Examine what charismatic leadership is, and what transactional leadership is. Discuss what different types of motivation techniques would be adopted by these two types of leader in a large organization. Charismatic leadership means a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he or she is set apart from ordinary people and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. A devotion to the specific and exceptional sanctity, heroism, or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns revealed or ordained by that erson.
Endowment with the gift of divine grace. The process of influencing major changes in the attitudes and assumptions of organization members, and building commitment for the organization’s objectives. Leadership that has a magnetic effect on people. In combination with individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, and inspirational leadership, a component of transformational leadership. Charismatic leaders have exceptional communication skills. Small-business owners need these skills to motivate employees through the difficult periods and to help them stay centered through the good times.
Charismatic leaders are equally adept in one-on-one and group settings and are able to communicate technical details in simple easy-to-understand language. They are also able to transfer their inspiration and communication skills to their groups. The group members believe in one another and in the power of teamwork. Leadership can appear from unexpected places, which propels a company forward, even when a charismatic leader departs. And it has masterful communication skill, to inspire people, have a colorful language, exciting metaphors and analogies.
Charismatic leadership tries to impress team members and enlist their devotion for he leader. This leadership style encourages communication that reinforces or promotes the leader’s ideas, information or feelings, but discourages communications that involve criticism or challenging the leader’s actions or decisions. For example by Hitler, he was known for his mastery of oratory. He could give a helluva speech. I would say he was very charismatic, comparable to FDR and Churchill at the time. He was basically a homeless bum in Vienna who rose to lead the world’s finest professional army in it’s quest to rule Europe.
It was his charisma, his power of public speaking, which enabled his rise to power. He aroused very deep emotions in his listeners. Unfortunately, some of those emotions led to one of darkest chapters in the history of the earth. The topic of charismatic leadership has been challenged from two major standpoints: 0 The misdeeds of charismatic leaders Some leadership researchers doubt that charisma can be accurately defined and measured. Conducting research about charisma is akin to conducting research about high quality. Furthermore, even when one leader is deemed to be charismatic, he or she has many detractors.
According to the concept of leadership polarity, leaders are ften either revered or vastly unpopular. The downside to charismatic leaders is that they can believe more in themselves than in their teams. This can create the risk that a project or even an entire organization might collapse if the leader leaves. A charismatic leader might believe that she can do no wrong, even when others are warning her about the path she’s on; and this feeling of invincibility can ruin a team or an organization. Also, in the followers’ eyes, success is directly connected to the presence of the charismatic leader.
As such, charismatic leadership carries great responsibility, and it needs a ong-term commitment from the leader. This leadership style starts with the idea that team members agree to obey their leader when they accept a Job. The “transaction” usually involves the organization paying team members in return for their effort and compliance. The leader has a right to “punish” team members if their work doesn’t meet an appropriate standard. Although this might sound controlling and paternalistic, transactional leadership offers some benefits. For one, this leadership style clarifies everyone’s roles and responsibilities.
Another benefit is that, because transactional leadership Judges eam members on performance, people who are ambitious or who are motivated by external rewards – including compensation – often thrive. The downside of this leadership style is that team members can do little to improve their Job satisfaction. It can feel stifling, and it can lead to high staff turnover. Transactional leadership is really a type of management, not a true leadership style, because the focus is on short-term tasks. It has serious limitations for knowledge-based or creative work. However, it can be effective in other situations.
The transactional model of leadership ssumes a very simplistic view of motivation, which fails to account for individual differences. Transactional leadership is based on the premise that employees will perform an action for a simple reward or to avoid punishment. A transactional leader does not typically recognize or praise employees who meet expectations. Because the leader views the Job as a simple exchange work for money, for example he feels no obligation to provide praise simply when an employee upholds his end of the deal. Only exceptionally good performance is rewarded, and mistakes are corrected through punishment.
