Leadership

Leaders and their leadership skills play an important role in the growth of any organization.
Leadership refers to the process of influencing the behaviour of people in a manner that they strive
willingly and enthusiastically towards the achievement of group objectives. A leader should have
the ability to maintain good interpersonal relations with the followers or subordinates and motivate
them to help in achieving the organizational objectives.

Features of Leadership

Influence the behaviour of others: Leadership is an ability of an individual to influence

the behaviour of other employees in the organization to achieve a common purpose or goal so
that they are willingly co-operating with each other for the fulfilment of the same.

Inter-personal process: It is an interpersonal process between the leader and the followers. The
relationship between the leader and the followers decides how efficiently and effectively the
targets of the organization would be met.

Attainment of common organizational goals: The purpose of leadership is to guide the people
in an organization to work towards the attainment of common organizational goals. The leader
brings the people and their efforts together to achieve common goals.

Continuous process: Leadership is a continuous process. A leader has to guide his employees
every time and also monitor them in order to make sure that their efforts are going in the same
direction and that they are not deviating from their goals.

Group process: It is a group process that involves two or more people together interacting with
each other. A leader cannot lead without the followers.

Dependent on the situation: It is situation bound as it all depends upon tackling the situations
present. Thus, there is no single best style of leadership.
Importance of Leadership

Initiating Action: Leadership starts from the very beginning, even before the work actually
starts. A leader is a person who communicates the policies and plans to the subordinates to start
the work.

Providing Motivation: A leader motivates the employees by giving them financial and non-
financial incentives and gets the work done efficiently. Motivation is the driving force in an
individual’s life.

Providing guidance: A leader not only supervises the employees but also guides them in their
work. He instructs the subordinates on how to perform their work effectively so that their efforts
don’t get wasted.

Creating confidence: A leader acknowledges the efforts of the employees, explains to them their
role clearly and guides them to achieve their goals. He also resolves the complaints and problems
of the employees, thereby building confidence in them regarding the organization.

Building work environment: A good leader should maintain personal contacts with the
employees and should hear their problems and solve them. He always listens to the point of
view of the employees and in case of disagreement persuades them to agree with him by giving
suitable clarifications. In case of conflicts, he handles them carefully and does not allow it to
adversely affect the entity. A positive and efficient work environment helps in stable growth of
the organization.

Co-ordination: A leader reconciles the personal interests of the employees with the
organizational goals and achieves co-ordination in the entity.

Creating Successors: A leader trains his subordinates in such a manner that they can succeed
him in future easily in his absence. He creates more leaders.

Induces change: A leader persuades, clarifies and inspires employees to accept any change in
the organization without much resistance and discontentment. He makes sure that employees
don’t feel insecure about the changes.
LEADERSHIP THEORIES

Trait Theory and Behavioural Theory of Leadership

Trait Theory of Leadership

The trait theory of leadership is the idea that the characteristics to be a good leader are inherited.
Under this theory, people who have good leadership skills were naturally born with these skills
and can easily use them to obtain a leadership role. The trait theory of leadership suggests that
when a person is born with leadership skills, the inherited skills then create a pattern of natural
leadership behaviours. Although some people may have these skills inherently, they also need
to have a drive or motivation to use them. Not all people born with leadership skills necessarily
want to become a leader. Some example characteristics of the trait theory include, but are not
limited to, adaptability, assertiveness, decisiveness, motivational, and creativity. Below is an
additional list of leadership traits.

Behavioural Theory of Leadership

In contrast, the behavioural theory of leadership is the idea that leadership skills can be learned
by observing those skills in the behaviour of others. Individuals can then study these skills and
practice them to try and become fluid in their leadership abilities. This type of leadership is
unique in that individuals can choose what kind of leader they prefer to be and study those
desired skills. Individuals can also combine several types to broaden their scope of leadership.
In fact, most leaders choose to use a combination of leadership styles.
Leadership Styles

Styles describe how a leader behaves with his group or how leadership is applied in practice.
The following leadership styles have been developed:

1. Motivational styles,

2. Power styles and

3. Orientation styles or Supervisory styles.

1. Motivational Styles-Positive and Negative Leadership

Motivation of followers (workers in a business enterprise) is the main function of a leader.

Motivational styles cover two main approaches, which are generally followed by a leader: (i)
Positive approach and (ii) Negative approach motivation may be: (a) Positive and (b) Negative.

