This document presents a theory about how CEO charisma affects external stakeholders outside the organization. It argues that current theories of charismatic leadership focus too narrowly on internal organizational members and processes. The theory proposes that CEO charisma influences external stakeholders through processes like managing external environments, rallying support, and engaging in political dynamics. It discusses differences between internal subordinates and external stakeholders, and how CEOs must rely more on symbolic behaviors and influence to interact with outsiders without direct authority over them. Developing an understanding of how CEO charisma impacts external stakeholders is important to more fully explain its relationship to organizational effectiveness.
Leadership and Organizational Culture: What’s the Connection?Denison Consulting
If “culture is everything,” then one of the primary responsibilities of leaders is to shape an organization’s culture. As Lou Gerstner demonstrated at IBM, the strengths and weaknesses of a leader soon become reflected in an organization’s values and beliefs.
This study seeks to examine the impact of leadership traits on public organizational performance.
The views presented by scholars and practitioners in the social sciences argued that there is no relationship
between transformational leadership traits and organizational performance in the public sector organizations.
The study used correlation and regression analysis to identify the gap that exist within the variables under
investigation
CEO’s Values, Management Style and Firm Performance: Evidence from Social Ent...SEFORÏS
A substantial body of research emphasizes the importance of the person in charge of an organization for a firm’s decisions and performance, yet less is known about which individual traits and experiences can explain variation in management styles that contribute to differences in firm performance. Our paper explores the possibility that a CEO’s personal values help shape his or her management style, which in turn helps drive firm outcomes.
Writekraft Research and Publications LLP was initially formed, informally, in 2006 by a group of scholars to help fellow students. Gradually, with several dissertations, thesis and assignments receiving acclaim and a good grade, Writekraft was officially founded in 2011 Since its establishment, Writekraft Research & Publications LLP is Guiding and Mentoring PhD Scholars.
Our Mission:
To provide breakthrough research works to our clients through Perseverant efforts towards creativity and innovation”.
Vision:
Writekraft endeavours to be the leading global research and publications company that will fulfil all research needs of our clients. We will achieve this vision through:
Analyzing every customer's aims, objectives and purpose of research
Using advanced and latest tools and technique of research and analysis
Coordinating and including their own ideas and knowledge
Providing the desired inferences and results of the research
In the past decade, we have successfully assisted students from various universities in India and globally. We at Writekraft Research & Publications LLP head office in Kanpur, India are most trusted and professional Research, Writing, Guidance and Publication Service Provider for PhD. Our services meet all your PhD Admissions, Thesis Preparation and Research Paper Publication needs with highest regards for the quality you prefer.
Our Achievements:
NATIONAL AWARD FOR BEST RESEARCH PROJECT (By Hon. President APJ Abdul Kalam)
GOLD MEDAL FOR RESEARCH ON DISABILITY (By Disabled’s Club of India)
NOMINATED FOR BEST MSME AWARDS 2017
5 STAR RATING ON GOOGLE
We have PhD experts from reputed institutions/ organizations like Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Indian Institute of Management (IIM) and many more apex education institutions in India. Our works are tailored and drafted as per your requirements and are totally unique.
From past years our core advisory members, research team assisted research scholars from various universities from all corners of world.
Subjects/Areas We Cover:
Management, Commerce, Finance, Marketing, Psychology, Education, Sociology, Mass communications, English Literature, English Language, Law, History, Computer Science & Engineering, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Pharmacy & Healthcare.
Leadership and Organizational Culture: What’s the Connection?Denison Consulting
If “culture is everything,” then one of the primary responsibilities of leaders is to shape an organization’s culture. As Lou Gerstner demonstrated at IBM, the strengths and weaknesses of a leader soon become reflected in an organization’s values and beliefs.
This study seeks to examine the impact of leadership traits on public organizational performance.
The views presented by scholars and practitioners in the social sciences argued that there is no relationship
between transformational leadership traits and organizational performance in the public sector organizations.
The study used correlation and regression analysis to identify the gap that exist within the variables under
investigation
CEO’s Values, Management Style and Firm Performance: Evidence from Social Ent...SEFORÏS
A substantial body of research emphasizes the importance of the person in charge of an organization for a firm’s decisions and performance, yet less is known about which individual traits and experiences can explain variation in management styles that contribute to differences in firm performance. Our paper explores the possibility that a CEO’s personal values help shape his or her management style, which in turn helps drive firm outcomes.
