The Jepson School of Leadership Studies has in its school description that “Students look at leadership as it was, as it is, and as it should be,” (University of Richmond); my first thought when reading these two works about Martin Luther King, Jr. was that he is a prime example of a leader as it was and should be. While to some he might be representative of a holiday we celebrate in January or a piece of our history class, he holds one of the most important legacies for leaders in the struggle for racial inequality and for leaders in general. Bill George, in “Leadership Lessons from Martin Luther King, Jr.” indicates that MLK holds a legacy of “…staying true to your beliefs, pursuing your purpose, and exhibiting courage under pressure and profound lessons for leaders in all walks of life,” (Camerota, Harvard Business School). MLK’s progress toward racial equality was a pivotal turning point in the history of the American South through his implementation of civil disobedience, civil rights protests, and charismatic leadership methods such as those from Riggio’s empirical article from The Encyclopedia of Leadership.
The readings about MLK directly connect to the lesson in class on charismatic leadership because he is the epitome of a charismatic leader, in my opinion. Carson’s article is introduced by saying that his effectiveness stems from his “…that of effectively communicating Negro aspirations to white people, of making non-violent direct action respectable in the eyes of the white majority,” (Carson 27). Charismatic leadership traits include that of effective communication skills and being influential to followers (Riggio 3). MLK was able to appeal to the masses through his charismatic leadership methods. His eloquence in works such as the famous “I Have a Dream” speech and enthusiasm in his marches on Montgomery and Washington represent charismatic leadership, in my opinion.
I agree with the author that he had a much greater contribution to racial equality and to the future of leaders; he utilized “other forms of intellectual and political leadership” (Carson 29) in addition to charismatic methods. Labeling MLK’s leadership methods as charismatic are sufficient, but we must not do so in a way that eliminates the efforts of other leaders such as Rosa Parks and E.D. Nixon, just to name a few. Analyzing MLK’s charismatic skills as the influential figure as he was is significant, but when studying leadership it is important to acknowledge all sides of the struggle. After reading this article, I want to ensure my future endeavors in leadership are not in a way that discredits significant contributors to the cause or issue at hand.
Anna Marston
I agree that is important to note how effective a communicator MLK was. He was really able to motivate those around him to take action and thus bolster a movement that was already going to occur. Furthermore, the fact that he was able to communicate effectively with white people too is important to remember. A movement can only be strengthened by communicating its goals to many. I also liked that Carson pointed out what an important figure that MLK was, but noted that he is not the only person involved in this movement and humanized him to show us that we should look for his traits in ourselves.
It is important not to discredit other significant civil rights leaders. I very much agree with that and, personally, never thought of MLK as the only key player in the Civil Rights Movement. I agree with Carson in that no ONE person (man, woman, or whatever) can revolutionize… anything. No one person can start anything that wasn’t already there/in the works.
That said, history is full of Great Men/Women… And that seems to just be how we record things. The Great Man Theory is so woven into our society that every event needs a face, but that also makes each event… unique, and easier to remember. Because people remember people. So I have to wonder… is it because people-are-easier-to-identify-than-events that sparked this whole Great Man thing. Or is it because of the whole Great Man thing that we use people to label events.