(i) Positive Approach or Leadership: Where a leader motivates the people by offering them
monetary or non-monetary rewards. When a leader motivates the people to work hard by
offering them various rewards monetary or otherwise-the approach or leadership is said to be
positive. The more is the reward, the higher is the efficiency. Positive leadership promotes
industrial peace. For example, encashment of leave will certainly reduce the absenteeism in the
organization because it increases workers' real wages.

(ii) Negative Approach or Leadership: Where a leader motivates the people through negative
rewards such a pay cut, loss of job, reprimand before others, etc. Where the leader (manager)
induces the followers (workers) to work hard and threatens them to penalize if work is not upto
the work, it is said Negative Leadership.

2. Power Styles

They are of three types: (a) Autocratic, (b) Democratic and (c) Free-rein styles.

(a) Autocratic Styles: Where power is centralized in the leader and the subordinates are
allowed only to follow them. He also assumes full responsibilities. If he uses his power in the
best interest of the followers then it is called 'benevolent autocratic leadership'.
(b) Democratic or Participative Style: Under this style, power is decentralised. Workers or
subordinates are allowed to participate in the decision making process and implementing them.

(c) Free-rein Leadership: Under this style, leaders avoid power. Power is vested in employees
and the leader only contracts with outsiders. Under this style, leaders enjoy no power. The
leadership is employee-centred and the group of employees is free to establish its own goals
and work-out its own problems. The members of the group train themselves and provide own
motivation.

The leader keeps contact with outsiders to bring the group the information and resources, the
group needs to fulfil its job. Free-rein leadership ignores the leader's contribution in the same
way approximately that autocratic leadership ignores the group. It fails to provide to the group
the benefits of leader inspired motivation. Sometimes it creates chaos.

3. Orientation Style or Supervisory Style (Employee and Task Oriented Leadership)

There are two types of leadership under this style: (i) Employee oriented leadership and (ii)
Production-oriented or task oriented leadership.

(i) Employee Oriented Leadership: Employee oriented leaders are concerned about the
human needs of their employees and pay highest attention to their subordinates' attitudes,
interests and necessities, etc. They try to get more and more production and increased
productivity by improving the working conditions and environments and solving the problems,
if any, faced by them during the course of their action on the job.

(ii) Production or Task Oriented Leadership: Production or task oriented leaders on the
other hand, believe that they are concerned mainly with the production and employees are not
of much concern. They are of the opinion that they can attain results by planning better
methods, keeping people, constantly busy and using them to produce. They do not consider
human aspect of the workers.

Which one is better?

Employee oriented and production oriented leadership styles seem to be both related and
independent. They are not opposite to each other. A manager who is more employee oriented
does not necessary become against production oriented or vice versa. Each orientation is
somewhat independent, so a manger may have both orientations in varying degrees. So, it is
prudent that a manager must combine these two orientations. He must think in terms of higher
production and not at the cost of human values. He must honour the initiatives and abilities of
employees and try to satisfy their needs.

Which leadership style is better?

It is highly unrealistic to talk of a single best style of leadership. The best answer to this
question is that a leader should not be rigid to any one style of leadership and he should get the
work done as the situational warrants. According to the circumstances, he may be autocratic at
one time and democratic at the other. Sometimes he motivates people through positive rewards
and sometimes he is forced to take negative action.
Ohio-Michigan Leadership Theory

Ohio State University and the University of Michigan performed a research on leadership at
about the same period; between 1940s to 1950s. Even though during that period, influence on
leadership studies more to autocratic and democratic but the conducted researches by these two
universities more to determine the behaviour of effective leaders which later those identified
behaviour were named as leadership style.

The objective of this paper is to discuss on similarities and differences of the leadership styles
by University of Michigan and Ohio State University. The content of this paper will as follows:
firstly, a review on University of Michigan leadership model and the second part, is a review
on Ohio State University leadership model. Finally, a discussion on similarities and differences
of the leadership styles between the two universities.

University of Michigan: Job-Centered and Employee-Centered Behaviour

The University of Michigan’s Survey Research Center, under the principal direction of Rensis
Likert, conducted studies to determine leadership effectiveness. Their main objectives are:

1. To classify the leaders as effective and ineffective by comparing the behaviour of leaders
2. To determine reasons for effective leadership.

The University of Michigan leadership model stated that a leader is either more job-centered
or more employee-centered as illustrated below

The job-centered style has scales measuring two job-oriented behaviours of goal emphasis and
work facilitation. Job-centered behavior refers to the extent to which the leader takes charge to
get the job done. The leader closely directs subordinates with clear roles and goals, while the
manager tells them what to do and how to do it as they work toward goal achievement.

