and professional success. Here are a few tips:

1. Assess your strengths and what has helped you achieve past success to discover personal and professional opportunities.

2. Assess whether a potential mate will be mutually beneficial.

3. Determine that you are the center of your universe and everything revolves around your worldview and choices.

4. Operate where you have the greatest potential for success. Find people who are comparable to you by making an objective assessment of who and what you are.

5. Be professional, not nice. In some venues, niceness can be seen as a sign of weakness.

6. Don’t act like attractive people are doing you a favor by acknowledging your existence. Set the stage, make the rules and lay the groundwork for what you want.

7. Like any bad deal or opportunity, don’t be afraid to walk away. Be vigilant over all your interests—emotionally, financially and psychologically.

Charisma, “We’re Winning”

2011-03-06T23:38:00.000-08:00

The latest on-air tirade of actor Charlie Sheen prompted me to begin thinking about how and why charismatic personalities win more often than average people. (Note: I do not suggest that Charlie Sheen is charismatic). One thing that Sheen did that is reminiscent of charismatic personalities is the ability to impact others through graphic and compelling imagery. Sheen’s use of terms like possessing “Tiger Blood,” or having “Adonis DNA” were exaggerated terms charismatics would have uttered, but couched within the context of a larger vision. In Sheen’s case, these powerful connotations were defensive shields used from a position of weakness. He was essentially fired and largely exposed as egotistical and lacking the proper comportment to inspire potential converts. That is not the mark of a winner! However, charismatic personalities differ in their degree of winning to achieve an objective, because they are relentless. Words are not defensive tools. Rather they are a means of expressing the manifestation of an idea. If the charismatic loses ground, he quickly assesses the situation and creates alternate routes to a destination. In Sheen’s case, he had no destination. His actions were a feeble attempt at bullying network executives into giving him his job back on the sitcom “Two and a Half Men.” It was tantamount to a fired worker picketing outside the company that terminated him. In this instance, Sheen was using competing networks that found his antics entertaining to further destroy the successful sitcom’s brand. Within this context, Sheen was essentially saying “If I can’t run it, I’ll wreck it.

Similar antics have been used by charismatic personalities. Adolph Hitler did it. Libya’s Muammar Gadhafi is doing it. The difference between the use of rhetoric between charismatic personalities and Charlie Sheen is the depth of the vision and the impact on supporting characters. For charismatic personalities, the power of their passion, perspective and personality are the driving forces that adherents support and get behind. On the contrary, Sheen was one piece of several parts of a puzzle. Successful projects that require an assembly of individuals to thrive are rendered ineffective when one of the pieces is missing. Charlie Sheen could not carry “Two and a Half Men,” by himself and the show’s formulaic success is not solely based on Sheen’s personal appeal. Rather, the success of the show hinges on the characters playing off each other. With charismatic personalities, their roles are seemingly indispensable. In short, they are the reason for the project’s existence.

It could be argued that the results of taking away the key component of a project is similar, whether the component is charismatic or merely the centerpiece. This may be correct. The loss of a key player is similar, but the impact is different in severity. The actors on “Two and a Half Men” are tied to a successful body of work and will be able to work on other projects. Conversely, the charismatic personality that goes down in ruins, not only destroys the project, he shakes the very foundation of the belief system of his followers. Sheen’s antics affects purse strings and pocketbooks, charismatic personalities affect hearts and minds. One can always regain money, but he loses everything when he loses his mind.

Charisma, Decentralization & the Downfall of Libya’s Muammar Gadhafi

2011-02-28T02:39:00.000-08:00

During the 1980’s, Libyan President Muammar Gadhafi was a rock star. Changing his sleeping locations nightly to thwart any attempts of assassination, Gadhafi’s charismatic personality as well as his flair for fashion made him the most popular renegade since Che’ Guevara. Reminiscent of Mao Tse Tung’s “Red Book,” Gadhafi’s “Green Book” was the quintessential tome on socialism. Gadhafi’s bloodless coup in 1969 set the course for a drive towards Arab unity. But, how did a man who’s bigger than life personality and early calls for unity become so fractionalized?

It would be logical to point to the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt that sparked the unrest in a number of Middle Eastern and African countries. It would also be rational to suggest that global economic depressions, high unemployment rates and a desire for western style freedom became a more compelling idea than socialism or “managed” democracy. Like many charismatic leaders, Muammar Gadhafi would have been better served by adopting the power moves of Russia’s Vladimir Putin rather than that of the late Ugandan dictator, Idi Amin. After Putin became ineligible to run for a third term, Dmitry Medvedev was elected Russia’s president, while Putin became prime minister. It is believed that Medvedev is nothing more than a proxy for the machinations of Putin to maintain power. However, that is the point. To create the symbolic illusion that a democracy exists, Putin did not exercise an overt grab for power, which would have been reminiscent of the old Stalin days. Instead, he took another political position, decentralizing power and spreading his influence through other leaders. These maneuvers led to the expansion of his political base by increasing the number of powerful supporters.

By Gadhafi positioning his sons and daughter to succeed him, he sowed the seeds of discontentment among Libyans in a time where egalitarianism has been ushered in by the Internet. By not being prescient about current events and its impact on governmental operations, Gadhafi was weakened by his unwillingness to alter his modus operandi. With the onslaught of the Internet and multimedia, no one wants to feel that his country is precluding him from self-actualizing. It would be altogether different if the world was not digitally connected. But, as the Internet has become the ultimate democratizer of education, blind allegiance has become impractical.

In addition, if Gadhafi had supported non-familial ties for his political ambitions, he could have been a kingmaker without losing any direct power. An analogy would be a parent company that owns the leading brands under its banner, which allows these brands to compete against each other in the market place. The parent company does not care which brand wins, because all revenue go to the same source. Gadhafi should have promoted other leaders in a succession plan and operated in the background while influencing decision makers. American style politics has shown the power of political machines that last for decades without any backlash from the citizenry. As long as the voting public perceives it has a voice in the outcome of an election, it will support the process.

Like Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, Gadhafi underestimated the impact of the changing times. To simplify the current tumultuousness within Libya would underestimate the power of progress. If power is at the base of geopolitics, the changes being demanded by Libyans and surrounding countries are not about totally reforming the political game as much as changing the players to compete more effectively. This is no different than trading a less productive player in professional sports for a more productive one. Gadhafi is paying the price of not possessing greater foresight. In a competitive world of power, such blindness is the beginning of the end of a dynasty.

Charisma & the Scientific Method

2011-02-21T00:31:00.000-08:00

Periodically, there are studies that emerge that attempt to quantify aspects of charisma. The typical study entails a focus group where individuals are asked to rate certain traits to determine a subject’s level of charisma. Visuals often entail analyzing the actions of the purported charismatic person. By using a rating or Likert Scale, the traits that define charisma are provided a ratio or final number. By creating a mechanism by which charismatic traits can be measured, a random sampling of participants derives the notion that charisma is quantifiable. As such, if an independent researcher was to follow the same format, he should receive similar results. Over a period of time and experimentation, the intangibility of charisma cannot only be measured, but evolve from a mere hypothesis to a theory to ultimately a law.

Fundamentally, using aspects of the scientific method to legitimize or delegitimize the validity of charisma is not necessarily an ineffective idea on face value. There are physical manifestations that may be common among individuals possessing charisma. The challenge in quantifying charisma is when “X” factors or unknown variables come into play. For example, if research suggests that narcissism, visions of grandeur and insecurity play significant roles on the psyche of charismatic personalities; would the initial results of a charismatic study be valid? Would these additional factors skew our overall impression of a charismatic personality? If we discovered that a charismatic leader manipulated the emotions of a populace for his own gain, would we think he was less charismatic once his true intentions were revealed? Or is charisma pristine when it is safely ensconced in the deep recesses of our untainted imaginations?

These inquiries speak to the intangibility of charisma that has escaped measurement. Social scientists often measure the physical manifestations of charisma, but not the three-fourths of charisma that lie beneath the persona. This is essentially the reason charisma in its motivation and application is difficult to measure. A charismatic act does not determine a charismatic personality. If researchers assert that there is a distinct divide between measuring the traits of charisma versus the psychodynamics of charismatic personalities, they would be correct. However, all too often, leading university researchers attempt to take shortcuts in academic studies by not delving deeper into the motivations and psyche of charismatic personalities. By taking the route of merely measuring outward manifestations, it leads to greater misconceptions of the comprehensiveness of charismatic personalities. Left to its own devices, imitation of charismatic mannerisms would falsely lead to the notion that there is an uptick in the number of charismatic personalities. When in fact, there has been an increase of acting to induce a charismatic response. To thwart such results, researchers must and should go deeper than surface appearances. By fundamentally dissecting known charismatic personalities in history and creating case studies that outline the critical factors that shaped their personalities, charismatic traits would take backseat to the genesis and motivations of charismatic personalities. Moreover, common psychological traits would emerge that are quantifiable in conjunction with a qualitative analyses providing context to the charismatic trait itself. To leave out these important pieces in understanding the totality of charismatic personalities is a sure sign of inept scholarship.

Could Possessing Charisma Have Saved Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak?

2011-02-14T01:24:00.000-08:00

For all his personal traits, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was not given the sobriquet “Mr. Charisma” by the world community. Very little is known about Mubarak and he seemed to have played an insignificant role in African-Middle Eastern politics. That is at least the impression. However, in all fairness, very few world leaders actually fit the prerequisite characteristics for being labeled “charismatic”. Such characteristics typically entail highly evolved communication skills, a compelling vision for a populace and the ability to continuously reinvent oneself based on the needs of the situation. But, can charisma assist leaders from being ousted from a position without overwhelming backlash from supporters? Specifically, could charisma have helped President Mubarak thwart an ignoble end to a 30 year reign? Although, there are many Mubarak supporters who view his downfall as devolutionary to Egyptian glory, the rippling effects of his departure will not be felt as would be the case of a Fidel Castro. Since 1959, Fidel Castro has been a stalwart for revolutionary politics that has caused fellow Cubans to either love or revile him. Even non-Cubans have an impression of Castro. Not so with Mubarak. To the world, Mubarak did not possess a preternatural charm nor serve as a visionary for Egyptian greatness. Reports suggest that Mubarak has in his coffers $40-$70 billion. This amount is not a vindication of his political prowess as much as another example of governmental greed and megalomania. To this extent, Mubarak is more of the same; denigrating the will of the people for personal gain under the guise of democracy.

