Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Charismatic Leaders are great... At lining their pockets

Reviewing now the "The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Leadership, Change, and Organizational Development (2013)".

Yes, the title already tells you it's a rather stodgy academic work.

Some interesting insights anyway:

The Two Types of Charismatic Leaders

There are two kinds of charismatic leaders:

House & Howell (1992) distinguish between two kinds of charismatic leadership: personalized (self-aggrandizing, exploitative, authoritarian) and socialized (altruistic, collectively oriented, egalitarian) (House & Aditya, 1997).

While the socialized is value-adding to followers, the former is not:

Charisma... To Line Their Pockets

In a cross-sectional study, Tosi et al. (2004) found no evidence of a relationship between the degree of perceived charisma of CEOs of Fortune 500 companies and their companies’ performances, but interestingly, did find a significant positive relationship between their “charisma” rating and their remuneration package. They add a warning that boards of organizations “should be a bit more circumspect in advocating charisma as a criterion for the selection of CEOs” (p. 414).

I'm not very surprised.

I bet that if you gave the Mach-IV scale to these charismatic leaders, they'd all score as very high Machs.

But it's not necessarily a "moral fail".

It's a natural, maybe even good thing, to use one's skills for personal well-being.
After all, that's the reason we're all here pursuing self-development and power intelligence / skills.

Where the ethical test would fail is if the business and the people around were paying the costs.
But it doesn't seem to be the case on the larger sample (albeit I'm sure it can happen on individual companies).

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?