The employee-centered style has scales measuring two employee-oriented behaviours of

supportive leadership and interaction facilitation. Employee-centered behaviour refers to the
extent to which the leader focuses on meeting the human needs of employees while developing
relationships. The leader is sensitive to subordinates and communicates to develop trust,
support, and respect while looking out for their welfare.

Ohio State University: Initiating Structure and Consideration Behaviour

Likes University of Michigan, The Personnel Research Board of Ohio State University, under
the principal direction of Ralph Stogdill, also conducted a study on the same purpose which is
to determine effective leadership styles. They developed Leader Behaviour Description
Questionnaire (LBDQ) and from the questionnaires, their findings on leadership styles as
follows:

1. Initiating structure behaviour where the leadership style is essentially the same as the
job-centered leadership style of the University of Michigan; which focuses on getting the job
done.
2. Consideration behaviour where this leadership style is essentially the same as the
employee-centered leadership style which focuses on meeting people’s needs and developing
relationships.

Ohio State University stated that because a leader can be on high or low sides of initiating
structure and/or consideration, they developed four leadership styles as follows:

1. low initiating structure and high consideration,

2. high initiating structure and high consideration,
3. low initiating structure and low consideration, and
4. high initiating structure and low consideration.

Leaders with high structure and low consideration behaviour use one-way communications,
and decisions are made by the managers, whereas leaders with high consideration and low
structure use two-way communications and tend to share decision making.
1. Similarities between Leadership Models

 · Both of the universities have developed a questionnaire and conducted a research that
have same objective which is to determine the behaviour of effective leader
 · Both researches are conducted in same period between 1940s to 1950s.
 · Both universities developed leadership model that emphasis on same definitions
which are on task-oriented and people-oriented style of leadership, even though used term is
different.

2. Differences between Leadership Models

 The Ohio State and University of Michigan leadership models are different in that the
University of Michigan places the two leadership behaviours at opposite ends of the same
continuum, making it one-dimensional. The Ohio State University Model considers the two
behaviours independent of one another, making it two-dimensional.
 University of Michigan’s one dimensional model proposed two leadership styles (1)
employee-centered and (2) job-centered while Ohio State leadership model has four leadership
styles as follows, (1) low initiating structure and high consideration, (2) high initiating structure
and high consideration, (3) low initiating structure and low consideration, and (4) high
initiating structure and low consideration.
Blake Mouton Leadership Theory

The Blake Mouton Grid plots a manager's or leader's degree of task-centeredness versus their
person-centeredness, and identifies five different combinations of the two and the leadership
styles they produce. It's also known as the Managerial Grid, or Leadership Grid, and was
developed in the early 1960s by management theorists Robert Blake and Jane Mouton.

The model is based on two behavioural dimensions:

 Concern for People: this is the degree to which a leader considers team members' needs,
interests and areas of personal development when deciding how best to accomplish a task.
 Concern for Results: this is the degree to which a leader emphasizes concrete objectives,
organizational efficiency and high productivity when deciding how best to accomplish a
task.

1. Impoverished Management – Low Results/Low People

The Impoverished or "indifferent" manager is mostly ineffective. With a low regard for creating
systems that get the job done, and with little interest in creating a satisfying or motivating team
environment, this manager's results are inevitably disorganization, dissatisfaction and
disharmony.

2. Produce-or-Perish Management – High Results/Low People

Also known as "authoritarian" or "authority-compliance" managers, people in this category

believe that their team members are simply a means to an end. The team's needs are always
secondary to its productivity. This type of manager is autocratic, has strict work rules, policies
and procedures, and can view punishment as an effective way of motivating team members.
This approach can drive impressive production results at first, but low team morale and
motivation will ultimately affect people's performance, and this type of leader will struggle to
retain high performers. They probably adhere to the Theory X approach to motivation, which
assumes that employees are naturally unmotivated and dislike working. A manager who
believes people are self-motivated and happy to work is said to follow Theory Y. You can learn
more about these theories in our article, Theory X and Theory Y.

3. Middle-of-the-Road Management – Medium Results/Medium People

A Middle-of-the-Road or "status quo" manager tries to balance results and people, but this
strategy is not as effective as it may sound. Through continual compromise, they fail to inspire
high performance and also fail to meet people's needs fully. The result is that their team will
likely deliver only mediocre performance.

