“ … it is in the relationship between the leader’s qualities and the followers’ devotion to the leader and belief in the leader’s cause that charisma lies,” (Riggio)
I strongly agree with Ronald E. Riggio’s point about the important role context plays in determining the followers’ need for a charismatic leader. When leaders display confidence and offer a clear message with charisma it indicates a sense of security that can unify followers in troubled times. Charismatic leaders are easy to see and easy to understand; like moths cling to light in the dark, individuals and communities that have been through rough times are more likely to swarm to charismatic leaders than they would be if all was good.
One of the reasons the follower-leader relationship and the context it is formed under is so important is because while charismatic leaders strengths are their confident, charming manner, these strengths can also lead to their downfall. The easiest way to understand how charismatic leaders can be ineffective is to imagine an extraverted student bombarding individuals in THC, unempathetic of their need to get to class or lack of interest: for a shy first year a shout out could be exactly what they needed to have the confidence to approach the table, but for a well-informed junior who also approaches the table in out of politeness and annoyance it could feel as if the person tabling is preaching to the wrong choir. A leader’s charismatic way could also make them less relatable or even seem very one-sided and not open to change that some may want
In a public forum of while charismatic leaders can adapt to the mood of the crowd, if an individual in the crowd is also confident in their state and their own beliefs, a leader who proudly and assertive preaches their own views can come off as arrogant, insensitive, and unable to relate to the average person.
I was always taught that in relationships listening and understanding is much more important than talking. If one takes the time and puts in the effort to truly comprehend what the other is saying, there is a sense of trust formed. Charismatic leaders get this trust by being so outgoing and self-assured that followers figure they must know what they are doing to be so active about it!
Again Riggio talks a lot about contributing and adding to the conversation but he mentions little to nothing about charismatic leaders being openminded and listening to new ideas. This is dangerous in the way that this indicates that they are not treating the followers as equals.
“Charismatic individuals use their emotional expressiveness to arouse and inspire others and to spur them to action. It is also this spontaneous emotional expressiveness that causes people to describe charismatic individuals as animated, emotionally charged, and full of life.”
This was also an interesting section of the passage to me because it made it seem like charismatic individuals did not have to be knowledgeable or noble or even organized, they just had to be good actors, emotional actors. This brings my mind back to Trump’s inauguration with the speech that sounded a little too similar to Obama’s… it makes me think that many leaders are more like puppets than intelligent, informed individuals.
I also connected this trait of “expressiveness to arouse” and being “animated, emotionally charged and full of life” to influencers on social media. They capture snippets of their lives in a photo and combine them with eloquently worded captions that inturn inspire millions to eat healthily or buy certain brands.
I think you did a really good job of describing the importance of the leader-follower dynamic. Yes, charismatic individuals wield great power playing off the emotions of other people, but their success in doing so is highly dependent on the type of follower, the type of leader, and the context of the environment around them. The rise right winged, authoritarian rule in Eastern Europe is a great example of charismatic leaders coming into power in a social and political climate that is favorable for them to do so.
Jess,
This was really good. I really appreciate how you were able to relate these complex ideas to stuff that we would all understand. I agree with you when you say that listening can be more important than talking sometimes. It makes me think about how listening ties into leadership and charisma since the articles talked a lot about how well charismatic people draw in and can get people to listen. But just because you can get other people to listen when you talk doesn’t mean that youre a good listener.
Marisa
I think you did a great job explaining and understanding the reading. I especially appreciated the example you gave to explain the follower-leadership relationship. I also think the example of Trump copying Obama’s inaugural speech was very interesting. I see what you mean but it’s interesting that you chose that as an example
Jess, You did a great job analyzing the idea of charisma, and I noticed that we both focused heavily on the leader-follower relationship more than the characteristics of charisma. While the characteristics are important, I fully agree with you when you say that these traits can also be their downfall. Without the proper portrayal or execution of these assumingely positive characteristics, i.e eloquence, an individual may not be able to provoke the needed reaction from potential followers in order to become a leader.