But, could charisma have saved him? The answer is yes and no. Within the thirty years of his reign, if Mubarak had laid out a compelling vision for Egypt, either being a global leader in a particular industry, a destination spot for advanced education or an economic behemoth comparable to the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) countries, he could have survived. Citizens will allow a certain amount of graft and naked aggression, when they are prosperous and optimistic. Inherently, they understand the nature of politics is rooted in political and economic self-interest. It is a naïve citizenry that believes in the altruism and magnanimity of politicians after centuries of historical accounts demonstrating the contrary. However, the politics of the world has changed where the citizenry and the politician must benefit equally, but the politician must appear subservient to the needs of the citizenry. To this extent, Mubarak was out of step with the zeitgeist of a digital world. In contemporary times, a political leader cannot afford to be greedy, unimaginable and exposed.

On the other hand, no amount of charisma can save a leader who has outlived his usefulness. Charismatic leadership is transitory for situations needing an infusion of innovation. Because the charismatic leader is a crusader for a cause, once the goal has been achieved, he either needs another challenge to overcome or an effective successor for the completed task. The long term success of a leader hinges on his ability to consistently satisfy the immediate and most relevant needs of the populace. A string of past successes are unimportant when critical needs go unaddressed. Charisma cannot fill the gap of unfulfilled needs no matter how likable the leader.

In the end, Mubarak broke all the implied rules for maintaining power. He was not prescient in determining the future needs of the Egyptian citizenry. If he had infused the Egyptian government with new faces and ideas, created political enclaves that played off each other, and encouraged Egypt to be a bigger player in the global economy, he could have maintained power under the guise of democracy. Even if Mubarak did not have a compelling vision for Egypt’s future, he could have placed talented individuals in position and ruled by proxy. Instead, his house of cards fell, because he neither possessed the charisma or savvy to operate in a world where illusions still matter.

Charismatic Leadership: Detached Connectivity

2011-02-06T23:27:00.000-08:00

Quite often within political and social circles, you hear of charismatic leaders who have a preternatural love for people. These charismatic leaders appear selfless and altruistic, always willing to go the extra mile for the greater good. To these individuals, the glass is always half full. Presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton are said to have customarily carried “sunny” dispositions. Of course in the political arena, where one has to appear to be all things to all people, the authenticity of whether a true love for people exits is debatable. However, suffice to say that if politicians in general and optimistic individuals, specifically, are more malleable to the foibles of human nature, does this create deeper connections with other people? If charisma, as defined by Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute is, ”The creating of perceptions that impact the mind and emotions of others through flair, finesse and glib language,” do these “lovers of people” emote differently than everyone else or merely better actors?

In viewing the issue from the position of charismatic leadership, emoting and acting becomes very real. If charismatic leaders are performance driven that takes on a messianic veneer, not only are they aware of the foibles of human nature, they have to be vigilant about the damage it can cause. Anyone versed in the basics of psychology and sociology has to give homage to the greatness of the human spirit during crisis situations, but also become suspicious of its potential for mayhem. In this regard, the charismatic leader, steeped in accomplishing a specific mission, has to view the glass as “half full and half empty.” Metaphorically, the glass represents what the charismatic leader knows about the vagaries of human nature, but often masks this dark side with feigned optimism. In a Machiavellian sense, the charismatic leader does whatever is necessary for the situation to affect a desired outcome.

Does this mean that charismatic leaders are frauds preying on the emotionalism of others? Not necessarily. They have keen insights into the motivational needs of others that are often utilized for achieving a certain objective. If the charismatic leader can be blamed for anything, it may be for his belief that he knows what is best for individuals irrespective of their input. The love that charismatic leaders have for others may not be out of magnanimity, but pity. This pity in its manifestations would naturally come out as patronizing, but through the keen awareness of human nature, it flows as optimism. The charismatic leader connects with others to achieve a long term goal, but is inherently detached, because of his prescience of the vagaries of human nature. His motto might be, “Love from afar, but make it feel up close and personal.” Often, people do not want the harsh realities of truth and support anyone who provides a semblance of hope. To this extent, charismatic leaders operate to provide optimism on the front end, while dealing with the muck and mire of diverging forces on the back end. Charismatic leaders know that they cannot have it both ways--pure optimism exclusive of the dark side of human nature-- but have to at least appear that the two sides are reconcilable. Followers of charismatic leaders will not have it any other way.

A World Without Charismatic Leadership

2011-01-31T00:40:00.000-08:00

I am providing a philosophical challenge that is purely speculative and filled with conjecture. What would the world be like without charismatic leadership? It is easy to suggest that charismatic clerics, political leaders, corporate CEOs and innovators would be nonexistent and the myriad of contributions society has come to enjoy would be null and void. But, would this void be felt? More importantly, would society still have progressed without these colorful figures? The most sanguine proponent of charismatic leadership would have to concede to a rational conclusion that the rippling affects of charismatic personalities would not be felt if it was absent from the zeitgeist of contemporary society. Furthermore, opponents of the charismatic leadership model would assert that charismatic leadership, while inspirational, does not lend itself to creating tangible value, particularly, after the charismatic leader no longer exists. The same pundits point to the narcissism, megalomania, and self-delusion of charismatic leaders. Even if opponents are correct in their assessment, is it possible for them to step back for a moment and objectively and unemotionally analyze any semblance of value created by charismatic leaders?

Like most unknowns in life, we do not miss what we do not know about. If there were no charismatic leaders and society was totally unaware of a concept called charisma, we would not miss charismatic leadership. This sounds like an obvious conclusion, but if philosopher Thomas Carlyle is correct and people are “hard wired” for hero worshipping, we would have created a charismatic concept out of a sheer need to believe in something bigger than ourselves. The most challenging thing for most contemporary people to deal with is the absence of hope. If individuals could not find hope in a living, breathing person, they would find it within inanimate objects. To this day, there are religions that worship objects representative of a higher deity. Since the dawning of humankind, individuals have looked for external forces to rationalize unusual and unexplained events. The human brain will find seemingly illogical means to align and justify its greatest desires absent any tangible or factual evidence. Facts are even pushed aside to assuage these yearnings.

So, what does this mean for charismatic leadership or the absence of? It means that people would go on existing, but subconsciously search for their self-created deliverer. Heroic deeds of common men would become epics. The daily drudgery would persist and stories and mythology would emerge to fill in the emotional gaps. And these epics would be recited in song.

In the end, charismatic leaders fill a visceral void within the psyche of individuals. The most heinous crimes attributed to charismatic leadership, in the name of honor and self-respect, filled an emotional need for a cadre of people. Corporate innovations have emerged through charismatic CEOs who inspired creativity in what might have been a stodgy environment. Opponents of charismatic leadership are myopic or short sighted about the charismatic person, event or concept that shaped their lives. To believe for a moment that we are devoid of the impact of charisma and its potency would be illusory.

Even the most scientific mind craves inspiration to make life more bearable.

What Charismatic Personalities Do Best

2011-01-23T21:48:00.000-08:00

In reminiscing about the impact of charismatic personalities, an interesting thought came to mind that reflects the greatest attribute they possess. While, remembering various past experiences is normal for most people, charismatic personalities create visceral and long term memorable experiences. An apt metaphor would be recalling the scenes of a movie that somehow captured a past experience that spoke directly to you. Years may go by and certain lines from the movie have made an indelible mark on your psyche. A true charismatic does the same thing. Thirty years could elapse and the exact experience you had with a charismatic personality feels like a recent event. The conversation could have been brief and mundane by conventional standards, but charismatic personalities have the ability to make the most mundane aspects of life exciting. If you were to describe the experience to someone else blow by blow, the person would look at you strangely, attempting to find the punch line. It would be similar to hearing a funny joke by a comedian and trying to recite that same joke to someone who had not heard it. The joke would fall flat! Charismatic personalities create experiences that you have to be present to appreciate. The best raconteur cannot capture the true essence of a charismatic moment.

To be fair, the individual experiencing a charismatic personality brings certain expectations and aspirations to the fold when dealing with the charismatic personality. His preconceived notion about the charismatic personality feeds into the expectations of certain behaviors. If one is already in awe of a charismatic personality, there is little that the charismatic personality has to do, but exist. This is the difference between a non-charismatic personality exhibiting charismatic traits and an authentic charismatic personality. The non-charismatic personality may not be able to respond “on call,” without advance preparation. Contrarily, the charismatic personality merely has to “be.”

By pointing out the impact of charismatic personalities on individual lives, it is essential to give credence for those endowed with this “X” factor. Charismatic traits can be learned, but the true charismatic personality is a product of hard-wiring, environmental influences, insecurities and a keen understanding of human nature.

The Charismatic Personality: Isolated & Alone

2011-01-17T02:02:00.000-08:00

In the past, I have referred to the charismatic personality as requiring a high degree of “self- containment,” isolation and solitude. Typically, I referred to these elements of detachment cavalierly as if the charismatic personality had a choice in the matter. Well, of course, there is always a choice, but such passion and focus lends itself to a natural cocoon, which he operates within. To work in order to transform a piece of intellectual real estate for the sole benefit of the charismatic’s need for distinction goes far deeper than most people’s desire to engage in work merely to enjoy the finer things in life. To the world, the charismatic’s isolated reality seems depressing and filled with despair.

Opponents of such asceticism ask,”Where is the joy, balance and love for life?” For the charismatic, building a body of work that supersedes physical existence is the joy itself. Immersing oneself in the process from idea to fruition is fundamentally what the charismatic lives for. His mission and ideas cannot be relegated to the metrics of quantitative analysis nor can the completion of a mission be forecasted on a calendar. The charismatic who wishes to astound the world with his brilliance works in the field of ideas with reckless abandon. If aloneness and solitude overtake him, it is only because he has pushed the envelope too far into areas where most men fail to endeavor out of fear as well as the lack of imagination. If the charismatic is a tragic figure, it is because his world is an amalgam of all the great ideas that came before him trying to find relevance in a world that has stopped thinking.

