1 The magic of leadership
Overview
How do leaders communicate? Do they communicate more by what they say, or what they do? Are their communication strategies unique? Are they moral beings, or impostors? In this work I hope to answer such questions by analysing the verbal and non-verbal communication of six highly successful non-western leaders.1 Verbal communication is their use of language â such as metaphors â and their non-verbal communication includes appearance, dress, gesture, the use of symbols and symbolic actions. An important finding is that verbal strategies are more effective when they interact with non-verbal ones. This is because multi-modal communication is more effective in evoking subliminal responses among followers and therefore is more likely to lead to the attribution of charismatic qualities. My overall intention is to enhance our understanding of how leadership is communicated.
In this chapter I first discuss the types of psychological need that leaders satisfy and some general theories of leadership. In particular, I consider transformational leadership and explain why it is relevant to investigating leadership across cultures. I develop two ideas that are important in our understanding of leadership â the creation of visions and values. I then consider charismatic leadership â in particular the relation between charisma, religion and myth â and the different circumstances in which charismatic leaders are likely to emerge. I argue that analysing transformational and charismatic leadership is vital to understanding how individual leadership style is designed.
In the following two chapters I examine the communication of leadership through the design of a leadership style that integrates a range of non-verbal and verbal strategies. I describe a number of non-verbal strategies for communicating leadership and how, verbally, metaphor is frequently used to create legitimacy by communicating visions and values, although there are culture-specific variations in the actual metaphors that are chosen. Charismatic leaders use symbols and metaphors to connect personal inner-visions with outer social realities. Metaphors are especially important in the communication of spiritual experience because they have the potential to erode barriers between religious and political spheres of action and satisfy the psycho-emotional needs of followers. But they have the potential to be more effective in the creation of charisma when they combine with non-verbal communication strategies such as symbols.
In each of the six following chapters I analyse the communication strategies of the following non-western leaders: Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Fidel Castro, Ayatollah Khomeini, Muhammad Mahathir and Lee Kuan Yew. The criterion for the selection of these leaders is that each attained an iconic status either by challenging western global dominance â typically in the form of colonialism â or by challenging a specific form of oppression that had its origin in the west (e.g. apartheid). I have included secular leaders (Fidel Castro and Lee Kuan Yew), spiritual leaders (Mahatma Gandhi and Ayatollah Khomeini) and leaders who had both a secular and a spiritual dimension to their leadership (Nelson Mandela and Muhammad Mahathir). Although the majority can be considered âleft-wingâ, I have also included those whose political thinking is more characteristic of the right (e.g. Lee Kuan Yew). As well as ideological breadth, I also have aimed for geographical range by including leaders from America, Africa, the Middle East and Asia. Finally, I wanted to choose leaders for whom communication was central to their success. Many other leaders could have satisfied these criteria equally well and so inevitably the choice is somewhat arbitrary.
In the final chapter I identify some of the shared communication characteristics of these leaders and consider how far these enable us to generalize about the role of language, metaphors and symbols in leadership communication. I claim that metaphoric and symbolic communication legitimizes leaders and that the adoption of metaphors and symbols that converge with the aspirations of followers allows them to dispose of unwanted identities and undergo psychological catharsis. I hope, through a series of detailed case studies like these, to arrive at an improved understanding of the leaders analysed and of leadership communication.
Perspectives on leadership
A recent definition of leadership is as follows: âLeadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goalâ;2 since very few goals are achieved without common action, leadership is fundamental to the nature of society itself. Perhaps in a utopia we would be able to dispense with leaders altogether â such was the aim of Anarchism. One of the aims of Communism was that the Party would replace the need for individual leaders by itself representing the peopleâs interests. Curiously, though, cults of personality seem to have surrounded Communist leaders even more than those in democracies where leaders are changed more easily. When we think of Communism, we think of leaders such as Lenin, Stalin and Mao. Similarly, religious societies also have a strong propensity to produce leaders. The Catholic Church has the Pope as its leader, and Islamic theocracies also show a predilection for charismatic leaders. Only Anarchism, because of its faith in fundamental human goodness, has rejected leadership because it relies on individuals becoming their own leaders. However, leaders are usually necessary because they generate a set of meanings that form the basis of social action.
The human problem is that to arrive at a degree of self-knowledge and personal spiritual insight involves a great deal of introspection, soul-searching, and coming to terms with the full range of tensions, contradictions and conflicts that arise from everyday experiences of life. There is a need to seek guidance from individuals who are able to influence others to improve society. This seems to be equally true across time and across cultures. Followers seek evidence of inner qualities of aspirant leaders through external characteristics such as confident behaviour, appearance and powers of expression. This applies equally to secular and sacred leaders, or others for whom the boundary between politics and religion is not relevant because they deny any important distinction between the two.3 A claim that charismatic leaders usually share is to have access to ultimate truths â and this permits followers to escape from uncertainty and fear.
A great deal of research has been undertaken into providing a theory of leadership. This can broadly be divided into theories that analyse leadership as a set of characteristics, or traits, possessed by leaders, and those that analyse the interactive nature of the relationship between leaders and followers. Northouse summarizes these as âtraitâ and âprocessâ approaches to leadership.4 Trait approaches fit with the popular view of leaders as people who possess exceptional characteristics. Based on an extensive survey of the early literature, Stogdill identified intelligence, alertness, insight, responsibility, initiative, persistence, self-confidence and sociability as the characteristics of great leaders.5 Trait approaches go back to âgreat manâ theories of leadership, and have the attraction of simplicity over more complex âprocessâ approaches that consider leaders in the contexts of their situations and followers. However, trait approaches have sometimes encountered difficulty in arriving at an agreed list of traits and run the risk of oversimplification because they ignore the social situation. The interactive nature of leadership is such that leaders and followers are often jointly involved in creating each other.
