Hitler lost his father at a young age. He was not a good student and dropped out of school to pursue art. He was obsessed with art, but did not get into art school. In fact he was rejected twice. He lived in a homeless shelter where he came up with his Anti-Semitism. He served in the military in WWI and his Anti-Semitism ideas grew stronger. After WWI, he started his political career and was later jailed for a year for the “Beer Hall Putsch” in Munich, where he wanted to start a revolution. In jail, Hitler wrote “Mein Kampf” meaning my struggles. This showed what he wanted to do with the German Society.( Adolf Hitler. (2015). The Biography.com website.)
Despite Hitler’s childhood and his rejections in life, he was a persuasive leader. He had complete power and influence over the people of Germany. How could someone who was unattractive, unsocial, somewhat of a failure, and extremely narcissist become such an effective leader? The answer is through power and influence. “Power is the capacity to produce effects on others”. (PUS, WC, 2015). Hitler was a failure in the beginning of his political career. It was from this failure that he learned to use his referent power to grow in the political world. With this growth, he began to influence those around him by strengthening relationships with his followers. (PSU, WC, 2015.) People became mesmerized by what Hitler was selling to them. Hitler continued to use his referent power to satisfy his incessant need to gain personalized power because ultimately he was selfish, impulsive and lacking in self-control (PSU, WC, 2015.). Hitler used his inspirational appeal to convince the Germans to annihilate an entire race of people.
Hitler gave his speeches and arouse “enthusiasm and emotions” thereby convincing people that his decisions were based on the good of Germany (PSU, WC, 2015.). As a leader, his power came from what Hitler had around him and what he wanted to achieve as a country. He used his inspirational speeches to explain that Germany needed to be cleansed from all the people that diseased the pure race. This was not a novel idea. He took it from the Egyptian culture. He sold himself with great art and befriended incredible movie directors, who showed him as amazing and powerful. This became social proof to the German people and as a result they were influenced by his leadership despite his drug addiction (PSU, WC, 2015.). The German world only saw the great propaganda that Hitler advertised. The strength of Germany is what he wanted to show the world to try to gain further influence over people. After gaining a vast amount of followers, he used his coercive power to keep people in line whenever his motives or actions were questioned. Anyone who questioned him or disobeyed his orders were punished (PSU, WC, 2015.). He used the many different facets of power and influence to first gain control of an entire country, to maintain that power through coercion and fulfill his maniacal goals. He could not be a more perfect example of how power and influence creates a leader.
References:
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2015). PSYCH 485, Module 7: Power and Influence.
Adolf Hitler. (2015). The Biography.com website. http://www.biography.com/people/adolf-hitler-9340144.
Great post highlighting the dark side of leadership and referent power that Hitler exhibited. Although not an ideal leader that individuals thinking of replicating, Hitler was successful on most accounts at getting his followers to do what he wanted. He certainly channeled his narcissistic behaviors to fulfill his malicious intentions no matter the cost.
I would agree with Ron’s comments that had Hitler used his leadership skills for good intentions, the results may be entirely different. He may have been able to rally more for peace and helped to calm the worldwide tensions during that difficult time. Unfortunately, he chose a different path, and I would question if some of that came from the rejection in life that he had experienced that you had mention. Did the constant rejection have a deeper psychological effect and manifest in Hitler feeling that he would get what he wanted and make others suffer because of the rejection? Or was he just inherently bad? We will never know, but can certain not doubt that he is a very successful leader, no matter how horrible the intent.
The Third Reich was unfortunately an effective organization. Although its fall is due to poor military strategy, LMX states that high-quality leader-member exchanges produce greater organizational commitment. I have not studied Hitler from a leadership perspective and find that there are too many unknowns, was the entire Army committed to Hitler’s idea of the Arian society, or were they fearful of being killed? Were leaders actually developing relationships with their subordinates like were in the US Military or was their leadership style coercive instead of that of which is outlined in LMX? LMX states that leadership is a process that is centered on the interactions between leaders and followers. (Northouse, 2013, p 161) I cannot say that I have seen the interaction between the leaders in the Third Reich as I have seen in the US Military. I would tend to believe that the German military was in lock step and following what they were told in order to live, while the US Military was dedicated to a cause and the leadership did demonstrate the LMX process that was previously stated.
I commend you on the bold move to introduce Hitler as a leader, because he was. Though the atrocities he committed and his quest for world domination was repulsive, he commanded the respect of many followers. Adolph Hitler, like other notorious villains (Jim Jones, Charles Manson, Attila the Hun, Genghis Kahn, and Stalin, to name a few) exercised power and influence over their followers to commendable levels. One notable characteristic of leaders like Hitler, Jones, and Manson, is that they had incredible charisma that earned referent power.
Often, we witness horrific events by exceptionally evil people, and we dismiss these people as insane or manipulative. Although both may be true, we do not consider that leadership may play a larger role, and that if those same people had used their power for good they would be celebrated like Alexander the Great or George Washington.
A leader is not exclusively good or exclusively bad, they simply command some level of loyalty from followers. Essentially, they “drink the Kool-Aid” because they believe in the genuine nature of the person. Going back to the beginning of our course, I believed a great deal in the trait theory of leadership. Though I have not dismissed any of the theories as false, I have yet to be convinced that traits do not play an extraordinary role in leadership.
I have studied, in great detail, the People’s Temple massacre at Jonestown and the Stanford Prison Experiment (which shows how power can corrupt). Jonestown is a study in the consequence of leadership, whereas Stanford shows the fragile nature of power and followership.
I applaud your post! If power and influence create a leader, as you propose, than what are your thoughts on emergent leadership? I would offer that leadership is a seed, planted in a ripe soil of social structure. Power is the water needed to grow, and influence is the sunlight needed to blossom. Without power or influence though, the seed still exists…. It just simply will not grow.
If you have the time, watch this powerful leadership documentary on Jim Jones:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jim+jones+documentary
Ron Neff