Charisma & Other Modes of Leadership

2011-01-10T03:28:00.000-08:00

Most, if not all, leadership models have a built-in objective of getting the leader to persuade a group of people to accomplish a goal the group either does not want, lacks the will to accomplish or requires more effort than the group is willing to expend. Every now and then, a charismatic leader comes along who inspires individuals to believe in something bigger than themselves. This individual woos the audience with emotional pleas of achieving far reaching goals requiring a collective effort. Although charismatic leaders seem better able to impact crowds more effectively than other leadership models, the object of persuasion is similar to other leadership models.

However, what would happen if leaders merely led by example without any notion as to who was following? What if aspiring leaders took compelling ideas and made them the hallmark of a modern day crusade? Once more, if leaders looked behind less would they become more foresighted? The response to these questions are speculative, but it is reasonable to believe that if one concentrates all his energy on the plan and road ahead, he relies less on the vagaries and capriciousness of people. Contemporary leaders often spend an inordinate amount of time attempting to determine how well they are doing with constituents. Yes, there should be a degree of concern for the people one leads, but not to the extent where such concern dilutes the leader’s focus.

If nothing else, the long road of preparation for leadership engenders a high degree of confidence within the leader himself as well as the guidance sought by followers. For the leader to second guess himself or look to followers for answers would be counterproductive and antithetical to the credibility and validity of the prepared leader.

The Price of Charisma

2011-01-02T23:42:00.000-08:00

For every upside there is a downside. In this regard, charisma is no different. While many people pine and strive to be more magnetic, under the guise of being unique, for bona fide charismatic personalities, there is some anguish. True charismatics are highly sensitive and feel the ebb and flow of human nature at the cellular level. Tuning into the nuance and connections with others requires a substantial amount of psychic energy. The passion exhibited by charismatic personalities stems from the energy derived from compelling ideas as well as insights about human nature.

In this sense, charismatic personalities are not doing, they are merely being. To be charismatic requires much more than drawing people in, often it means pushing people out. The energy absorbed by psychically engaging others can be extremely draining. The charismatic personality cannot afford to expend energy within inconsequential venues. Often, non-charismatic personalities believe charisma is about constant connections and being all things to all people. This could not be farther from the truth. Not only does the charismatic personality not desire to connect with all people, he may view his mission as limited to a finite number of individuals. Mentally, his mission is clear and he sets out to impart only the variables that tie directly to the mission. Focused discipline requires that a highly evolved filtering process be in place to insure the completion of the mission. For the charismatic personality, completing the mission is a do or die dichotomy. Nothing is more important!

Charisma: A Misunderstood Concept

2010-12-26T23:38:00.000-08:00

I often demarcate the difference between non-charismatic individuals exhibiting charismatic traits and a bona fide charismatic personality. The key to understanding the difference between the two perspectives lies in the ability to determine when something is similar, but not that thing itself. For example, one might describe a color as “pinkish.” Although it looks pink, it has differences that suggest it is not altogether the color pink. The same analogy applies to charismatic traits versus the charismatic personality. Charismatic traits may be better defined as “charisma-ish.” It may appear that we are splitting hairs here between the manifestations of something versus the purist form of a thing. However, concepts and definitions have very little meaning and utilitarian value if we cavalierly misuse or misappropriate terms due to lazy intellectualism or because something is illusory.

When we ascribe charismatic traits as being the end all to describing a charismatic personality, we dilute or taint the “specialness” and rarity of charismatic personalities. In fact, pure charismatic personalities are so rare that it requires observers a period of time to determine if they are witnessing actual charisma or mere glimpses of it. The charismatic personality, which is driven by an internal passion and missionary zeal, may show sparks of charisma throughout the charismatic’s life and at other times remain dormant. In other words, the charismatic personality is not always exhibiting charisma. He is not constantly spewing nuggets of wisdom or astounding the world with his brilliance. Often, he may be “picking his spots,” or looking for advantages to further his mission when times are not the most ideal for movement. When nothing appears to be going on at the surface, great preparation is being mobilized at the visceral level. This is a far cry from merely possessing highly evolved interpersonal communication skills.

If one were to peruse the mind of a charismatic personality, he would see pulsating energy, filled with color and verve, with seemingly discordant concepts loping after one another. This kaleidoscopic picture would inspire great emotions similar to the fast pace action at a circus, but it would all be aligned and sequential, if the charismatic personality was asked to explain it. The charismatic personality lives in the field of ideas and thus needs an inordinate amount of information in his efforts to complete a mission. Active listening, storytelling, eye contact and strategic touching are means of connecting to others to gain buy in. These traits are used to engage others by creating a sense of connection and magnetism as a conduit for moving the mission along.

Non-charismatic Individuals, who utilize charismatic traits, often have short term goals. Politicians, salesmen, and businessmen use these traits to achieve a limited goal like getting elected, making a sale, or being promoted. The charismatic personality uses the same trait as a long term strategy for transforming or revolutionizing an industry, country or status quo. For the charismatic personality there is no real separation between the trait and the actual personality. The non-charismatic is “acting,” and separates the action from his personality. The magnitude of the objective as well as an insatiable desire to achieve a goal play a large part in determining if one is viewing charismatic traits or the components of the charismatic personality. The charismatic personality has a long term objective, because he has committed his life to transforming an idea, structure or mode of thinking. The relentless, insatiable desire to obtain a goal bigger than himself is the root of the charismatic personality versus those merely exhibiting charismatic traits with limited scope.

Charisma: The Challenges of Open Communication

2010-12-20T01:35:00.000-08:00

Charismatic personalities are often celebrated for their ability to articulate and maintain a strong command of language. To the charismatic personality, language is a double-edge sword that can build or tear down with equal intensity. While the charismatic personality is consciously aware of the power of words, he uses words as a source of influence and control. As a thinker, he knows intellectually how to generate specific responses to stimuli, but as one who loses himself in the field of ideas, he may not always be cognizant of the power of his words or his actions. Sounds contradictory? How can one be in tune with his power over words and still allows this knowledge to become lost in the field of ideas? This can occur because charismatic personalities often view ideas with less sensitivity than the emotions of others. People are the conduit by which ideas are manifested and often may take a backseat to the ideas themselves. In the field of ideas, charismatic personalities can experiment with various thoughts and precepts. Ideas are not emotional and do not take off-handed or misperceived comments personally. On the contrary, people take every nuance and connotation of language to heart. Thus, charismatic personalities must be ever vigilant over their words, because the passion and assuredness by which they speak can cause extreme chaos. The best place for charismatic personalities to frolic in the field of ideas is alone, because once ideas are brought to the masses; they must be delivered gently when emotions run high and forcefully when emotions are low. In this respect, charismatic personalities who speak cavalierly about critical issues do so at their own peril. If Carlyle’s idea of people being hard-wired for hero worshipping is accepted, then the deification of the charismatic personality beckons for a high degree of circumspection.

Charisma: Does Measuring It Make It Valid?

2010-12-13T00:17:00.000-08:00

Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus assert in “Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge,” that “charisma is the result of effective leadership, not the other way around.” A recent report on the measurability of charisma co-authored by Kenneth Levine, Communications Studies Professor at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville, suggests that traits like: empathy, good listening skills, eye contact, enthusiasm, self-confidence and skillful speaking are measurable by social scientists. After surveying students to assess the means of defining and characterizing charisma, these learnable traits were viewed as the hallmark of charisma. Following this line of thinking to its logical conclusion suggests that any individual demonstrating these traits would be described as charismatic. In this sense, charisma would be the affectation of certain physical traits, not a specific personality trait or worldview. In this context, charismatic traits are not inborn, but learned. Going even farther, one could assert that the world would have more charismatic leaders if only more individuals possessed these physical traits. This notion is contrary to the work established by Charisma Researcher Edward Brown of Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute.

Brown asserts that traits like eye contact, effective listening skills, enthusiasm, passion and other traits are the manifestations of charisma, not charisma in its pristine form. If everyone learned the skills for becoming more charismatic, there would not be a larger number of charismatic leaders, but a larger number of people demonstrating charismatic traits. Brown is careful to not “split hairs,” when demarcating the differences. The likes of Adolph Hitler, Alexander Hamilton and Martin L. King, Jr. represent perspectives of grand ideas that transcend the physical mannerisms of charismatic personalities. Charismatic traits are the means by which charismatic leaders express ideas. The reason there would not be more charismatic leaders in the world if more people learned these behaviors (greater eye contact, empathy, effective listening, etc…) is because these individuals would not necessarily be motivated by compelling ideas. This is the critical distinction between charismatic personalities and individuals exhibiting charismatic traits. In addition, when charisma is measured based on these physical attributes, the results could be a “false positive.” Yes, one may score high on charismatic mannerisms, but low on the ability to create transformational ideas. The distinction can be characterized as one merely going through the motions versus one who thinks, feels, analyzes, synthesizes and embodies a crusade or mission. To relegate charismatic leaders to mere “actors” would suggest that behind the mask is a chameleon who seeks merely to inspire good feelings within others rather than transform a specific human condition. This is largely why charismatic leaders have been more effective during times of crisis and instability. Charismatic leaders believe they are best suited for the situation at hand, which encompasses ego, narcissism, insecurity and visions of grandeur which are inextricable traits within charismatic personalities. Individuals who score high on charismatic scales would view such traits as oppositional to their self-image as well as antithetical to their ideals on charisma.

Measuring charisma and its manifestation is valuable for developing more effective interpersonal skills within organizations. The ability to coordinate and create alliances will always be indispensable to the viability of organizations. However, there must be a distinction between what it means to be congenial versus what it means to be transformational within organizations. To confuse the two would merely create more questions than answers.

