Why
does charismatic leadership sometimes lead to disastrous negative
consequences? Explain, with reference to the four charismatic
theories, how the influence processes combine with leader behavior to
produce disastrous results.
Charismatic
leadership will likely lead to disaster if there are no other
qualifications of leadership such as competence or integrity. For
charismatic leadership to be used without the benefits of the other
traits appeals to the worst of human tendencies. The followers of
such leadership do not make rational decisions and instead base
decisions on personal identification, “which involves a follower's
desire to please and imitate the leader” (Yukl, 2012, p.312). Yukl
offers one psychoanalytic explanation, “followers suffering from
fear, guilt, or alienation may experience a feeling of euphoric
empowerment and transcendence by submerging their identity in that of
a seemingly superhuman leader” (2012, p.315)
Identify a
charismatic leader—religious, political, military, or social—who
caused harm to his subordinates or followers through his influence.
Why do you think this leader was initially able to attract and
control his followers?
President Obama is such a “leader”. His actions have damaged both the country as a political entity and his party at the polling place. His election was brought on by the failure of the Bush presidency; Yukl states that “charisma occurs during a social crisis when a leader emerges with a radical vision that offers a solution to the crisis and attracts followers who believe in the vision” (2012, p.310).
Which characteristics of this leader led to the harm-causing behavior? How could the facilitating conditions have been used for positive charisma?
Obama's reactions to events have shown his lack of both integrity or competence, prime requirements of leadership success. There is a exacerbating issue of charismatic leadership: “Narcissism—a personality trait encompassing grandiosity, arrogance, self-absorption, entitlement, fragile self-esteem, and hostility—is an attribute of many powerful leaders. Narcissistic leaders have grandiose belief systems and leadership styles, and are generally motivated by their needs for power and admiration rather than empathetic concern for the constituents and institutions they lead “(Rosenthal & Pittinsky, 2006, abstract). Yukl gives one of many problems caused by charismatic leadership; “Denial of problems and failures reduces organizational learning (2012, p. 319). We will use just this one issue as an example of the many in the Obama administration. In this example we will look at Fast and Furious, in which three American lawmen, and hundreds of Mexican citizens were murdered as a consequence. ATF both knowingly allowed weapons flow into Mexico and denied any participation (Fisher, 2013, p.170). Obama's justification for invoking executive privilege to cover up this issue was contradicted by an OIG (Office of the Inspector General) investigation (Fisher, 2013, p.181).
Can this leader's charisma be explained by attribution theory or the self-concept theory? Provide reasons for your choice.
Attribution theory relies in part on the leaders “expertise” (Yukl, 2012, p. 311). However, we may apply “expertise” here as qualities that appeal to the sort of people that follow charismatic leaders. Yukl provides some of these; novel and appealing vision, emotional appeals to values, confidence and optimism, and finally, unconventional behavior (2012, pp. 311,312) Yukl contends that some theorists believe that attributions of charisma are limited to followers who lack self-esteem and a clear self-identity (2012, p. 318)
Can charismatic leadership evolve into transformational leadership? How are these theories different from transactional leadership theories?
“Success is possible for a narcissistic charismatic with the expertise to make good decisions” (Yukl, 2012, p.320); however, for transformational leadership to happen requires other traits of successful leadership such as integrity of competence.
Why were followers influenced so powerfully by this leader? Was it a result of psychodynamic processes or social contagion?
Yukl
explains: “The intense personal identification of followers with
such leaders is explained in terms of psychodynamic processes such as
regression, transference, and projection. Regression involves a
return to feelings and behaviors that were typical of a younger age
(2012, p. 315). In addition, Yukl states “Followers who lack a
clear self-identity and are confused and anxious about their lives
are more attracted to a strong leader with a personalized power
orientation who can provide a clear social identity for them as
disciples or loyal supporters” (2012, p. 318) Another concept that
can explain such follower behavior is social identification, in which
one regards “membership as one of their most important social
identities” (2012, p. 313). However, emotional contagion, in which
a “leader who is very positive and enthusiastic can influence the
mood of followers” (Yukl, 2012, p. 314), can also be a factor.
Fisher,
L. (2013). The law: Obama’s executive privilege and Holder’s
contempt: “Operation Fast and Furious.” Presidential Studies
Quarterly, 43(1), 167–185. Retrieved November 18, 2014
from
http://search.proquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/docview/1368907285/22F8A1FB92E24FEDPQ/18?accountid=87314
Oakley,
B. (2009, August 3). Why most journalists are democrats: A View from
the Soviet socialist trenches. Psychology Today. Retrieved
November 27, 2014 from
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/scalliwag/200908/why-most-journalists-are-democrats-view-the-soviet-socialist-trenches
Rosenthal,
S. A., & Pittinsky, T. L. (2006). Narcissistic leadership. The
Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 617–633.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.005
Yukl,
G. A. (2012). Leadership in Organizations, 8th Edition. [VitalSource
Bookshelf version]. Retrieved November 27, 2014 from
http://digitalbookshelf.southuniversity.edu/books/9781256650225
What
challenges do you foresee in overseeing the correctional officers?
