Charismatic Leadership Behaviours

Human Behavior in Organizations Topic: The relationship between charismatic leadership behaviors and organizational Introduction The survey of this research paper are investigated that the relationship between the charismatic leadership and organizational commitment in Indian Organization. A survey of 147 employees who work in eastern and northern India. The results of this study showed that charismatic leadership can be influence values and the emotional needs between manager and employees, especially influences on commitment, it is a clear vision for managers to achieve the common goals and values of the organization. Within an organization, leadership influence will be dependent upon the type of power that the leader can exercise over other people. The exercise of leadership power can influence the behavior or action of others in order to obtain both follower satisfaction and productivity. The Study of Indian Company There are 147 employees who working at difference levels in a large organization in Eastern and northern region in India. Data were collected in written form and some data such as ago, monthly income, length of service, educational background, nature of job etc. We found that the average of age was 34.51 years and 6.1% were female out of 147 total employee. The average monthly incomes were 21951 rupees, it is approx. 353.495 USD and the average lengths of service were 13.78 years. Most of the employees had spent at least two working years in this organization. The education levels were as 28% in high school, 42.9% was graduated, and 4.1% were technical or degree level. There are 75% were married and only 25% were unmarried. Referring to the above data, concluded that the overall job satisfaction and organizational commitment are relatively above average, the result showed that they are satisfied and committed towards their job duties due to their leader who presented in charismatic and transformation leadership skills and behaviors. Some factors such as nature of job, length of service, it also affected the organizational commitment of employees. On the other hand, such as age, educational background and nature of job, it do not predict the organization commitment based on these data. This study may help us to understand and re-look at the past history of the organizational commitment. The study has some limitations due to incomplete information that cannot be apply for all organization. However, this of the analyzed data, the findings can prove useful for guiding future research. Charismatic leadership Referent power is the ability of the leader to exercise influence on the subordinate because of his perceived attractiveness, personal characteristics, reputation or “Charisma”, so we also call this concept as Charisma Leadership. For example, a particular leader may not have the power to punish but may still exercise power over the subordinates because the manager commands their respect or esteem. Famous examples of charismatic leaders who produce both negative and positive results, they are Adolph Hitler, Mahatma Gandhi, Winston Churchill, Mother Teresa and Bill Clinton. Adolph Hitler is a good example of the destructive power of charismatic leadership. Adolph Hitler was able to use speeches to connect to followers and persuade them to commit genocide. Mahatma Gandhi used his charisma to inspire the followers to protest nonviolently. Mahatma Gandhi can fast showed self-sacrifice and commitment to his followers. Mahatma Gandhi’s charismatic leadership can help him to gain more followers and enough attention to aid in peacefully ending British rule of India. Charismatic leaders are good at observing others and discerning their emotional needs. The leader which show his interacts with other people, and he can pays enough attention to people during the conversation. For example, the charismatic leaders may change their presentation skills or attitude to suit the needs of any people that interact with. The leader can use both body language and speeches tactics to convert the people to their point of view. According to Weber (1974), he was emphasis on charisma as a personality characteristic, the charismatic leader who have a strong desire to influence others, such as self-confident and strong sense of moral values. He also recognized the important role played by the followers in charisma leadership (Bryman 1992 and House 1976). One of the follower – House, he described that charismatic leadership is focusing on the emotional and motivational of followers, and he also identified that the mission, rust and confidence, self-esteem should be articulated by the leader. Conger & Kanungo (1998), they developed a model of charismatic leadership into three stages. The theory are focus on the leadership process. First stage, the leader will assess the environment as to growth opportunities for the respective organization, and evaluates their members’ needs carefully. In the second stage, the respective leader will formulate a strategic vision, it is presented in a inspiring way, such as strategic vision and articulation. In the third stage, the leader will provide a role model to their followers by demonstrating personal risk and unconventional behavior. The leader also can build up the followers’ trust and commitment. Conger emphasized the vision should be include an essential ingredient of charisma, even much stronger than the previous two theories that the leader have this ability to articulate a vision among man other qualities. Conger and Kanungo also classified into six scales. They are Sensitivity to the leadership, Sensitivity to member’s needs, Strategic vision and articulation, Personal risk, Unconventional behavior and the Status quo. The example of these six scales:

1. Sensitivity to the leadership

The charismatic leader can assess the environment for growth opportunities and also radical change in order to achieve the organizational goals for his followers.

2. Sensitivity to member’s needs

The charismatic leader evaluates his followers in carefully.

3. Strategic vision and articulation

The charismatic leader can formulates a strategic vision for the respective organization in an inspiring way for his followers.

4. Personal Risk

The leader can present or demonstrate in self-confidence and ensure all the vision in the potential outcome.

5. Unconventional behavior

The leader can build the trust and commitment between the leader and the followers, and also provide a role model to followers for reference.

6. Not maintain status Quo

The leader can examine the status quo in order to achieve the goal. Conger found that the charismatic leader behavior directly affect to the follower feeling, just a sense of perceptions of group collective identity and perceptions of group task performance. Charismatic leader provided very skilled communicators, the leader are able to communicate to followers on a deep and emotional level, and also have a strong basis for followers commitment to such goals. Both job involvement and charismatic leadership are likely to be related to organizational commitment. Organizational commitment Organizational commitment is very important to organizational success. It plays a large role in determining whether a member will stay with the company and enthusiastically work towards organizational goals. The theory of organizational commitment have three component model (TCM). They are affective commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment (Meyer and Allen 1991).