It was this perspective that was incorporated into process approaches to leadership such as the situational approach, contingency theory and the path-goal approach. These are concerned with how leadersâ behaviours may change according to factors in the situation such as followersâ motivational levels. These approaches have the advantage of accommodating motivation theory by treating followers as part of the situation and also of exploring how leaders modify their behaviour in particular situations. They have practical outcomes in the form of offering advice to aspirant leaders and for this reason are often employed in management training programmes.
An approach that will be very influential in this work is the style approach. This approach integrates aspects of the trait and process approaches by proposing that the key feature of leadership is the actual behaviour of the leader in various contexts. It was initiated by researchers at Ohio State University and the University of Michigan who examined the interaction between two types of behaviour and their followersâ responses. âTaskâ behaviours concern the organisation and planning of work-related tasks while ârelationshipâ behaviours concern developing trust, commitment and mutual respect among followers. The successful leader needs to find the right balance between the task and relationship behaviours for a particular group of followers.
The value of the style approach is that â unlike the trait approach â it recognizes that personality traits are not sufficient in themselves but require expression through behaviour. In keeping with process approaches, it is dynamic because it recognizes that the particular blend of task and relationship behaviours varies according to the situation. This is especially important in an approach to leadership based on communication because one of the principles of successful communication is that it takes into account the setting and the audience. My notion of âthe design of leadership styleâ proposes a set of verbal and non-verbal strategies that resonate with followers.
In his classic study McGregor Burns first describes how:
Leadership over human beings is exercised when persons with certain motives and purposes mobilize, in competition or conflict with others, institutional, political, psychological, and other resources so as to arouse, engage, and satisfy the motives of followers.6
Notice, first, that leadership can be treated in the abstract â that is, there is a common (or âgenericâ) idea of leadership that exists independently of both individual leaders and the particular social situations in which they operate. Therefore leaders can emerge in any type of social grouping â political, business, educational, military, religious, or leisure â and in any culture or society. Then notice that leaders have their own motives â they may be self-seeking or altruistic, and individuals compete with others for a limited number of leadership roles. In human society the struggle to become leader is the equivalent in the animal world to becoming the alpha male who is able to see off rivals in the search for sexual dominance. Next, notice the verbs: leaders are dynamic agents because they mobilize, arouse, engage and satisfy. Finally, notice the inter-connectedness of leaders and followers â leaders only exist because others follow.
The mutual dependency of leaders and followers is something commented on by Cronin:
A leader has to resonate with followers. Part of being an effective leader is having excellent ideas, or a clear sense of direction, a sense of mission. But such ideas or vision are useless unless the would-be leader can communicate them and get them accepted by followers.7
And it is also highlighted in Burnsâ definition of leadership:
I define leadership as leaders inducing followers to act for certain goals that represent the values and the motivations â the wants and needs, the aspirations and expectations â of both leaders and followers. And the genius of leadership lies in the manner in which leaders see and act on their own and their followersâ values and motivations.8
Leaders satisfy and express their own psychological needs as well as those of their followers and therefore leadership equally concerns the inner values of leaders and the social values of followers. We will see in the next chapter that interaction between leaders and followers is vital to the effective communication of leadership.
Transformational and transactional leadership
A further approach to leadership that is central to this work is transformational leadership. This approach integrates characteristics of both the trait and process views on leadership and â like the style approach â is a theory that works effectively when describing leadership across a range of cultural and social settings. An important distinction that has dominated western leadership studies is the distinction between transactional and transformational leadership; this can be summarized as follows:
Transactional leadership . . . occurs when one person takes the initiative in making contact with others for the purpose of an exchange of valued things.9
Transforming leadership . . . occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality.10
It is interesting to note that transactional leaders are concerned with exchange values while transformational leaders are concerned with ethical values. Implicit in these definitions is the claim that transformational leaders are more effective because they motivate followers by acting upon their higher order non-material needs, aspirations and desires rather than upon âthingsâ. The potential of transformational leaders to appeal to ethical values is a theme that is developed in subsequent discussions of Burnsâ transformational leaders. For example:
Transformational leadership deals with the leaderâs effect on the followersâ values, self-esteem, trust and confidence in the leader; and their motivation to perform âabove and beyond the call of dutyâ.11
Transformational leadership is measured by the effect that leadership has on followers as people are in some ways âtransformedâ â whereas transactional leadership is measured in terms of materials that are exchanged. Therefore in the choice of terms there seems to be preferential treatment given to the transformational leader because of his capacity to change followers for the better. The positive connotation of transformational leaders is brought out by the use of the word âhigherâ that occurs in nearly all definitions of such leaders and follows a âconceptual metaphorâ:12 GOOD IS UP, and DOWN IS BAD. Consider for example, the words that I have italicized in the following descriptions:
Transformational processes usually involve the upgrading of needs. As a consequence of this upgrading of needs, subordinates and followers become self-directing and self-reinforcing.13
The transformational leaderâs influence is based on t...