4. Country Club Management – High People/Low Results

The Country Club or "accommodating" style of manager is most concerned about their team
members' needs and feelings. They assume that, as long as their people are happy and secure,
they'll work hard. What tends to be the result is a work environment that is very relaxed and
fun, but where productivity suffers because there is a lack of direction and control.

5. Team Management – High Production/High People

According to the Blake Mouton model, Team Management is the most effective leadership
style. It reflects a leader who is passionate about their work and who does the best they can for
the people they work with. Team or "sound" managers commit to their organization's goals and
mission, motivate the people who report to them, and work hard to get people to stretch
themselves to deliver great results. But, at the same time, they're inspiring figures who look
after their teams. Team managers prioritize both the organization's production needs and their
people's needs. They do this by making sure that their team members understand
the organization's purpose and by involving them in determining production needs. When
people are committed to, and have a stake in, the organization's success, their needs and
production needs coincide. This creates an environment based on trust and respect, which leads
to high satisfaction, motivation and excellent results. Team managers likely adopt the Theory
Y approach to motivation, as we mentioned above.
Tannenbaum-Schmidt Leadership Theory

The Tannenbaum-Schmidt Leadership Continuum is a model showing the relationship between

the level of authority used by a leader and the freedom it allows the team. At one end of the
continuum are managers who simply tell their employees what to do (autocratic). At the other
end of the continuum are managers who are completely passive (laissez-faire). As one moves
from one end of the continuum to the other, the level of freedom you give your team will
increase and your use of authority will decrease. Most managers and leaders will lie somewhere
in the middle between these two extremes. The Leadership Continuum was developed by
Robert Tannenbaum and Warren Schmidt in the year 1958 in their joint article of Harvard
Business Review.

Within these two extremes, the leadership style a manager uses can fall at any point on the
continuum. However, Tannenbaum and Schmidt described seven points on the continuum to
make it easy to understand how different leaders behave at different points on the continuum.

1. Tells

The leader that tells is an authoritarian leader. They tell their team what to do and expect them
to do it. This style is useful when you urgently need to turn around a department or business,
and also in situations where deadlines are critical. However, this extreme style can be
frustrating for experienced subordinates as it takes no account of team member’s welfare.

2. Sells

The leader that sells makes their decision and then explains the logic behind the decision to
their team. The leader isn’t looking for team input, but they are looking to ensure the team
understands the rationale behind the decision. A key aspect of this approach is for the leader to
explain how the decision will benefit the team. In this way, the team will see the manager as
recognizing their importance.

3. Suggests

The leader that suggests makes their decision, explains the logic behind the decision, and then
asks team members if they have any questions. Through asking questions, the team can more
fully understand the rationale behind the decision than the previous approaches. The leader
isn’t going to change their decision but they do want the team to fully understand the rationale
behind it.
4. Consults

The leader that consults presents their provisional decision to their team and invites comments,
suggestions, and opinions. This is the first point on the continuum where the team’s opinion
can influence or even change the decision. The leader is still in control and the ultimate decision
maker, but open to any good ideas the team may have. With this style, the team feels they can
influence the decision-making process. Once the leader has finished consulting with their team,
their decision is finalized.

5. Joins

The leader who joins presents the problem to their team and then works with the team in a
collaborative manner to make the decision as to how the problem is going to be solved. This
point on the continuum differs from the previous four, as it’s the first point the leader isn’t
presenting their decision. Instead, they are simply presenting the problem to be solved. This
obviously will require plenty of input from the team, making this approach suitable when the
team is very experienced or has specialist knowledge. Because this style involves greater input
and influence form the team it can lead to enhanced feelings of motivation and freedom.

6. Delegates

The leader that delegates asks their team to make the decision, within limits that the leader sets.
Although the team makes the decision, it is still the leader that is accountable for the outcome
of the decision. However, it might seem very risky to let a team make a decision even though
a manager will be held accountable for the outcome.

7. Abdicates

The leader who abdicates lets the team decide what problems to solve and how to solve them.
Abdication is the total opposite of telling the team what to do using an autocratic style. Here
the team must shape and identify the problem, analyze all the options available, before making
a decision as to how to proceed. They will then implement the course of action without
necessarily even running it by the leader. This style can be the most motivating but can be
disastrous if it goes wrong.
Fiedler’s Contingency Theory & Leader’s Situational Control Leadership

Fiedler's Theory

Fiedler's contingency theory will help to explain why managers can behave so differently.
Fiedler's contingency theory contends that there is no one single leadership style that works for
all employees. He recognized that there are situational-contingent factors that affect a leader's
ability to lead. The effectiveness of workers depends on how good a match exists between the
leadership style of the leader and the demands of the situation. There are two factors that result
from this: leadership style and situation favourableness (or situational control).