Charisma, Products and Passion

2010-12-06T00:56:00.000-08:00

The difference between a star and a genuine charismatic personality hinges on the star’s willingness to merely be a product and the charismatic personality’s need and desire to lead a crusade. To go a step further, it is the difference between a movie star and an artist/actor. The movie star makes movies to be popular, while an artist builds a body of work demonstrating the range and variations of his talent. A movie star may have a body of work, but it is like a high school student who joins organizations to enhance his resume for college consideration compared to a student who campaigns for student government, because he is preparing for a future in politics. The two individuals may very well become successful, but the future politician engenders something much greater than the “resume builder.” The student government official, artist and charismatic personality all have one thing in common---passion. Each is driven by a goal that begins with incremental steps leading to a grand design. It is the difference between Matthew McConaughey and Johnny Depp; Jerry Springer and Ted Koppel and Cornell West and Stephen Hawking. One group panders to the low brow in the theater of the absurd, while the other passionately and carefully considers each step to a compelling goal. Depp, Koppel and Hawking can provide a cogent, consistent reason for their work that has not deviated from the first time they opted towards their medium of expression. The difference between the two schools of thought is largely philosophical based on a specific worldview. The product driven individual sees the world as a business where fame and popularity can be traded. The passionate creator believes the body of work done properly and carefully can be profitable without having to look outside the medium for expression. To be sure, both parties realize the economic realities of the world, but choose to go about it differently. A disparity in the human will for excellence emerges when the goal of the individual is not to master a craft, but leverage it “half developed” for pure profitability.

Too many individuals are opting to take the product driven route without a balance towards the creation of excellence through disciplined passion. To rest future ingenuity and innovation in an environment of mediocrity and apathy is the cessation of what has made civilization great and sparked imaginations beyond our wildest dreams.

Invariably, charisma is a rare trait within any individual no matter what vocation he might participate. But, there is one thing that any individual can embrace under the charisma marquee, the ability and willingness to consider and care for the long term affects of one’s body of work. Passion is only one component of the charismatic personality. However, this one trait can ascend to the highest heights of possibilities when excellence is the goal.

Wanted: Charismatic Leaders and Ideas

2010-11-28T23:10:00.000-08:00

Since the election of President Barack Obama, the conversation surrounding charismatic leadership has quieted. This is a dramatic shift from candidate Obama who regaled the world reminiscent of John F. Kennedy’s “Camelot.” Obama’s youthful vigor, enthusiasm and good looks were a breath of fresh air in an attempt to “reset” the agenda for geopolitics and commerce in a global economy. The world had waited for a change in business and politics and Obama seemed to answer the clarion call. What happened? How could a candidate who came out of virtually nowhere have a meteoric rise and then the connectivity and charisma ascribed to him become muted? The obvious question would be, “Was candidate Obama a bona fide charismatic or merely more interesting compared to the field of his non-charismatic competitors?” More importantly, is society so desirous of leadership with passion and a compelling vision that it will support anyone who comes close to this ideal? Suffice to say that when leaders, generally, and charismatic leaders, specifically, are not in abundance, any uptick towards a semblance of leadership is not only embraced, but revered. The fact is that charismatic leadership is scarce because there are too few people steeped in the field of ideas. Sexy marketing is in and the hard fought battle of reconciling disparate ideas and concepts is out. Contemporary society is witnessing the “dummying down” of intelligence in an information, digital age. Such a thought appears oxymoronic. How could the democratization of information produce so few great men and women of ideas? How could the great universities of the world not produce a sea of Einsteins or a phalanx of Alexander Hamiltons? Only in a time where one does not have to dig for information could ideas that produce compelling and magnetic leaders be quashed.

What is the connection between charismatic leaders and ideas?

When the mind is disciplined to read and absorb a great deal of information, it sees patterns and voids in ways the less intellectual cannot. If the mind is a computer within itself, it arranges ideas that seem disconnected into a tapestry of form. It fills empty spaces within the human experience with substance hoped for, but not realized until now. It is like someone having a taste for something sweet, but does not know what dessert would actually fulfill the desire. If one was posed options to select from, the person would decide the appropriate treat based on taste and satisfaction. Thought leaders who turn ideas into compelling visions do not create to lead, they create and the audience embraces the viability of the idea and follows. The thought leader revels in the field of ideas. Ideas revitalize, capture and spark new realities converse to mere existence. The individual devoid of ideas is a lifeless lump of clay. Better yet, a living, breathing, “Lifeless,” lump of clay.

Thought leaders with compelling ideas delivered with passion reflect charismatic leadership. They breathe life into individuals that either encourages similar initiatives or a renewed purpose on the part of individuals. The field of ideas creates these leaders, but one must be intellectually curious to wallow in the possibilities. Because the Information Age has not produced individuals with great intellectual curiosity, it has not produced an abundance of thought leaders who inspire hope and the manifestation of ideas. It has created people who regurgitate information as a means of satisfying limited needs (Term papers, answers to immediate questions, trivial pursuit, etc…), but not the next Alexander the Great, Emerson or Machiavelli.

Within any presidency or position of leadership, it is important to inspire hope and optimism, but at the end of the day, the continuous creation, processing and implementation of ideas are essential. The world can become saturated with entertainment, sports and even technology, but the field of compelling ideas with never be overrun. The charismatic leader chooses the road less travelled. To choose the road less travelled makes all the difference in the world.

"Prada" is a Charismatic

2010-11-20T06:06:00.000-08:00

This review is from: The Devil Wears Prada (Full Screen Edition) (DVD)

"The Devil Wears Prada" is a staple in my personal movie library. Rarely has a lioness been more enticing or vicious in corporate America as Meryl Streep's "Miranda Priestley." Priestley is equal to task to Michael Douglas' "Gordon Gekko" in the movie "Wall Street." But, why do we love these characters that would do anything to achieve and maintain professional success? I believe "...Prada" is a microcosm of the world. Most people are afraid to wholeheartedly go after the "Brass Ring." When we see the likes of a Miranda Priestley (Streep) entering onto the world stage, we love and loathe her simultaneously for her viciousness as well as her victories. While she may exhibit somewhat psychopathic tendencies, she is not the shrinking violet many would have her be. In fact, her subordinates become victims of the "Stockholm Syndrome." While the fashion industry isn't a philanthropic endeavor, the characters become sucked into her vortex, enamored by the passion and sheer excellence Miranda puts into her vocation. Meryl Streep was edged out by Helen Mirren's "The Queen" for the Oscar, but it's Streep's riveting performance that keeps me repeating the experience.

Watch "The Devil Wears Prada" to be entertained and educated about the ways of the world. The most salient one liner in the movie was Streep's divulging a truism of contemporary society and its pursuit of acclaim, fame and fortune, "Everyone wants to be us."

The Charisma Of A New Concept

2010-11-11T14:54:00.000-08:00

This review is from: Fling (DVD)

"Fling" is one of those "sleeper" hits. The kind of movie that doesn't have blockbuster appeal, but creates its own cult following on the DVD scene. Why? Because it challenges conventional thinking in ways that frighten mainstream mores. To engage in romantic relationships, where each party isn't attempting to own the other person, is counterintuitive to our Judeo-Christian socialization. "Fling" makes an overt commentary that might be missed by the typical viewer--conform or be alone. Granted, it's difficult to be emotionally detached and compartmentalized when feelings emerge in relationships. But, does the emotional conflict derive because we legitimately feel expectations from love or have we been socialized to respond a certain way, because of the societal scripts we read from? If we respond emotionally from the framework of our socialization, I suspect it'll be the later--we feel emotional connection from our psychological scripts.

"Fling" attempts to dissect and explore the emotional possibilities of "Free Love." In keeping with conventional wisdom, Hollywood let's the explorer lose in the end. Not because the idea is preposterous, but because "Free Love" would disrupt life as we know it.

I highly recommend "Fling" to the intellectually enlightened.

The Charisma of Simone

2010-11-04T14:03:00.000-07:00

This review is from: Simone (DVD)

"Simone" is "A Thinking Person's" movie. It's one of those "would if" movies where the concept trumps the acting and cinematography. Would if you could digitally produce a musician, athlete or actor for the pure purpose of entertaining a population and didn't have to worry about prima donnas, excessive salaries and bloated budgets? What if, for the first time, a bona fide celebrity could be created from the dark recesses of a computer and appear more real than the latest phenom? From the election of the President to the latest fad, "Simone" shows how far society has come in creating illusions that people not only buy into, but relish as a way of life better than reality. There is philosophical subtext throughout "Simone" commenting on how far we've devolved as a society without being sermonic. However, what initially was a moral dilemma becomes an acceptance of the world "as is." In the end, the audience is left with the option of fighting an uphill battle over reality or surrendering by adapting to the environment of illusion. Darwin said that the person best able to adapt to an environment would thrive.

"Simone" is a comedy, but the concept is strikingly real.

There is an "Upside" and "Downside" to Everything!

2010-10-29T20:31:00.000-07:00

This review is from: Up in the Air (DVD)

"Up In The Air" is a reality check for individuals who have chosen professional and material success over family obligations and mainstream sentimentalities. Yes, Ryan Bingham (George Clooney) has made great sacrifices that seem unconventional, but does not conventionalism come with its own price? "Up In The Air" reconciles unorthodox reasoning with collective thinking. At one point in the movie when it appears that Bingham will become a relic of the past, he is redeemed. It's a man versus machine moment when corporate heads decide to disband its new technology of contractually terminating employees through teleconferencing in favor of face-to-face relations. In an altered reality, the boilerplate would have Bingham losing his job; due to the changing work environment and lamenting about the personal relationships he sacrificed to be a corporate dweller. Fortunately, this doesn't happen, which is a "thumbs up" for personal choice.

In the end, the clear message is that life is filled with choices that have an "upside" and a "downside" attached. As one undergoes a "Cost-Benefit Analysis," it is important to take the long view of a myriad of decisions. There are no moral absolutes! Rather, happiness is a culmination of core choices surrounding individual contentment.

"Up In The Air" is a great movie for individuals on both sides of the equation--those who have abandoned personal relationships for professional success and those who have abandoned self actualization for familial responsibilities.

