Charismatic CEO Theory - Research Papers

D.A. Waldman, F.J. Yammarino
CEO charismatic leadership: Levels of management and levels of analysis effects
Academy of Management Review, 2 (1999), pp. 266–285

The paper focused on the charismatic leadership of CEOs and it included the relationship between managers very close to the CEO and CEO and employees far from the CEO and CEO also apart from other concepts or variables of interest. Theoretical Propositions were developed in the paper. The proof of the proposition is given by putting up an argument of plausibility in theoretical papers. They are tested empirically in empirical theory testing papers.

Propositions developed in the paper


Proposition I: Adaptive organizational culture will foster the emergence of leaders predisposed to showing charismatic behaviors. Charismatic behaviors will, in turn, reinforce core values of an adaptive culture while helping to change aspects of culture that become dysfunctional over time.

Proposition 2: Charismatic relationships developed between a CEO and Top Management Team (TMT) members will result in heightened TMT cohesion and effort, especially under conditions of perceived environmental volatility.

Proposition 3: Role modeling and TMT effort and cohesion will promote the cascading of charismatic leadership to lower hierarchical echelons.

Proposition 4; Charismatic leadership at lower management levels will result in heightened effort on the part of organizational members, as well as intragroup and intergroup cohesion.

Proposition 5: Charismatic attributions of CEOs at a distance are a function of symbolic behaviors, articulation of an ideologically based vision, sagas, storytelling, and prior organizational performance.

Proposition 6: Charismatic attributions toward the CEO at lower echelons will result in heightened organizational member effort and intergroup cohesion, especially under conditions of perceived environmental volatility.

Proposition 7: Intergroup cohesion will result in linkages regarding the performance objectives of units within an organization so that the subsequent performance of units will be coordinated toward higher-level organizational performance.

Proposition 8: Coordinated operational performance of subunits will lead to higher organizational performance, especially when units are interdependent.

Charismatic Leadership - Theoretical Propositions

Organizational and contextual influences on the emergence and effectiveness of charismatic leadership
Boas Shamir, Jane M. Howell
The Leadership Quarterly
Volume 10, Issue 2, Summer 1999, Pages 257–283

The research propositions in this paper were developed out of the argument or premise that while charismatic leadership principles and processes potentially apply across a wide variety of situations, the emergence and effectiveness of such leadership may be facilitated by some contexts and inhibited by others

Proposition 1: Charismatic leaders are more likely to emerge under conditions of turbulence and crisis than under conditions of stability and continuity. However, crisis is neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition for the emergence of charismatic leaders.

Proposition 2: Charismatic leadership is more likely to emerge and be effective in psychologically weak situations than in psychologically strong situations.


Proposition 3: Charismatic leadership is more likely to emerge and be effective in dynamic organizational environments that require and enable the introduction of new strategies, markets, products and technologies.

Proposition 4: Charismatic leadership is more likely to emerge and be effective at the early (entrepreneurial) stage, and the late stages (collaboration stage and renewal crisis) than in the middle stages of the organizational life-cycle.

Proposition 5: Charismatic leadership is more likely to emerge and be effective the lower the analyzability of the organizational or departmental technology.

Proposition 6: Charismatic leadership is more likely to emerge and be effective when the tasks of organizational members are challenging and complex, and require individual and group initiative, responsibility, creativity and intense effort.

Proposition 7: Charismatic leadership is more likely to emerge and be effective when performance goals are ambiguous and extrinsic rewards cannot be strongly linked to performance.

Proposition 8: Charismatic leadership is more likely to emerge and be effective in organic organizations than in mechanistic organizations.

Proposition 9: Charismatic leadership is more likely to emerge and be effective in organizations with a clan mode of governance than in organizations with either a market or bureaucratic mode of governance.

Proposition 10: Charismatic leadership is more likely to emerge and be effective in adaptive than in non-adaptive organizational cultures.

Proposition 11: New leaders are more likely than established leaders to emerge as charismatic and have a charismatic influence on organizational members.

Proposition 12: New charismatic leaders are more likely to emerge and be effective when they succeed non-charismatic leaders than when they succeed charismatic former leaders.

Proposition 13: Charismatic leadership is more likely to emerge at the top level of the organization than at lower levels. However, charismatic leadership is not restricted to the top organizational level.

Proposition 14: Charismatic leadership at higher organizational levels will rely on image building, articulation of a strategic vision, rhetorical skills and symbolic activities to produce charismatic effects on followers, while charismatic leadership at lower organizational levels will rely on personal role modeling, building a collective identity within the team, and conveying confidence in followers' capabilities.

Proposition 15: Charismatic leadership is more likely to emerge and be effective when the organizational goals and primary tasks are consistent with dominant social values, and offer both leader and followers an opportunity for moral involvement.

The paper quoted D.A. Waldman, F.J. Yammarino,  "CEO charismatic leadership: Levels of management and levels of analysis effects"
Academy of Management Review, 2 (1999), pp. 266–285

This paper also contains theoretical propositions above charismatic leadership at CEO level.

Management Process and Discipline - Research Papers

 

 

___________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

Management as a discipline and profession

 

 

Design and Devotion: Surges Rational and Normative Ideologies of Control in Managerial Discourse

Stephen R, Barley and Gideon Kunda

Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 37, No. 3, Sep, 1992, Pp. 363-99

http://www.hhss.se/akademiska/Old%20Documents/kunda%20barley.pdf

 

 

 

Cybernetics and Management - An early paper with good explanation, August 1969

MIT faculty

http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/48399/managementproces00zann.pdf?sequence=1

 

___________________________________________________________________________________________