How outstanding leaders lead with affect: An examination of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders

Abstract

Frameworks for understanding outstanding leadership have flourished in the past decade. Research into the charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic (CIP) model of leadership in particular has examined how leaders develop mental models, frame visions, communicate goals, and utilize political tactics to form relationships with followers and impact society in meaningful ways. However, a discussion of how these types of leaders use emotions and influence tactics to influence followers and affect society is notably absent in the literature. To fill this gap, the current effort focuses on how charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders differ in their use of emotional displays and influence tactics. Results suggest that the emotional displays and influence tactics that leaders use successfully discriminate between CIP leader types and create expected leader styles. Implications of these findings are also discussed.

Understanding a Leader’s Behaviour: Revisiting the Role of Reputation Management in Leadership Research

“…It appears that scholars show a sustained interest in how leaders generate goals and visions that meet a sympathetic chord with followers (Galloway, 2015;Griffith et al 2015;Simons et al, 2015). Yet, one may wonder if one angle is missing that could assist in elucidating the subject matter: The recognition that a leader's values, attitudes and ethics in their own right may not be the critical factors research needs to concern itself with -but instead the very perception and anticipation of these features.…”

Political activity of the Russian youth: a mobilization potential of the sources of political information

“…Currently, domestic and foreign researchers are increasingly worried about global leadership issues [16], [17], a fundamental comparison of the models of youth political leadership that is emerging in various types of civilizations [18], [19], [20] and states with different political regimes [21], as well as in the face of severe world economic crises [22], [23]. The voices of researchers about the need for a critical understanding of the foundations of the theory of leadership [24] and the modification of typologies of political leadership [25] in the new reality of online communication and the intensification of political processes sound more and more actively [26], [27], [28]. More than that, the growth of social demand for an effective management system [29] and power institutions for political innovation sounds more and more actively.…”

Interpersonal leader responses to secondary trauma in nonprofit human service organizations

“…Empathy can be challenging for leaders due to their high‐status roles in organizations (Keltner et al, ). Given that leader emotions highly influence followers (Fisher & Ashkanasy, ) and their ratings of leader effectiveness (Griffith, Connelly, Thiel, & Johnson, ), which is the capability of leaders to motivate followers to accomplish collective goals (van Knippenberg & van Kleef, ; Yukl, ), it seems that the capacity of leaders to exhibit emotion complexity by expressing both positive (e.g., encouraging followers to share secondary trauma experiences and then listening calmly and empathetically to them) and negative (e.g., expressing disappointment or frustration to mobilize followers to achieve common goals) emotions is extremely important for the success of secondary trauma‐affected HSOs.…”