Charisma, Government and Other Businesses: Measuring Outcomes

2010-10-21T20:32:00.000-07:00

This review is from: Performance Budgeting for State and Local Government (Paperback)

"Performance Budgeting for State and Local Government" isn't a page turner. In fact, you're more apt to read a few pages and put it down. Not because of its profundity, but because of its tedium. But, building the foundation to any business for long term sustainability requires a degree of monotony. Kelly and Rivenbark's "Performance Budgeting..." is about power and the inner workings of state and local governments tasked with measuring services to the public.

As a master degree candidate, this book was a requirement for a course of the same title. While it's only 8 chapters, readers are left with a greater appreciation for taxes and how it greases the wheels that keep governments operating. While you can read another type of business book, "Performance Budgeting..." shows you how the private sector has largely influenced governmental operations. While, the government isn't quite as efficient, "Performance Budgeting for State and Local Government" spends a long time attempting to make its case.

As performance review is important, it becomes increasingly difficult to make the same case for the public sector as the private sector. In fact, "Performance Budgeting..." fails to make a compelling case, because certain departments within city government are immeasurable based on the nature of the services.

Whether you're a student of politics, government or business, this book is a helpful tool for aligning programs with outcomes and objectives, albeit limitations. For one who teaches on charisma, measuring service deliverables is essential.

Coco is Charismatic

2010-10-15T20:43:00.000-07:00

Audrey Tautou in "Coco Before Chanel" is compelling and has charisma galore. Coco was self-empowered and smashed the rules of proper etiquette for women far before it became fashionable. Her indomitable spirit leaps off the screen with very little movement. Charismatic personalities can make reading from a telephone book an awe-inspiring experience. Throughout the movie, viewers witness Tautou's penetrating stare as an observer of the people around her. What is she observing? She sees the masks they wear; Women overly adorning themselves in an attempt to fit into high society when their true selves cry out for simplicity. Coco saw it all and captured it with fashion. She wasn't merely dressing women, she was leading a crusade.

A French movie with sub titles provides an air of authenticity that would have been lost in English. To those who dear to dream and who pay the price for success, watch this movie.

The Charisma of Knowing It All

2010-10-08T20:35:00.000-07:00

This review is from: Sherlock Holmes (DVD)

"Sherlock Holmes" portrays the downside of the "Renaissance Man." Imagine being able to outthink, outwit and outfight most people and then become trapped in a cocoon of self-misery based on these facts alone. The genius and lamentations of Sherlock Holmes is excellently played by Robert Downey, Jr. While one usually would need to be an anglophile or at least appreciate the backdrop of England (circa) 1880's--1900's, Downey and Jude Law make it fun. The intellectualism of the characters is a breath of fresh air from the mindless, hackneyed movies normally on the modern day roster.

"Sherlock Holmes" is an odyssey through human nature and the need for illusions, whether it is the need to believe in the dead or delusions of grandeur based on self importance. "Sherlock Holmes" shows the upside and downside of human nature and the vagaries in between.

I highly recommend this movie for the comedic erudite.

The Charismatic Sociopath!

2010-09-30T14:15:00.000-07:00

This review is from: The Sociopath Next Door (Paperback)

Dr. Martha Stout's "The Sociopath Next Door" starts out as a riveting analysis of the part of humanity (4%) that permeates our existence right under our noses. Dr. Stout's case studies of sociopaths as a clinical psychologist gave the book the scientific heft needed for credibility. In describing the traits of sociopaths as charismatic, it helped further my own body of work on Charismatology ("One of the more frequently observed of these traits is a glib and superficial charm that allows the true sociopath to seduce other people., figuratively and literally--a kind of charisma that, initially, can make the sociopath seem more charming or more interesting than most people around him, p. 7)

In part, there could even be a case made that she is describing President Obama as a sociopath on page 93 when she says, "Insidiously, when such a `savior' abducts the normal population to his purposes, he usually begins with an appeal to them as good people who would like to improve the condition of humanity, and then insists that they can achieve this by following his own aggressive plan."

The groundbreaking news comes on page 107, when Dr. Stout reveals the core motivation and warning signs in sociopaths being the need for pity and for people to feel sorry for them. It is pity not fear that sociopaths are after.

However, the scientific pattern established up to this point changed around page 171. "At least 96 percent of us are fundamentally thus (Filled with Conscience). What we will end up doing with the species survival problems created by the other 4 percent (sociopaths) is, at present, unknowable. From this point to the end of the book, it sounded like another person wrote it. Dr. Stout goes to great lengths to vindicate her sense of humanity as well as attempt to convince the 96 percent of the population that having a conscience is better than not having one at all. Her careful analysis seeps into a cacophony of internal dialogue, waxed poetry and girlish innocence. If sociopathy is a combination of biological predilections and environment influences, she makes a better case for sociopaths being born not created through their own choices. Once more, she describes the tragic end to all sociopaths as part of their fate, but feels compelled to warn moral bound individuals of impending doom if these sociopaths are not stopped.

Through Dr. Stout's sermonizing, she loses her sense of objectivity, which turns "The Sociopath Next Door" into an emotional rant by a doctor who claims "End of Times" at the hands of sociopaths. She admits that all humans have the ability and propensity towards sociopathy when humans are perceptually turned into "Its." She uses Osama Bin Laden as an example. Most conscience bound individuals would separate the likes of Osama Bin Laden from the rest of humanity labeling him an "It" and as such rendering any heinous destruction upon him without compunction.

Could a child be born with a heart of gold and the cruelty of the world make his heart grow cold? If so, would the catalyst for becoming a sociopath be marked by the 4 percent of the population who are already sociopathic or the other 96 percent filled with conscience? The numbers alone favor the latter.

The few nuggets revealed in "The Sociopath Next Door" are valuable enough to read the entire book. In this instance, you have to sift through a lot of chaff to get to the wheat.

Edward Brown
Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute

The Charisma of Body Language

2010-09-23T22:28:00.000-07:00

This review is from: Body Language Secrets: A Guide During Courtship & Dating (Paperback)

R. Don Steele's, "Body Language Secrets: A Guide During Courtship and Dating" is a good introductory book for becoming better aware of the nonverbal language that goes on between men and women during potentially romantic settings. A key take away of the book is to look for "clusters" of behavior from the person you are attempting to engage. Is their body in an open and receptive position? Are they smiling? Exercising friendly touching? Pupils dilated?

Steele outlines why all these factors are important in assessing one's interest without verbalization. If over 50 % of communication is nonverbal, it behooves us to align our thoughts with effective nonverbal communication. To do otherwise, leads to extreme miscommunication and failed attempts at connecting. To be as attractive as possible, it is essential to manage one's physical and kinetic expressions.

Charisma: The Power of Personality

2010-09-16T20:39:00.000-07:00

This review is from: The Sins of the Father: Joseph P. Kennedy and the Dynasty he Founded (Hardcover)

Kessler's,"The Sins of the Father," is a page turner, not merely for the colorful and bombastic life of Joseph P. Kennedy. But, a gut check for those fraught with extreme ambition and a thirst for power. Joseph Kennedy answered the age old question, "How far would you go to achieve ultimate power?" His life's response was, "To the ends of the earth." That he did and more.

In addition, Kennedy is an excellent case study on a small percentile of individuals steeped in an insatiable desire to achieve great success at all costs. The statement,"Men do not differ an any respect from other animals, but survive, according to their aptitudes, by adapting themselves to exterior conditions which prevail at the moment of their birth,"(P. 102). The gene pool, environment, and conditions that create a Joseph Kennedy is more prevalent in contemporary times than they ever were.

"The Sins of the Father" is the potential for greatness and vile we all have within us. The ending words speak volumes to our best and worst--"...He did not care about his reputation. What he cared most about was having power. Through the political dynasty that he founded, Joseph P. Kennedy achieved that for generations to come. If he hurt and corrupted others in the process, it was because no one had the courage to challenge him. For that, they only have themselves to blame" (p. 428).

The Art of What Works Builds Charisma Empire

2010-09-10T12:41:00.000-07:00

William Duggan's, "The Art of What Works..." has become one of the guiding principles by which the Core Edge Image & Charisma Institute (Core Edge) bases its innovations. The other principles of Core Edge are: Albert Humphrey's "SWOT" analysis and Michael Treacy and Fred Wiersema's, "The Discipline of Market Leaders." It is essential to take these three bodies of works collectively, if you are to build a 21st Century enterprise.

"The Art of What Works" provides the foundational principles by which contemporary "break-throughs" are made. Duggan's ideas work within any industry. Take for example, the musician "Prince". While his music is defined as transformational, his musical success is laid by the prior success and styling of Jimi Hendrix, James Brown and Sly Stone. Now, Duggan's doesn't provide the myriad of examples by which using past contributions to tweak contemporary innovations, but you begin to see the patterns of possibilities by laying his concept within any social phenomenon. The great contributors, past and present, used "hybrid' approaches towards achievement, which lays bear the idea of "pure" innovation within any industry. Nothing is really "new' nor created in a vacuum. Duggan's analysis of success trumps those of Napoleon Hill and Dale Carnegie, because it's based on historic or factual reality over metaphysics. The notion, "It is what it is" takes precedent over theories that fail to look behind what is qualifiable and quantifiable.

Neeson Exudes Charisma in a Machiavellian Way

2010-09-02T12:30:00.000-07:00

This review is from: Taken (Single-Disc Extended Edition) (DVD)

"Taken" is one of those movies for your personal library. Liam Neeson does a convincing job of demonstrating the virility and vitality of the aging Baby Boomer. He's what Jason Bourne grows up to be. Neeson's character doesn't knock you over with quick quips and a bevy of beauties. He's merely a dedicated former government agent who has learned some "tricks" of the trade. The screenwriter did an excellent job of creating a "He-man" without becoming a cliché'. By Neeson recovering his daughter where his ex-wife's new rich husband isn't able to rise to the occasion, says the man who can really protect his family with sheer prowess is the better man. How could the ex-wife go back to a normal life when the real man (Neeson) lives across town? Of course, all this is subtle subtext.

The salient point is that Neeson is amoral, doing what is appropriate for the situation to affect an ideal outcome. Neeson does the unthinkable in ways that are believable. No extraordinary special effects, no superhuman feats only possible for a man 20 years younger. In short, just plain old "Americana." Man encounters challenge. Man meets challenge head-on. Man triumphs!