Writekraft Research and Publications LLP was initially formed, informally, in 2006 by a group of scholars to help fellow students. Gradually, with several dissertations, thesis and assignments receiving acclaim and a good grade, Writekraft was officially founded in 2011 Since its establishment, Writekraft Research & Publications LLP is Guiding and Mentoring PhD Scholars.
Our Mission:
To provide breakthrough research works to our clients through Perseverant efforts towards creativity and innovation”.
Vision:
Writekraft endeavours to be the leading global research and publications company that will fulfil all research needs of our clients. We will achieve this vision through:
Analyzing every customer's aims, objectives and purpose of research
Using advanced and latest tools and technique of research and analysis
Coordinating and including their own ideas and knowledge
Providing the desired inferences and results of the research
In the past decade, we have successfully assisted students from various universities in India and globally. We at Writekraft Research & Publications LLP head office in Kanpur, India are most trusted and professional Research, Writing, Guidance and Publication Service Provider for PhD. Our services meet all your PhD Admissions, Thesis Preparation and Research Paper Publication needs with highest regards for the quality you prefer.
Our Achievements:
NATIONAL AWARD FOR BEST RESEARCH PROJECT (By Hon. President APJ Abdul Kalam)
GOLD MEDAL FOR RESEARCH ON DISABILITY (By Disabled’s Club of India)
NOMINATED FOR BEST MSME AWARDS 2017
5 STAR RATING ON GOOGLE
We have PhD experts from reputed institutions/ organizations like Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Indian Institute of Management (IIM) and many more apex education institutions in India. Our works are tailored and drafted as per your requirements and are totally unique.
From past years our core advisory members, research team assisted research scholars from various universities from all corners of world.
Subjects/Areas We Cover:
Management, Commerce, Finance, Marketing, Psychology, Education, Sociology, Mass communications, English Literature, English Language, Law, History, Computer Science & Engineering, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Pharmacy & Healthcare.
This purpose of this research is to examine the philosophical challenges of human resources
management in the 2ist century and contribute to the knowledge of organization development. The study will
examine the impact of internal environmental changes on management, and empirically test the constructs of
performance leadership as it relates to organizational performance and discuss the many emerging challenges
that corporate culture posed to current day performance leadership.
Over the years, business analysts, economists, and academic researchers have pondered several theories that attempt to explain the dynamics of business organizations, including the ways in which they make decisions, distribute power and control, resolve conflict, and promote or resist organizational change.
The American culture of individualism, self-reliance, and independence celebrates the legend of the lone entrepreneur. However, for many years, research has shown that team-founded ventures achieve better performance than those founded by individuals. This paper reviews why entrepreneurs form teams, and the process of securing the various types of capital required, to increase the probability of success. A particular focus is placed on social capital and how when complimented with social competence, it can be leveraged to secure financing and build a highly effective, high-performance team.
In this article, I endeavors to develop an emerging paradigm of leadership for our organizations known as "leaderful practice." Leaderful practice constitutes a direct challenge to the conventional view of leadership as "being out in front." It is submitted that in the 21st Century organization, everyone will need to share the experience of serving as a leader, not sequentially, but concurrently and collectively. In other words, leaders co-exist at the same time and all together. In addition, each member of an organization will be encouraged to make a unique contribution to its growth, both independently and interdependently with others. In this sense, organizational members will aspire to become fervently collaborative, which in turn is derived from their compassion toward other human beings. Their well-developed sense of self permits them to develop a deep consideration of others. Thus, the article makes the case that the only possible way to lead ourselves out of trouble in management is to become mutual and to share leadership.
Leadership effectiveness a multi-factorial model dr. m. roussety mba, m led,...jameskandi
Dr. Maurice Roussety is an Executive Consultant at DST Advisory and Lecturer in Small Business, Franchising and Entrepreneurship at Griffith University in Queensland, Australia. Maurice holds a PhD from the Griffith University in Intellectual Property and Franchise Goodwill Valuation. He also holds a Master’s degree in Leadership and a Master of Business Administration.
