What exactly is charisma? We all have our own idea of what it is, and we all see charisma in our own way, so is it possible to use charisma as trait that we can apply to a person to say they are a charismatic leader? If so, who would fall into this category over the past fifty years?
Oxford dictionary defines charisma as “Compelling attractiveness or charm that can inspire devotion in others”. The dictionary also gives us synonyms by which we can relate to this word like: “charm, presence, personality, strength of character, magnetism, attractiveness, appeal, and allure”. This opens the word to fit any number of people. Northouse (2013.) also provides us some clues to help us identify this elusive charisma: “They are strong role models for the beliefs and values they want their followers to adopt”, appear competent to followers”, “they articulate ideological goals that have moral overtones”, “communicate high expectations for followers and they exhibit confidence in followers’ abilities to meet these expectations”, and “arouse task-relevant motives in followers that may include affiliation, power, or esteem”. Other documents allude to other factors that expand or narrow these definitions, but I will just concentrate on these two for this article.
Regardless of leader being considered for this trait, not everyone will consider the leader charismatic. Each individual will have their own view of each individual. Some may think that the person is attractive. Some may find them charming. Some will thing that the leader has appeal, personality, or allure. And what exactly how is one to measure presence? All of the qualities listed will be rated by individuals differently. However, not every leader will appeal to everyone, and it is the general effect that they have on the masses that is used to determine their ‘likeability’.
I think that charisma can only be determined later in the leaders life based on the impact that they have had to inspire, get things done, and make a difference. These are the qualities that make the most difference in the charismatic model. In many cases it may be who the leaders surrounds themselves with to plan the words, actions, reactions and muster. The delivery of what is said is just as important as the words. They must inspire, provoke thought, and elicit genuine enthusiasm among others to get them to believe that what is being said is important and worth following.
In the end it comes down to the followers. How well the leader was able to garner the followers given the resources that they had surrounded themselves with. The inspiration they conveyed. The ability to garner the resources necessary to make the vision come true. Only then will the leader be able to demonstrate charisma to the point that they can say that they do possess it.
Even all of this does not narrow down or define how you would determine if someone has charisma. History has not even been able to definitively determine who actually was a charismatic leader. Each list is dependent upon a long list of criteria and subjective determination. Would you consider the following historical figures charismatic? The likes of: Napoleon Bonaparte, Jesus, Adolph Hitler, Creaser, Lincoln, F.D. Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, J.F. Kennedy, Winston Churchill, Genghis Kahn, or Fidel Castro. Many lists have all of these as charismatic leaders. Some would agree, others would not.
In the end I feel it comes down to individuals and if they feel that the leader was worthy of the trait ‘charisma’. This will always be a debatable trait. We just need to understand that it is, and expect that what one person would consider charismatic, another may not.
Citations
Definition of charisma in English:. (n.d.). Retrieved March 29, 2015, from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/charisma
Bacal, R. (n.d.). Leadership and Leadership Development For Today. Retrieved March 29, 2015, from http://leadertoday.org/faq/charisma.htm
Varghese, S. (2010, January 25). The Power Of Charisma. Retrieved March 29, 2015, from http://www.forbes.com/2010/01/25/charisma-speaking-communication-leadership-managing-inspiration.html
Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2015). PSYCH 485 Lesson 10: Transformational Leadership. Retrieved March 29, 2015 from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1486679/modules/items/15963878
Jesse Richard Blake says
This was a very interesting blog to read. I agree with you the definition, or who we would define as charismatic, is largely based one’s own opinion of what charisma is.
I thought that the portion near the end where you posed the question, “Would you consider the following historical figures charismatic? The likes of: Napoleon Bonaparte, Jesus, Adolph Hitler, Creaser, Lincoln, F.D. Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, J.F. Kennedy, Winston Churchill, Genghis Kahn, or Fidel Castro.”, was a great question. In fact I do believe that the people mentioned in the list you provided are all charismatic in there own way.
There is no doubt that Ronald Reagan and Adolf Hitler were both charismatic and had a great way with words.
Ronald Reagan used his words to fight for the rights and freedoms of millions of people that he cared for , in the U.S. and around the world. He stood up to the biggest foe America had at the time and through his toughness and charisma, he convinced Mikal Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin wall and avoided a major war.
Hitler, on the other hand, used his words and charismatic attitude to convince millions of people that an entire ethnicity had to be extinguished. Hitler convinced people that the reason for the way their lives were was because of a Jewish person and that they need to kill them all in order for the German race to reign supreme. To anyone that time and place, it sounds like complete insanity, but to those who were living in those areas and time, it made perfect sense.
Charisma can be defined as something good or bad, it all comes down to how each individual uses that talent.
Klatann Thomas says
“I believe that Warren Buffett and Floyd Mayweather Junior are NOT hanging out because Mr. Buffett is charismatic. ”
I have no idea how to edit my own comment, so….
“I could NOT agree with you more in the end it really does come down to the followers and how malleable they are.”
Klatann Thomas says
I appreciated your blog in that you showcase the charisma is as personal as the truth. Following a leader is not the same as listening to a musician and buying all their records. The interesting component of charisma as you cite is the “devotion” component. From a personal perspective, my view is that charisma and magic fall in the same arena. They’re entertaining for a while but at some point, once you’ve seen it…
On a current basis I readily throw away “charisma” for “effective.” In a certain point productivity outweighs “charm, presence, personality, strength of character, magnetism, attractiveness, appeal, and allure”. And thus we kind of understand where our Bill Gates and Warren Buffett types fit in. I believe that Warren Buffett and Floyd Mayweather Junior are hanging out because Mr. Buffett is charismatic. That relationship exists and will continue to exist because Mr. Buffett is a wealth of knowledge and wisdom and experiential productivity that even the greatest pound for pound boxer of the current decade sees utility in.
I recall being on a movie set with Anthony Hopkins. I watched this very senior gentleman navigate from person-to-person with a great degree of self-confidence, he told stories (about his wife, cat, music. etc.), he entertained and when the director called “action” he went to work as a true professional. To some extent I understood his charm and charisma, his depth in the entertainment industry had huge connections (he could vouch for whoever he chose) and he seemed tremendously at ease with all of his attributes. He was as you stated, very likable. I think the differential was I saw a person, and wanted nothing from them other than to “do my job.” There were no assumptions about an end state and all the possibilities of becoming… Maybe I’m off-base but I sense that charisma is almost something you have to be willingly receptive to. A sort of predisposition to the “magic.”
Agreeing with a phenomenal speaker is not the same as following blindly. I tend to assign somewhat of a negative connotation to the term follower, and perhaps that’s the kryptonite to charismatic leadership. I also believe that very much like any other behaviorally extreme person I can’t really see a truly charismatic leader filled with self-promotion (“Whoa, how charismatic am I?” or “Unh, charisma up in your face!”). In entertainment industry they call it the “it” factor, and they like to say you have it or you don’t.
I could agree with you more in the end it really does come down to the followers and how malleable they are.
Great blog. Thanks tremendously.