I highly recommend "Taken". Neeson exhibits the subtle charisma of a Harrison Ford.

Charisma is Founded On "Understanding Human Nature"

2010-08-26T21:48:00.000-07:00

This review is from: Understanding Human Nature

Eminent psychologist Alfred Adler's (1870-1937), "Understanding Human Nature" is a ground- breaking book outlining the dynamics, psychology and neurosis of human nature. For me, Adler's salient point in his "Individual Psychology" is that we are all slaves to our motivations. Whatever, driving need within all of us, move us to act in fulfilling that need. Adler says,"...A change of attitude in adult life need not necessarily lead to a change of behavior pattern. The psyche does not change its foundation; the individual retains the same tendencies in childhood and in maturity, leading us to deduce that her goal in life is unaltered." (P.4) He further asserts, "A person's mental life is determined by his goals. No human being can think, feel, wish, or dream without all these activities being determined, continued, modified and directed toward an ever-present objective." (P. 15).

Adler's conceptual framework served me well in constructing my model on charisma. Whether you witness the magnetism of President Barack Obama, the magnanimity of Oprah Winfrey or the altruism of Bono, they are all moved by their compelling drives and motivation, which are all self-serving.

Adler cut through the chase in defining the human psyche that was de-mystifying in ways that eclipsed Sigmund Freud. Although contemporaries, Adler's contribution to psychology seems much more visceral and pragmatic than that of Freud.

I highly recommend "Understanding Human Nature" as a timeless tome more
relevant today than a century ago.

References

Adler, A. (1998), Understanding human nature. Minnesota: Hazelden Foundation

Lessons Learned for Enhancing Charisma: "The Stepfather"

2010-08-20T13:52:00.000-07:00

This review is from: The Stepfather (DVD)

The movie "The Stepfather" is a psycho-drama where you don't need Michael Myers or Jason Vorhees to be your worst nightmare. It's the nice looking, Kurt Rusell-esque guy next door to be concerned about. In this instance, "The Stepfather" has a few things going to exemplify the weaknesses of human nature. For one, David Harris (Dylan Walsh) is invited into these homes by women who are attractive, single and operate as the primary parent. But what does he do to enamor himself with these ladies? Charisma and charm can be used for good and evil, but you decide your own case. David does a few things that speak to the voids in the women he entangles in his web. David:

--Finds attractive, single mothers shopping in stores with their children and engages them by being open and vulnerable ("My wife and daughter were killed in a car accident...I'm new in town and don't know my way around.")

--Targets attractive women with children, because an attractive, eligible, and tolerant man to bring into their world might initially be challenging. David makes himself available.

--Plays it cool. David isn't stressed and seems indifferent to what the women might do. But, because he's figured out their psychodynamics, he feels confident he can predict what they're inclined to do, which is to invite him into their lives.

---Interacts well with the children. To get the cow express interest in her calf! If David demonstrates he is father material, the women can quickly envision him being an addition to a newly formed family. They get a new mate and the children get a new father.

All in all, "The Stepfather" is instructional for illustrating the precepts to getting one's feet in the door to any opportunity, whether it's finding a new love or exploring new job opportunities.

I recommend "The Stepfather" for these "Take aways" alone.

Charisma & Presidential Characteristics Unseen

2010-08-12T14:29:00.000-07:00

This review is from: Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance (Paperback)

I searched Barack Obama's, "Dreams from My Father," in hopes of finding signs forecasting his ascension to the U.S. Presidency as well as evidence pointing to his inclusion into the School of Charismatic Leadership. Interesting, I saw all evidence wanting. There were no signs as exemplified in David Maraniss', "First in His Class," a biography on President Bill Clinton's evolution to power.

At best, it is a reclamation of a man who idealized an element of black sub-culture, based on skin color, only to find his own truth in a world fraught with contradictions. The climax of the book came while in Africa, as Obama and his sister Auma are speaking with an old history teacher of Auma's. Dr. Rukia Odero says," ...You know, young black Americans tend to romanticize Africa so. When your father and I were young, it was the opposite -we expected to find all the answers in America. Harlem. Chicago. Langston Hughes and James Baldwin. That's where we drew our inspiration. And the Kennedys---they were very popular" (p. 433). Throughout "Dreams from My Father," Obama is expressing the disconnection of his personal experiences with those who share the same skin color. As usual the case when one feels he's not "Black enough (complexion and psychologically)," he over compensates believing that the sub-culturally described definition of being black is the objective definition. Dr. Odero's insights closes the gap of the proverbially, "Grass being greener on the other side." By closing the psychological gap, Obama is allowed to embrace the truism that his global experiences have allowed: Born In Hawaii to a white Kansan mother and black Kenyan father, reared in Indonesia by an Asian step-father, educated in the highest pedigreed universities in the world, and finally, being able to point directly to a country (Kenya) that engenders his future aspirations being manifested in America.

"Dreams from My Father" is an immigrant story in the vein of Arnold Schwarzenegger and Rupert Murdoch with sociological underpinning of the Black Experience as a construct. The beauty of Obama's writing is the social experiment he engages himself in to find a panacea for the psychological malaise (part self-induced, part uncontrolled social forces) he experienced growing up. Obama is reminiscent of a scientist who uses himself as a guinea pig to find a special elixir. As such, he has produced a psychological blue print, steeped in hybridized cultural influences of power for the ages. A call to action would be, "Find an authentic socio/psychological philosophy to base your understanding of the world and consolidate power from that perspective."

A must read by a man who would become the most powerful person in the world and the process that got him there.

Charismatic Influences That Created Pop Culture

2010-08-05T12:43:00.000-07:00

Steve Jobs (Technology). Even before Apple became a technology company, Steve Jobs was instrumental for making computers “user friendly” and sexy. Jobs’ charisma made him the first technological rock star whose impact is seen in every form from sleek and aerodynamic computers to multimedia.

Craig Venter (Science). Venter is credited for being one of the first persons to sequence the human genome. Craig Venter’s accomplishments have influenced the future of biotechnology fused with entrepreneurialism. Much, like Alexander Graham Bell, Venter is a scientific businessman, which made science sexy by taking research out of the laboratory and placing it into the marketplace.

“Superfly” (Movie). Ron O’Neal’s portrayal of Priest made the drug culture attractive, although the movie was meant to provide an anti-drug message. This 1970’s explosion captured imaginations through O’Neal’s charisma, Curtis Mayfield’s soundtrack, a tight storyline and the styles of that period. Movies like: “Scarface,” “New Jack City” and “Sugar Hill” are cut from this genre.

“The Mack” (Movie). “The Mack” starred Max Julien, which revolutionized and glamorized the pimp lifestyle. This 1970’s megahit showed the rise and fall of a pimp much like Al Pacino’s portrayal of Tony Montana in “Scarface.” While “The Mack” attempted to show the downside of street life with some peppering of messages like “Staying in school,” it largely influenced a generation of Rappers who point to “The Mack” as a rags to riches saga for achieving one’s goals at any cost.

Evel Knievel (Stunt man). Robert Craig Knievel was the first rock star stunt man who captured the imagination by jumping over cars, buses and a canyon with a motorcycle. Knievel can be credited for influencing today’s extreme sports from motorcycle jumping to bikes and skateboards.

Julius Erving (“Dr. J”-Basketball). Dr. J influenced contemporary basketball played “above the rim”. Erving’s impact created the legendary Michael Jordan, who mesmerized a legion of basketball players whose acrobatics on the court has raised the NBA brand to global proportions.

Grandmaster Flash and The Furious Five (Rap). This group broke ground in 1982 by producing the first urban experience song “The Message.” “The Message” changed the whole genre of Rap music from boasting about personal exploits to characterizing the visceral experiences of life in urban communities.

F. Lee Bailey (Law). While there was a line of influential attorneys before F. Lee Bailey, he was instrumental in ushering the “super lawyer” as a media darling. Bailey was instrumental in raising the profile of the law profession through high profile cases to where today’s court shows are media successes. The likes of Johnnie Cochran and Willie Gary come out of Bailey’s influence and impact.

Gianni Versace (Fashion Designer). Versace was instrumental in placing fashion on the front burner of contemporary minds as he placed clothing on celebrity behinds. Versace impacted the fashion industry by making individuals rock stars by merely wearing the Versace label.

Are Charismatic Leaders Motivated By A Love For People?

2010-08-01T13:51:00.000-07:00

Often, the notion of charismatic leaders having a great affinity for people is attributed to this form of leadership. However, the charismatic leader’s desire for power and control comes into question as to whether the love of people is a motivating factor. McClelland (1985), under the Leader Motive Profile, asserts that effective leaders have: A high conscious need for power, low need for affiliation and a high concern for moral use of power. Weighing these traits with charismatic leaders, charismatic leaders are motivated by a great need for power. Their self-identity hinges on vainglorious and missionary pursuits. Also, charismatic leaders live in the field of ideas and imagination and thus do not necessarily form close relational bonds or affiliations. Their advanced interpersonal relationship skills tend to make associates, colleagues and followers feel closer to them then they actually are. Finally, charismatic leaders’ use of moral power is largely subjective. In a Machiavellian sense, they use morality interchangeably based on the needs of the situation.

In the end, the mission of charismatic leaders supersedes a passion for people. People are mere means for accomplishing a vision. Followers become enraptured in a task bigger than themselves, which give them a purpose for existing and societal needs are fulfilled through the sheer force, determination and fortitude of the charismatic leader. Arguably, without the efforts of the charismatic leader, great achievements would be far and few between.

References
McClelland, D.C. (1985). Human motivation. Chicago: Scott, Foresman and Co.

Charisma Through Ideas

2010-07-23T03:10:00.000-07:00

Often charisma is experiential based on the connection between the charismatic leader and followers. But, could charismatic leaders be detached from adherents and connect purely through ideas? Weisberg (2010) asserts that there is a difference between the charismatic traits of Presidents Clinton, G.W. Bush, Reagan and Obama. Clinton, Bush and Reagan were described as “relaters” in that they made visceral or deep connections with the people they came in contact with through shared experiences and common interests. A great deal of their political savvy was attached to this ability to “feel the other person’s pain.” However, Obama is described as cool, aloof, detached, not warm, and highly analytical. Supporters are more enamored with his ideas than his connectivity. If this description of Obama is correct, how does this bode with the idea of his being charismatic?

