10.3. An evolutionary model of “bad charisma”
In the discussion of “bad charisma” above (4.2.1), when charismatic leadership is used to antisocial ends, several different typologies were proposed. In contrast to identifying different types of charisma, the account below proposes a developmental/evolutionary model, wherein the different types form a continuum. The advantage of this over a typology is that it raises the awareness that “good” charisma can and will turn into “bad” charisma in certain situations, and secondly that there is a natural tendency for the charismatic element of the leadership to expand over time in the sense that “power corrupts”.
In the first stage of evolution, the transformational leader develops and expands their …show more content…
To start with, all transformational and then charismatic leadership needs to be “good enough” to be able to improve organisational performance. In the language of “socialised and personalised” charisma, it has to start off as sufficiently “socialised” for the authority base to develop; for the person to receive promotion; for the individual to develop the Weberian distinction and exceptionality required as a charismatic prerequisite. The development of “bad” charisma from “good” is driven by adverse contingencies. These contingencies can be in two main areas – firstly related to the business environmental context, and secondly related to the personality of the charismatic …show more content…
There are not two types of charismatic leader, all good charismatics can develop into bad charismatics in a particular set of circumstances. As leaders and followers, we must constantly be vigilant; we cannot reassure ourselves that because out leader was good and charismatic today, the situation will be the same tomorrow.
10.4 Organisational effectiveness, managerial agency
The concept of “managerial agency” is the core and central finding and contribution of the research, providing a partial response to the research question of how managers are effective within organisations. The model combines four theoretical strands that have emerged;
• the object relations theory of structure and agency (3.3.3) with its central argument that structure and agency are ontologically identical, namely ideas held collectively and individually respectively;
• Archer’s Critical Realist Morphogenic model linking agency, culture and structure, (@@@@);
• accounts of charisma (@@@@)
• the accounts of discipline and power as internalised structure of Foucault and others
In the discussion of “bad charisma” above (4.2.1), when charismatic leadership is used to antisocial ends, several different typologies were proposed. In contrast to identifying different types of charisma, the account below proposes a developmental/evolutionary model, wherein the different types form a continuum. The advantage of this over a typology is that it raises the awareness that “good” charisma can and will turn into “bad” charisma in certain situations, and secondly that there is a natural tendency for the charismatic element of the leadership to expand over time in the sense that “power corrupts”.
In the first stage of evolution, the transformational leader develops and expands their …show more content…
To start with, all transformational and then charismatic leadership needs to be “good enough” to be able to improve organisational performance. In the language of “socialised and personalised” charisma, it has to start off as sufficiently “socialised” for the authority base to develop; for the person to receive promotion; for the individual to develop the Weberian distinction and exceptionality required as a charismatic prerequisite. The development of “bad” charisma from “good” is driven by adverse contingencies. These contingencies can be in two main areas – firstly related to the business environmental context, and secondly related to the personality of the charismatic …show more content…
There are not two types of charismatic leader, all good charismatics can develop into bad charismatics in a particular set of circumstances. As leaders and followers, we must constantly be vigilant; we cannot reassure ourselves that because out leader was good and charismatic today, the situation will be the same tomorrow.
10.4 Organisational effectiveness, managerial agency
The concept of “managerial agency” is the core and central finding and contribution of the research, providing a partial response to the research question of how managers are effective within organisations. The model combines four theoretical strands that have emerged;
• the object relations theory of structure and agency (3.3.3) with its central argument that structure and agency are ontologically identical, namely ideas held collectively and individually respectively;
• Archer’s Critical Realist Morphogenic model linking agency, culture and structure, (@@@@);
• accounts of charisma (@@@@)
• the accounts of discipline and power as internalised structure of Foucault and others