Leadership style is determined by rating a leader's least preferred co-worker on the least
preferred co-worker (LPC) scale. A leader is asked to rate someone he or she least liked
working with (presently or in the past) on a scale of 1-8 in the following areas:

 Unfriendly/friendly
 Uncooperative/cooperative
 Hostile/supportive
 Guarded/open

The leader tallies up the score. This test is not about how horrible the least preferred co-worker
was to work with. It is about the leader's behaviour towards the co-worker. The leader who
scores high is most likely relationship oriented. These high LPC leaders like to build
relationships with employees. They are more likely to avoid conflict. They also are better
equipped to make complex decisions.

The lower-scoring LPC leader is task oriented. This leader is more interested in assigning duties
and getting the work done. This leader does not care much about building relationships. A high
LPC leader is capable of leading a team in a favourable situation, while a low LPC leader can
lead a team in both favourable and unfavourable situations because the low LPC leader focuses
on tasks rather than on relationships.

The essential element of this theory is that there are different leadership styles for different
situations. The style of leadership is contingent upon the particular situation. So, if the situation
is fast decision making, the high LPC leader fares well. If the situation is high production, the
low LPC leader is better equipped to handle that because that leader does not care much about
whether the employees like what he or she is doing. Once a leader determines his or her
leadership style, the situational control needed for a particular situation must be determined.

Three Dimensions of Situational Favourableness

Situation favourableness occurs when the three dimensions - leader-member relations, task
structure, and leader position power - are high.

Leader-member relationships refer to the degree of trust, respect, and confidence that exists
between the leader and the workers. Task structure refers to the degree to which tasks are
clearly explained and structured for workers. Leader position power refers to the degree to
which the leader possesses inherent power in his or her position.

If employees and the leader have trust, respect, and have confidence in each other, there are
clear and structured tasks, and the leader possesses formal authority in his position, the situation
is considered favourable.
Transactional Leadership Theory

The transactional style of leadership was first described by Max Weber in 1947 and then
by Bernard Bass in 1981. This style is most often used by the managers. It focuses on the basic
management process of controlling, organizing, and short-term planning. The famous
examples of leaders who have used transactional technique include McCarthy and de Gaulle.
Transactional leadership involves motivating and directing followers primarily through
appealing to their own self-interest. The power of transactional leaders comes from their formal
authority and responsibility in the organization. The main goal of the follower is to obey the
instructions of the leader. The style can also be mentioned as a ‘telling style’. The leader
believes in motivating through a system of rewards and punishment. If a subordinate does what
is desired, a reward will follow, and if he does not go as per the wishes of the leader, a
punishment will follow. Here, the exchange between leader and follower takes place to achieve
routine performance goals.

These exchanges involve four dimensions:

Contingent Rewards: Transactional leaders link the goal to rewards, clarify expectations,
provide necessary resources, set mutually agreed upon goals, and provide various kinds of
rewards for successful performance. They set SMART (specific, measurable, attainable,
realistic, and timely) goals for their subordinates.

Active Management by Exception: Transactional leaders actively monitor the work of their
subordinates, watch for deviations from rules and standards and taking corrective action to
prevent mistakes.

Passive Management by Exception: Transactional leaders intervene only when standards are
not met or when the performance is not as per the expectations. They may even use punishment
as a response to unacceptable performance.

Laissez-faire: The leader provides an environment where the subordinates get many
opportunities to make decisions. The leader himself abdicates responsibilities and avoids
making decisions and therefore the group often lacks direction.
Assumptions of Transactional Theory

 Employees are motivated by reward and punishment.

 The subordinates have to obey the orders of the superior.
 The subordinates are not self-motivated. They have to be closely monitored and
controlled to get the work done from them.
Transformational Leadership Theory

Transformational leadership may be found at all levels of the organization: teams, departments,
divisions, and organization as a whole. Such leaders are visionary, inspiring, daring, risk-
takers, and thoughtful thinkers. They have a charismatic appeal. But charisma alone is
insufficient for changing the way an organization operates. For bringing major changes,
transformational leaders must exhibit the following four factors:

Inspirational Motivation: The foundation of transformational leadership is the promotion of

consistent vision, mission, and a set of values to the members. Their vision is so compelling
that they know what they want from every interaction. Transformational leaders guide
followers by providing them with a sense of meaning and challenge. They work
enthusiastically and optimistically to foster the spirit of teamwork and commitment.