Such a notion actually upends the traditional concept of charisma as a driving force based on sheer magnetism. If ideas can be described as charismatic, what is more important, the message or the messenger? Ideally, the pure charismatic is a combination of both. He can arouse audiences with a compelling idea through sheer passion and steel determination as well as conceptualize the larger vision. To the point, either President Obama fits squarely into the Charismatic leadership model albeit less of a connector than Clinton, Bush and Reagan, has some traits of charismatic leaders, but is not a full- fledged charismatic or charismatic ideas stand on their own devoid of the charismatic personality. If research suggests that the prototypical charismatic leader has a compelling vision as well as passionate oratory, than the message is only part of the total picture. In reading Obama’s autobiography, “Dreams from My Father,” there is no evidence that Obama has a mesmerizing personality nor had a far reaching vision such as that demonstrated by Adolph Hitler’s “Mein Kampf”. In fact, there is no evidence provided in “Dreams from My Father” that Obama had political ambitions, let alone aspirations for the presidency. This is in stark contrast to Bill Clinton’s political aspirations in David Marinnass’ book, “First in His Class.”

The compelling passion of an overarching vision is so intertwined that one would be hard pressed to determine where the idea begins and where the passion articulated by the charismatic leader ends. All told, President Obama would probably best fit into the category of possessing some charismatic traits of charismatic leaders, but not a full-fledge charismatic. As articulated in the movie, “V for Vendetta,” ideas are perspectives. Without the will, passion and fortitude of the charismatic leader, ideas mean nothing in the long run. Action is the active ingredient for moving a mere idea to its ultimate manifestation.

Can ideas be charismatic? Only when the will of a leader is committed to an overarching vision tailored to the need of the people who believe the time has come and waiting would engender a missed opportunity.

References

Weisberg, J. (2010 Feb. 1). Alone in a crowd. Newsweek, Vol. 155, Issue 5, p. 14-14, 1p.

The Raw Charisma of Mike Tyson, Mickey Rourke and Bobby Brown: A Case Study

2010-07-16T20:38:00.000-07:00

What is it about boxer Mike Tyson, actor Mickey Rourke and singer Bobby Brown that keep audiences on the edge of their seat anytime these men give an interview or tie themselves to a project? If you say “charisma,” then we have to review how do these men’s charisma differ from the likes of Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama? Or even a fellow entertainer like actor Denzel Washington. How do Tyson, Rourke and Brown compare to carefully crafted images of Clinton, Obama and Washington? If charisma requires a certain level of finesse, the former characters have found a way of assuaging difficult situations with a sense of flair.

Dictionary.com defines “finesse” in part as: “skill in handling a difficult or highly sensitive situation; adroit and artful management; a trick, artifice, or stratagem.” In short, Tyson, Rourke and Brown have used sheer personality, great will and shrewd ambition to meld their brand of charisma into a synergistic, seemingly edgy concept. No matter what level of professional success each achieved, they seemed to be unfazed by the glitz and glamour that attaches itself to marquee athletes and entertainers. For these men, they would be equally entertaining and mesmerizing even if the klieg lights were off. It is easy to suggest celebrity as the cause for audience interest. But, they are not buffoons or charlatans attempting to extend their 15 minutes of fame. No, they interact on the world stage as if success and money are incidental to a higher purpose, not always clearly understood by the populous. As they attempt to exorcise their personal demons, their honed professional craft is used to exercise the muscles of the internal battle.

In a recent Detail magazine interview, when asked about his bout with Evander Holyfield, Tyson said:

“Man, I didn't care about boxing anymore. I was wrong to do that—all wrong—all crazy to do that. But that wasn't about boxing. I just wanted to f--king maim him. I had no business being in that ring. A year out of prison, 16 months out of prison, already with two belts to defend? I had no business with those belts. I was already done. They put you, a writer, in prison, for three years, hands tied behind your back. Then they put you up against some hack, and you outwrite him, and they give you two awards. And then I put you up against a Nobel Prize winner? Absurd.”

Bobby Brown talks about his need for control and focus:

“I like being in control of making all the major decisions pertaining to my projects. That`s something that you don`t get to do in a group. Everything has to be voted on - every minor decision.

“I could really care less about what they think about me, but at the same time, I do have something to prove.”

Mickey Rourke talks about his career and choices:

“A couple of guys won Academy Awards for the things that I turned down. Today, after coming to terms with everything, after being in therapy for a long time-there are areas where I will compromise.”

“What I've got to do now is let them judge me for who I am as an actor and not for my notoriety.”

The raw charisma of Tyson, Rourke and Brown emanates from intense authenticity with incomparable ambition. Their focus is the pureness of their craft and inner voice rather than image management. In this regard, they are freer than Clinton, Obama and Washington to push their creativity and thus their charisma to the limit.

References

Bobby Brown Quotes. Lucy.Com, Retrieved from: http://www.quotelucy.com/quotes/bobby-brown-quotes.html

Mickey Rourke Quotes. Brainy Quote. Retrieved from : http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/mickey_rourke.html

Solotaroff,I. (2010 August). Everything you think you know about Mike Tyson is wrong. Details Magazine,Retrieved from: http://www.details.com/culture-trends/news-and-politics/201008/interview-boxing-mike-tyson?currentPage=1

Charismatic Leadership: Loved By Some, Hated By Others

2010-07-10T21:30:00.000-07:00

Recently, I had Brenda Neckvatal, author of a white paper on charismatic leadership, as a guest on my online radio show, Charisma live. Brenda’s research echoed much of what I had discovered about charismatic leadership and so I wanted her to elaborate further. As we discussed her findings, she was pretty candid about having some misgivings about the traits characterized by charismatic personalities; mainly, extreme narcissism, rebuking anyone who disagrees or pushes back against them, a missionary zeal and manipulation (my addition). Initially, as Brenda discovered these traits during her early research, she decided these traits were not ideal. Later, as she analyzed the conceptual framework of charismatic personalities, she begin to expand her paradigmatic predilections to accept that charismatic personalities were a special breed and contributed greatly despite those traits that were antithetical to mainstream thinking. Largely, she followed the data to determine, what, if any real value, charismatic leadership contributed to organizations. We also agreed that charismatics caused schisms among people, because as one segment of the population loved charismatics and their contributions, the other half of the population abhorred their symbolism. The dichotomy came with an understanding that for every benefit to a group of individuals, the same benefit often proves disadvantageous to another group. Consequently, trying to please everyone proved erroneous and shortsighted.

The take away for students of charismatic leadership is to be fully aware and prepared to be loved and despised if you become immersed in an idea that you believe to be transformational. Charismatics accept this truism, although like anyone else, they would wish to be loved and accepted by all.

To listen to the show in its entirety, link to: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/charismalive/2010/07/06/the-emergence-of-charismatic-leadership

Charisma: The Human Will

2010-07-02T00:43:00.000-07:00

A client, Stan, recently asked me why I did not talk about any other topics other than “charisma” and “Charismatic leadership.” I casually asked, “What other topics would you be willing to pay for?” Stan laughed and said, “Is it about money?” I then chuckled and said, “If you had mentioned a desire to know about another subject, other than charisma, I would have referred you to someone else.” He continued with,” Would you leave an opportunity to grow your business on the table?” I said, “If the subject does not have some relativity to charisma, I would have to leave it on the table.” He walked away puzzled as we set up an appointment for our next training. I thought about the look on Stan’s face as he left and decided to call him later to inquire further.

As Stan picked up the telephone after about two rings, I said,” Hello Stan this Ed Brown, is this a good time to talk?” He said, “Sure, what’s up?” I said, “I was thinking about our conversation earlier and I couldn’t get that look you gave me out of my mind. After I told you I would pass up an opportunity, if it didn’t fit my specialty, you seemed confused. Just curious, why the look?” Stan responded, “Well Ed, it is an economic recession and I know, as probably you do, there are a lot of people out of work. They would die to grab any opportunity they could to feed their families and pay their bills. You came across as beyond all that as if you couldn’t find yourself in a similar situation.” I paused a few seconds, because I didn’t realize Stan had emotionalized my response to that extent. I carefully considered his words and said,” Stan, I can understand your feelings and I was not, under any circumstances, trying to demean those who are unemployed. Of course, I could be in similar situation, if fortune was against me. But, do you know how long I’ve been pursuing my dream to find a concept and a plan that I could commit my life to? Stan asked, “How long?” I said, “30 years.” He said, “30 years? You’re not even that old.” I said “I’ve been looking for the one thing that would separate me from everyone else, since I was a child. I was influenced by everything in 1970’s from Super Fly to Evel Knievel. From Earth, Wind & Fire to Parliament-Funkadelic. Once I realized who created these surreal emotions as a child, I needed to know how they did it. When I determined that all of these influences had a high degree of charisma, that’s all I wanted to study. You came to me, because you found my work on the Internet. Do you think you would have found me if I talked about different subjects with no passion for either?” Stan said, “Maybe, if you were in different arenas, you would be known for different things.” I concluded by saying, “Stan, the days of being a Jack-of-all-trades, master of none are over. It’s just too many people trying to grab the megaphone spewing mere opinions with no research, background or homework. You pay me the price of my services, because I eat, sleep and drink charisma. If I died tomorrow, my body of work and system of thought would surpass anyone who has not spent years developing a compelling idea. I do not worry about the economy, because my lifestyle and commitment to my work will always allow my mind to create opportunities no matter the financial forecast or conditions. What you perceived as arrogance was a testament to the human will of a determined mind.”