Why? How can you apply the principles of the path-goal theory to
ensure the success of the task entrusted to you?
The
immediate challenge I see in this environment is that I expect to
lose more officers due to the leave policies; “subordinates
will not accept a decision made in an autocratic manner” (Amtmann &
Evans, 2001, para. 34). Officers are under a great deal of stress in
the best of correctional settings; “For the correctional officer
prison life is filled with confrontation, mendaciousness and force.
To be challenged mentally and physically and to have your integrity
tested is an event that reoccurs over and over for the correctional
officer”(Micieli, 2008, p.5). To potentially counter this, I may
be able to use path-goal principles; “leaders
can motivate subordinates by influencing their perceptions about the
likely consequences of different levels of effort. Subordinates will
perform better when they have clear and accurate role expectations,
they perceive that a high level of effort is necessary to attain task
objectives, they are optimistic that it is possible to achieve the
task objectives, and they perceive that high performance will result
in beneficial outcomes” (Yukl, 2012, p.165). In order to use these
principles, I have to be able to show my officers that the high
performance in “gutting out” the overwork and stress will lead to
a beneficial outcome like keeping their jobs. Unfortunately, the
system is not giving me the resources to do anything past feeding
CO's into a meat-grinder. But I can put my best face on it, and pitch
in to give my subordinates as much rest as possible. “Ours is not
to wonder why...”
On
the other hand, “some situations have so many neutralizers that it
is difficult or impossible for a leader to succeed” (Yukl, 2012,
p.166).
How will you
use supportive and directive leadership to motivate the correctional
officers assigned to you?
In
a dangerous work environment, “supportive leadership increases
subordinate confidence, effort, and satisfaction”(Yukl, 2012,
p.166). I would minimize directive leadership methods, as they add
stress to already over stressed CO personnel. Finn identifies
supervisor demands as a cause of CO stress. (2000, p. 13).
Can you apply
the situational leadership theory to improve the relationship with
your officers? If yes, how? If not, then why? Can situational
leadership be applied to the inmates?
Using
situational leadership theory will be the best practice for dealing
with both guards and inmates. The mediating variables will vary from
day to day. Although I had stated I would minimize directive
leadership with the guards, there would be times it would be the best
approach, and the guard would benefit from it as well, even if he did
not appreciate it at the time.
How can
participative and achievement-oriented leadership motivate these
officers? Can it be used to motivate the inmates?
Participative leadership would improve officer morale. Roy, Novak, & Miksaj-Todorovic cite “dissatisfaction with their share in decision making processes” as one cause of burnout in older correctional officers (2010, p. 190). Achievement-oriented methods would work as well; Roy et al also cited “ loss of purpose and meaning” as a similar cause of burnout. We have already seen that achievement-oriented methods work with the inmates as their move to a minimum security unit as a reward.
What are the situational variables that might affect the application of the path-goal theory of leadership?
Some variables include the potential loss of additional officers, increasing workload; inmate assaults on officers, adding to stress levels, and domestic situations adding to officer stress. “Shift work and overtime can create stress by preventing officers from attending important family functions” (Finn, 2000, p. 16)
Amtmann,
J., & Evans, R. (2001). Decision-making processes of correctional
and educational leaders. Corrections Compendium. Retrieved
August 18, 2014 from
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Decision-making+processes+of+correctional+and+educational+leaders.-a082510862
Finn,
P. (2000). Addressing correctional officer stress: Programs and
strategies. Issues and practices. U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs. Retrieved from
http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED449457
Micieli,
J. (2008). Stress and the effects of working in a high security
prison. Rockville, MD: National Institute of Justice.
Retrieved August 18, 2014 from
http://www.nyscorrections.org/224105.pdf
Roy,
S., Novak, T., & Miksaj-Todorovic, L. (2010). Job burnout among
prison staff in the United States and Croatia: A preliminary
comparative study. International Journal of Criminal Justice
Sciences, 5(1). Retrieved August 21, 2014 from
http://www.sascv.org/ijcjs/pdfs/royetaljcjs2010vol5iss1.pdf
Yukl,
G. A. (2012). Leadership in Organizations, 8th Edition. [VitalSource
Bookshelf version]. Retrieved November 27, 2014 from
http://digitalbookshelf.southuniversity.edu/books/9781256650225
No comments:
Post a Comment