1. Affective commitment (Affection for your job)

The tendency of the employee want to stay with a company that is based on an emotional attachment. For example, if you enjoy the relationship between the members and the organization, you will want to stay in this company.

2. Continuance commitment (Fear of loss)

This kind of commitment that you believe that leaving the organization would be costly. For example, if you stay at the company because of the loss you would experience by leaving it is greater than the benefit you think you might gain in a new role. On the other hand, you might feel loss if you leave a well famous company, such as a top law firm or accounting firm.

3. Normative commitment (Sense of obligation to stay)

This kind of commitment that even you are unhappy in your role, but you still want to stay with your company because of you feel a sense of obligation to your company, that is the right thing to do. For example, you will stay with your company even you are unhappy, because of your family will give you stressful that you should stay loyal to your company. You will want to stay the company because of your have invested money or time in your college tuition, you should want to receive the reward from the company, so you better stay. By applying the three component model developed by Meyer and Allen, it help to develop the team to think positive. According to Meyer and Allen’s model, their model provide a comprehensive overview of organizational commitment, and it is the greatest practical study for the researchers. People are likely to feel increased commitment between the team and the organization, the members will feel more motivate and positive and want to get the job satisfaction. We can see that people are less likely to leave their company because of the age and tenancy of employees increase (Hunt 1985). Mathieu and Zajac (1990) also pointed out that some of the employees with higher leaves of education, which show less commitment to their company, and the employees’ commitment is a concern to the organization because of it is related to reduced turnover. Tsui and Cheng (1999) found that the job position, length of service and marital status can influence employee commitment. Charismatic leadership and organizational commitment Referring to Conger and Kanungo, charismatic leadership, these theories was focus on exceptional leaders who have unexpected effects on their followers. Two fields of research have gained conservable interest. For Conger and Kanungo’s Charismatic leadership, they described that why the followers identify with their respective leader, and transformational leaders emphasis that motivation can creating and representing an inspiring vision for the future. The positive effects of transformational and charismatic leadership on the outcomes under the significance, these positive effects examine the behavior of leaders, who are able to draw out the confidence and support of the followers, and it lead to achieve the productivity, job satisfaction and organizational commitment. It also impact the followers to increases their performance, efficiency, ability and easy to meet the expectation. Rowden (2000) was found that charismatic leader behavior who have a clear vision, and sensitivity to understand what member needs, it is positively related to affective organizational commitment. We can see that charismatic leader can improve the employees’ commitment. Transformational leadership behavior also can encourage employees in both positive way to develop stronger employee’ commitment as well. In general, managerial level, the leadership style which affect the employee attitudes to their organizations, and also managers are powerful to influence the subordinate to loyalty. In other study, the researcher found that the connection is important as connection is between the leadership and commitment and expected high correlations between transformational leadership and affective commitment (Bycio 1995). A good leader can inspire the followers by persuade them in their vision. Leadership is not about enforcing the leader’s dream, it is about developing a shared sense of destiny (Kouzes and Posner 2002). The result of above leaders who suggest that leaders need to exercise the charismatic leadership and transformation leadership, more practice based on their experience and trends for organizational commitment. A relationship is between the leadership style and subordinates organizational commitment, so if the manager managing the employee, the commitment is important and first priority because of it will reduced turnover and absenteeism and also increase the knowledge and behavior. Confusion The aim of this study is to further the understanding of the relationship between charismatic leadership and organizational commitment in Indian organization and even other large organization. As charismatic leadership should influence values and the emotional needs of subordinates, it is important to influences on commitment were expected in this study. The study can help us to explain how much charismatic leadership which can contribute to organization and commitment between employee and organization as well. This study can explore more effects of charismatic leadership on organizational commitment and described the leadership behaviors by Conger and Kanungo and Meyer and Allen. References

1. Babcock-Roberson & Oriel J. Strickland, 2010, The Relationship Between Charismatic Leadership Work Engagement, and Organizational Citizen Behaviors, The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied Volume 144, Issue 3
2. Bycio P, Hackett RD, Allen JS, 1995, Further assessments of Bass’s conceptualization of transactional and transformational leadership J. Appl. Psychol., 80: P468-478
3. Conger JA, 1999, Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insider perspective on these developing streams of research, Leadership Quarterly, P145-179
4. Conger JA, Kanungo RA, 1994, Charismatic leadership in organizations: perceived behavioral attributes and their measurement. J. Org. Behav., 15: 439-452
5. Conger JA, Kanungo RN, Menon ST, 2000, Charismatic leadership and follower effects. J. Org. Behav., 21: 747-767
6. House RJ, 1977, A theory of charismatic leadership, In J. G. Hunt and L.L.Larson leadership: The cutting edge Carbondale:Southern Illinois University Press, P189-207
7. Kouzes JM, Posner BZ, 2002, The leadership challenge, third edition, San Francisco:Jossey-Bass
8. Mathieu J, Zajac D, 1990, A review of meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates and consequences of organizational commitment, Psychol Bull, 108: P171-194
9. Meyer JP, Allen NJ, 1991, A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment, Human. Res. Manage. Rev. P61-89.
10. Robert W. Rowden, 2000, The relationship between charismatic leadership behaviors and organizational commitment, leadership & organization development journal, Vol. 21 page 30-35 issue 1
11. Tsui Kwong Tung, Cheng Yi Cheong, 1999, School organizational heath and teacher commitment: A contingency study with multi-level analysis, Edu. Res. Evaluation, P249-268
12. Weber M, 1947, The theory of social and economic organization, New York: The Free Press, original work published 1924

Cite this page