Stan grew silent. I said, “Stan, are you still there?” He said,”Yeah Ed, I’m here. What you said inspired me. Rarely do I meet people who have settled on their own truth and drawn a line in the sand daring anyone to cross it.” I said,” When you get to that point by finding something that gives you a sense of purpose, nothing else matters…not money, people or things.” Stan seemed to become a bit rushed and weary. He said,” Ed, I’ll see you at our next appointment, I have to go.” I said, “What’s up? Are you okay?” He said,”Yeah, you gave me an idea for a plan I’ve been holding off for a long time. If I don’t get to it now, I probably never will.” I asked, “Can you talk about it?” Stan said,”Ed, your passion and words make talking at this point, a dead subject. I have to do it. I’ll tell you about it the next meeting.” I said, “Okay, take care.”

The next few sessions, Stan would be elusive about his project saying, “You’ll see when it’s done.” To date, I don’t know what Stan has up his sleeves, but not only has he referred other clients to me, he has added more sessions to his contract. I don’t believe the weak shall inherit the earth, I truly believe the world belongs to the brave and courageous.

Charisma: A Random Experiment on Influence

2010-06-27T00:32:00.000-07:00

Recently, I gave a seminar titled, "The Principles of Charismatic Leadership” at the 2010 Power Networking Conference held in Downtown Atlanta at the Marriott Marquis Hotel. The seminar was filled to capacity, much to my surprise. There were several other seminars going on at the same time, which made the attendance even more special. I gave an overview of the philosophy behind charisma and asked the audience, “What problems or challenges does charisma solve?” I favor the Problem Based Learning Model, which essentially is solution oriented in its mechanics. The solutions I received that charisma addressed ranged from moving up the corporate hierarchy using advanced interpersonal skills to persuading and impacting audiences to fulfill a mission.

Shortly after, I divided the room into two groups and asked participants to choose a candidate for President of the United States. After some internal campaigning within both groups, two men were selected (the groups were nearly equally divided with women and men). The two candidates had to give a stump speech at which the audience would vote collectively for the next President of the United States. The two men did not have a platform of issues and were relatively unknown, until that day, by the general audience. Guess who won?

Without much information, contact or questioning, the audience chose the candidate who aroused the greater of emotions, spoke about the difficulties ahead, and talked about the interest of the audience’s children and grandchildren (sound familiar?). The same “hot buttons” that real politicians use to get elected worked during a staged, impromptu election.

Can the tools and machinations of charisma work in situations where an individual has to go in “cold” without any knowledge of the people he or she has to influence? This random experiment suggests they can when they know the common motivation, interests and desires of the populous.

The Impact of Narcissism on Charismatic Leadership: The Conclusion

2010-06-17T23:32:00.000-07:00

Narcissists and charismatic leaders often are so commonly link, one cannot determine where one personality trait ends and the other begins. While all narcissists are not charismatic, it is believed that all charismatic leaders have some form of narcissism greater than the average individual. The hard-wiring of narcissists is highly Machiavellian in that they have “changeable” or mutable consciences. Instead of being tied to a specific method of getting things accomplished, narcissists change their minds and paradigm according to the needs of the situation. Consequently, narcissists are difficult to pigeon hole, because they adapt to a situation for the sole purpose of winning. As Vidal Gore once stated, “It’s not enough to win, the other guy has to lose.” This will to achieve is believed to stem from early childhood experiences of degradation that positioned the narcissist to excel at all cost. Lubit (2002) asserts that narcissists are inclined to leave projects unfinished once they become bored. Conversely, Fleming (N.D.) contends that charismatic leaders become inextricably tied to a project. So much so that the challenge is motivating the charismatic leader to leave or delegate power rather than remain, once the mission has been accomplished.

Charismatic narcissists are often more persistent than the average individual based on the need to achieve. This drive is a benefit for organizations in that the charismatic will stay the course until the task is accomplished or deem the challenges unwinnable. As noted earlier, the downside is the unwillingness for charismatics to leave or create a succession plan once a goal has been achieved. Evidence also suggests that charismatic narcissists will abdicate the mission or forego alliances if persisting acts contrary their self-interest.
All in all, charismatic narcissists can be beneficial in creating an innovative, fast paced and groundbreaking environment for employees. Their “Big Picture” sentimentalities allow for individuals to feel a part of something bigger than themselves. For charismatic narcissists, accomplishing a grandiose mission becomes the driving force of their existence.

As demonstrated by Prince, Hitler and Stalin, the mission is so critical for vainglorious and self-aggrandizing measures, anyone who poses either a threat or ceases to be valuable will be eliminated. Charismatic narcissists are persistent in their endeavors and will unload any “baggage” at will. In their minds, they are indispensable where everyone else is expendable.

For organizations wrestling with charismatic narcissists, it is essential to weigh the pros and cons of this type of leadership. For organizations that are receding, irrelevant and complacent, charismatic narcissists can be valuable for jump starting the organization. The cautionary note is to have parameters, boundaries and oversight to the actions of charismatic narcissists. Not to have some measure of control is fodder for the charismatic narcissists to wreak havoc on the long term aspirations of the mission. Like fire, charismatic narcissists can be beneficial for building an organization or they can obliterate everyone and everything around them if left unchecked.

References

Fleming,G.(N.D.). Student leadership styles: Charismatic leadership. About.com guide. Retrieved from: http://homeworktips.about.com/od/studymethods/ss/leadership_4.htmFf

Lubit, R. (2002), ‘The Long-Term Organizational Impact of Destructively Narcissistic Managers’, Academy of Management Executive, Volume 16, Number 1, pp. 127–138.

What Sacrifices Would Charismatic Personalities Make to Achieve Their Goals?

2010-06-11T10:56:00.000-07:00

If the charismatic narcissist uses individuals to affect a bigger mission, would he sacrifice individuals for the sake of he mission? Bizumic and Duckitt (2008) contend that given the choice between self-interest and the interest of others, the charismatic narcissist will choose self-interest. They cite information pointing to the fact that both Hitler and Stalin were willing to give up their countries when it no longer served their goals. When Hitler realized that he would lose the war, he started to despise Germany and was ready to sacrifice it, saying, “Germany is not worthy of me; let her perish” (quoted in Hershman & Lieb, 1994, p. 187).

So whether it is the musician Prince switching out bands for the sake of his music or Hitler and Stalin abdicating their country for individual gain, research suggests that the charismatic narcissist is relentless when achieving a goal and will discontinue and forsake all alliances when it is in his best interest to do so. The upside for corporations and organizations is that usually a charismatic narcissist has checks and balances through by-laws, corporate governance and board of directors. The recent debacle in the housing and financial industries reflects what happens when a megalomaniac goes unchecked—he brings down a company. Both empirical and theoretical evidence suggests that narcissistic individuals
lack integrity. For instance, narcissism has been found to be negatively related to integrity outside of organizational settings (Mumford et al., 2001).

References

Bizumic, B. and Duckitt, J. (2008 June). My group is not worthy of me: Narcissism and ethnocentrism. Political Psychology, vol. 29 Issue 3, p. 437-453, 11 p., 5 charts.

Hershman, D. J., & Lieb, J. (1994). A brotherhood of tyrants: Manic depression and absolute power. Amherst: Prometheus Books.

Mumford, M. D., Connelly, M. S., Helton,W. B., Strange, J. M., & Osburn, H. K. (2001). On the construct validity of integrity tests: Individual and situational factors as predictors of test performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 240–257.

Narcissism Fuels Passion Within Charismatics

2010-06-03T23:39:00.000-07:00

In many respects, narcissism is the fuel that prompts charismatics to go farther than the average individual in achieving goals within and without crisis situations. Eminent psychologist Alfred Adler described this aspect of narcissism as the “Superiority Complex.” Maniacci (2007) asserts:

They see others from the vantage point of who is above—or below—whom. If they are not on top, they feel grossly inferior. Others tend to feel inadequate around them. They are overly responsible, too involved, and far too controlling. When confronted with the possibility of not being superior, these people blame, attack, and criticize others. They may be wrong, but others are more wrong than they are. They hate the notion of not having a purpose in life, and they often work too hard and far too long. Winning is everything, and they are willing to cut corners, cheat, or even hurt others if they perceive themselves as losing. Winning is not the only thing: It is everything. They are excessively concerned with their appearance, and while they often take care of their outward appearance through dressing well and superb hygiene, they often neglect their inner health, both emotionally and physically. They are far too busy achieving to be worried about such things, and after all, they are special, so they don't have to worry about diets, sleep, and their health—nothing could ever happen to them (p.138-139).

When these characteristics are exemplified within charismatics, it is often seen as “missionary zeal” and “the love and concern” for people. In actuality, people are mere pleasantries utilized to implement and bring to fruition an ultimate goal. “In advance of performance, narcissists seem to care most about attaining desirable rewards associated with meeting or exceeding performance goals, and they typically show less concern about the prospect of failing to achieve the desired goal” (Wallace, et al, 2009. P. 79). It is important to note that these vainglorious acts are cultivated by an enabling culture. Western culture, which relishes and embraces its Judeo-Christian leanings, inherently support the narcissism of individuals generally and charismatics, specifically. A tenet which espouses man being created in the image of an omnipotent God-head, by definition relegates man to a superior position. If everything is created by a superior being than how did man become the inheritor of this largesse? Man’s self-importance, through scriptural edict or ethnic domination, saw fit to find self-defining roles to pit his esteem against real or perceived adversaries. “Throughout history, the pretense of masculine superiority has had to be continually reinforced by patriarchal laws, religion, and cultural rituals and ceremonies that elevated men and made woman subservient, all too often through the application of brute power and violence. The appearance of harmony between the genders was more often the experience of subjugation by fear, male dominance followed by the submissive acts of women who had been stripped of power and status in the world” (Bitter, 2008, p.271).

Bitter. J. (2008 Fall). Reconsidering narcissism: An Adlerian-feminist response to the article in the special section of the journal of individual psychology. The Journal of Individual Psychology, vol. 64, issue 3, p. 270-279, 10p.

Maniacci, M.P. (2007 Summer). His majesty the baby: Narcissism through the lens of individual psychology. Journal of Individual Psychology. Vol. 63, Issue 2, p.136-145, 10 p.

Wallace. H.M., Ready, C.B. , and Weitenhagen, E. (2009 Jan-Mar.). Narcissism and task persistence. Self & Identity. Vol 8, Issue 1. P. 78-93, 16. Chart.