Charisma: Inherent or Acquired?

What is charisma?

Charisma is a magnificent property of mesmerizing and others. According to the prevailing wisdom in society, charisma is a divine gift that some people possess, by which they will not be included in the list of ordinary people, but will be treated as superhuman or extraordinary men. Charismatic leadership is heterogeneous, it can be political, business, religious. Charisma belongs to the personality of a person. In simple charisma is personal magnetism. Charisma is the reason that people admire some leaders like anything, for example, the Americans who follow Mr. Richard M. Nixon even after his involvement in the Water Gate scandal. Charisma doesn’t always show a positive impact; it has its own negatives. India’s largest corporate fraud was led by Mr. Ramalinga Raju, who was one of the most effective and charismatic leaders who led the Satyam group of companies to one of the leading IT solutions companies in India.

Is the charisma inherent or acquired?

Against the prevailing wisdom that prevails in society, charisma can be acquired by any individual. Charisma is often considered a trait. The trait is the internal character of a human being, such as knowledge, energy, etc. Traits like knowledge are not innate, they are acquired, but charisma is an exceptional trait. Charisma is innate in everyone, but in different amounts. Some leaders like JFK, Bill Clinton are born with miraculous charisma and are considered gifted. The parameters of charisma are communication skills, risk taking, authenticity, etc. All of these characters can be developed by one person, which in turn enhances a person’s charisma. According to the attribution theory, charisma depends on people’s perception. A person is charismatic if and only if people feel charismatic. Steve Jobs was conflicting for some people, but for some he is charismatic, it shows that the charisma of an individual will depend on the environment in which he exists. If people need character and the leader has that character, then he is considered charismatic. There are many cases where a person who was rejected by people at some point later proved to be charismatic, as in the case of Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Regan. Some people will emerge as charismatic leaders after great speeches like ‘I have a dream …’ by Martin Lutur King. Then the charisma can be acquired by an individual. Muthandar al Zeidi, a journalist who threw a shoe at the American head of state became charismatic in Iraq, it happened overnight, but the burning thoughts about him are never overnight. Years of Iraqi blood spilled him They led him to take the initiative and made everyone follow him, admire him. he

Is charisma required to be an effective leader?

Charisma is not required to be an effective leader. Creativity, innovation, anything can propel a leader towards effectiveness. If you can innovate at something like Facebook, Microsoft, or Google, you will rank as an effective leader regardless of your level of charisma.

Larry page and Sergey Brin of Stanford University had significantly low charisma, but they managed hundreds of employees efficiently and made Google a multi-million dollar business. This example justifies that charisma is not required to be an effective leader. Charisma is just an added boost for a normal leader to become extraordinary. Even without charisma, a leader can make you an effective leader by having other leadership qualities at an extraordinary level, as in the case of Jerry, a former CEO of Yahoo! Mr. Yang Jerry has great vision, but without charisma, he went on his way to success.

The space for charism depends on the field; In religion and politics, charisma has a role to play, not in business. If you can show that your ideas are compelling, you can be an effective leader.

Transformational and charismatic leadership

Yes, both charismatic leadership and transformational leadership have similarities, in that the transformational leader may well be charismatic. Charismatic leadership is part of transformational leadership because for a leader to inspire subordinates to work beyond their own interests, they must have charisma. The ultimate goal of both leaders is to inspire employees more than they can do. For the most part, both leadership concepts are the same but the charismatic leader, whose personal vision inspires employees, while transformational leaders make employees aware of their goals and inspire them. Transformational leaders have a basic approach to transforming the organization and possibly their followers, the charismatic leader may not want to change anything. Transformational leaders are mostly charismatic like Abraham Lincoln. If they have good intentions towards others, they can rise higher and transform an entire company. The charismatic leader gathers followers by force of character and magnetism, rather than any form of external power or influence.

Transformational leaders encourage their subordinates to work for the good of the organization rather than entirely for their own personal gain. Charismatic leadership is also about creating a one-of-a-kind group identity that is very separate from the other group. Leaders make a separate image of the group in the minds of the followers, so that the followers can simply recognize each other with the group, which in turn gives the followers a sense of belonging. The charismatic leader has fantastic self-confidence; they always do what they say, they are patient and show great willpower. Transformational leaders increase subordinates’ awareness of the importance of their daily jobs and the importance of doing them well. Transformational leaders create subordinates who are aware of their requirements for expansion, development, and individual achievement. They have a mental image of how good things could be in an administration that contrasts with how things are today. Charismatic leaders undoubtedly communicate this vision to their followers and, through their own passion and encouragement, induce their followers to passionately support their vision. Charismatic leaders tend to contain a high degree of self-confidence and self-esteem, which further encourages supporters to respect and admire them. Charismatic leaders’ opening attempt is to understand the context in which they are doing their work. They place great importance on people’s moods and feelings and try to bond with them personally.

All transformational leaders are charismatic, but not all charismatic leaders are transformative, for example, Sam Walton and Abraham Lincoln are transformational leaders and also charismatic. Jim Jones, who is famous for his charisma but is never transformative, so yeah.

Joseph Bizo Tito.

Why flexibility?

In our rapidly changing world, technology advances faster than we can keep track as virtually all companies go global and especially when climate change threatens our people. In the especially near future, organizations will be looking for managers who have the skills of sustainable management. It is imperative that an effective leader be flexible. The way in which the change in trends suggests us to have a

Flexible manager to his nature of work and characteristics corresponding to that job.

Flexible and effective leadership

The general qualities of the excellent leader are his aptitude to flex, modify and adapt his style according to the situation, context and circumstances he is going through. Effective leaders have their own decisions and will be able to act differently, think differently, and seek inspiration from different sources. All of these are the good qualities of flexible leadership, and a flexible leader must make his own decisions without the help of others. The effective leader will have a degree of manner and can use to adapt to the various disciplines that they encounter on a daily basis and are adjustable to any situation. Leader’s reason to be prepared to respond to a large distribution of positions, jobs Every time the leader often wonders which leadership style is the best and wants to show his good qualities and wants to become the role model for others. Delegate differently and effectively to team members. Leaders at all levels must develop the ability to figure out exactly what challenge to focus on at any given moment and the best way to respond to it. Even for leaders themselves, manners and formal programs will change as conditions change. Common sense alone should ensure that bringing in one position might be less effective in a different position, or when conditions change for reason, leaders at all stages motivate originating power to figure out which challenge to concern at a time. Given, and the best way to react to the same leadership challenge, the approximate combination of leadership activity and formal plans will alter as the conditioned reaction changes.

Situational leadership is often taken as the flexible one, where a manager needs to work in different types of situations in which he cannot predict the outcome. The need for such people has increased enormously in the recent past, as the global economy needs people with those skills to adapt to all kinds of roles. An effective leader is one who understands the group, the goal to be achieved and how to achieve it. In general, an effective manager is task-oriented, but in times when the way he manages teams made them flexible to work in one type of work environment.

According to contingency theory, no one management principle is valid for all situations. The effective leader will have many leadership styles and will use them according to the situation.