Intellectual Stimulation: Such leaders encourage their followers to be innovative and creative.
They encourage new ideas from their followers and never criticize them publicly for the
mistakes committed by them. The leaders focus on the “what” in problems and do not focus on
the blaming part of it. They have no hesitation in discarding an old practice set by them if it is
found ineffective.

Idealized Influence: They believe in the philosophy that a leader can influence followers only
when he practices what he preaches. The leaders act as role models that followers seek to
emulate. Such leaders always win the trust and respect of their followers through their action.
They typically place their followers needs over their own, sacrifice their personal gains for
them, ad demonstrate high standards of ethical conduct. The use of power by such leaders is
aimed at influencing them to strive for the common goals of the organization.

Individualized Consideration: Leaders act as mentors to their followers and reward them for
creativity and innovation. The followers are treated differently according to their talents and
knowledge. They are empowered to make decisions and are always provided with the needed
support to implement their decisions.
Charismatic Leadership Theory

Charismatic leadership is a trait-based leadership theory where the leaders act as visionary
driven by their convictions and motivate their followers to work towards common vision using
their charm and persuasiveness. These charismatic leaders act as role models and exhibit
extraordinary characteristics that inspire devotion and motivation in followers to persuade
change.

Charismatic leaders are regarded as of divine origin and the recognition of the followers depend
upon the demonstration of constant proof, which in turn, augments follower devotion and
enthusiasm. Given below are the characteristics of Charismatic Leadership, what distinguishes
charismatic leaders from others:

 Charismatic leaders have a special charm and glow

 They have a natural charisma that draws people to them
 A charismatic leader is good at recognizing the emotions and moods of others
 They effortlessly work with people and make everyone feel important and valued
 Charismatic leaders consistently possess traits of self-monitoring

Five Charismatic Types

Dubrin, classified Charismatic leaders into 5 types, viz. socialized, personalized, office-holder,
personal, and divine charismatic, which are discussed below:

1. Socialized Charismatics: A socialized charismatic is a leader who uses power only for the
benefit of others, rather than using it for private gains. Socialized charismatic leadership (SCL)
is a type of leadership characterized by a leader’s altruistic intent and helping others
internalizes his or her values. Socialized charismatic leaders are thought to play an ethical
leadership role. The socialized charismatic formulates and pursues goals that fulfil the needs
of group members and provide intellectual stimulation to them. Followers of socialized
charismatics are autonomous, empowered, and responsible.
2. Personalized Charismatics: Personalized charismatics are leaders who use the powers to a
certain extent for personal gains, to serve their own interests. The personalized charismatic
leaders have vested interest agenda, characterized by high authoritarianism, high narcissism,
self-aggrandizing, and non-egalitarian. Such leaders impose self-serving goals and they offer
support to group members only when it facilitates their own goals. They are exploitative
leaders who wish to accumulate power by imposing self-serving goals. Followers of this type
of leader are typically obedient, submissive, and dependent;

3. Office-holder Charismatics: For this type of leader, charismatic leadership is more about
the office occupied by him/her rather than his/her personal characteristics. By being a holder
of a key position, the leaders attain high status. Leaders in a large bureaucratic organization can
use their authority and the power associated with the position. Most managers we find in
organizations lack charisma. They are bland personalities, the person you never remember,
who has nothing of interest to focus on. They are the people we forget since they can never get
anyone excited about what they are doing.

4. Personal Charismatics: A leader with this quality often gains very high esteem through the
extent to which others have faith in them as people. Personal charisma is when someone has
very high amounts of sophisticated social and emotional skills. Irrespective of the high or low
status held by this leader, the personal charismatics are able to influence the followers, through
their right traits, behaviour and characteristics.

5. Divine Charismatics: A historically important type of charismatic leader is that of the divine
charismatic. Middle English also adopted the word as "karisme" to refer to gifts of healing and
teaching. Such leaders tend to have divine grace and they are considered as magnetic saviour,
who would arise to lead people through a crisis. The divine charismatic leaders are the ones
where people think that they are god sent.