Writekraft Research and Publications LLP was initially formed, informally, in 2006 by a group of scholars to help fellow students. Gradually, with several dissertations, thesis and assignments receiving acclaim and a good grade, Writekraft was officially founded in 2011 Since its establishment, Writekraft Research & Publications LLP is Guiding and Mentoring PhD Scholars.
Our Mission:
To provide breakthrough research works to our clients through Perseverant efforts towards creativity and innovation”.
Vision:
Writekraft endeavours to be the leading global research and publications company that will fulfil all research needs of our clients. We will achieve this vision through:
Analyzing every customer's aims, objectives and purpose of research
Using advanced and latest tools and technique of research and analysis
Coordinating and including their own ideas and knowledge
Providing the desired inferences and results of the research
In the past decade, we have successfully assisted students from various universities in India and globally. We at Writekraft Research & Publications LLP head office in Kanpur, India are most trusted and professional Research, Writing, Guidance and Publication Service Provider for PhD. Our services meet all your PhD Admissions, Thesis Preparation and Research Paper Publication needs with highest regards for the quality you prefer.
Our Achievements:
NATIONAL AWARD FOR BEST RESEARCH PROJECT (By Hon. President APJ Abdul Kalam)
GOLD MEDAL FOR RESEARCH ON DISABILITY (By Disabled’s Club of India)
NOMINATED FOR BEST MSME AWARDS 2017
5 STAR RATING ON GOOGLE
We have PhD experts from reputed institutions/ organizations like Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Indian Institute of Management (IIM) and many more apex education institutions in India. Our works are tailored and drafted as per your requirements and are totally unique.
From past years our core advisory members, research team assisted research scholars from various universities from all corners of world.
Subjects/Areas We Cover:
Management, Commerce, Finance, Marketing, Psychology, Education, Sociology, Mass communications, English Literature, English Language, Law, History, Computer Science & Engineering, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Pharmacy & Healthcare.
Writekraft Research and Publications LLP was initially formed, informally, in 2006 by a group of scholars to help fellow students. Gradually, with several dissertations, thesis and assignments receiving acclaim and a good grade, Writekraft was officially founded in 2011 Since its establishment, Writekraft Research & Publications LLP is Guiding and Mentoring PhD Scholars.
Our Mission:
To provide breakthrough research works to our clients through Perseverant efforts towards creativity and innovation”.
Vision:
Writekraft endeavours to be the leading global research and publications company that will fulfil all research needs of our clients. We will achieve this vision through:
Analyzing every customer's aims, objectives and purpose of research
Using advanced and latest tools and technique of research and analysis
Coordinating and including their own ideas and knowledge
Providing the desired inferences and results of the research
In the past decade, we have successfully assisted students from various universities in India and globally. We at Writekraft Research & Publications LLP head office in Kanpur, India are most trusted and professional Research, Writing, Guidance and Publication Service Provider for PhD. Our services meet all your PhD Admissions, Thesis Preparation and Research Paper Publication needs with highest regards for the quality you prefer.
Our Achievements:
NATIONAL AWARD FOR BEST RESEARCH PROJECT (By Hon. President APJ Abdul Kalam)
GOLD MEDAL FOR RESEARCH ON DISABILITY (By Disabled’s Club of India)
NOMINATED FOR BEST MSME AWARDS 2017
5 STAR RATING ON GOOGLE
We have PhD experts from reputed institutions/ organizations like Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Indian Institute of Management (IIM) and many more apex education institutions in India. Our works are tailored and drafted as per your requirements and are totally unique.
From past years our core advisory members, research team assisted research scholars from various universities from all corners of world.
Subjects/Areas We Cover:
Management, Commerce, Finance, Marketing, Psychology, Education, Sociology, Mass communications, English Literature, English Language, Law, History, Computer Science & Engineering, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Pharmacy & Healthcare.
This purpose of this research is to examine the philosophical challenges of human resources
management in the 2ist century and contribute to the knowledge of organization development. The study will
examine the impact of internal environmental changes on management, and empirically test the constructs of
performance leadership as it relates to organizational performance and discuss the many emerging challenges
that corporate culture posed to current day performance leadership.
Over the years, business analysts, economists, and academic researchers have pondered several theories that attempt to explain the dynamics of business organizations, including the ways in which they make decisions, distribute power and control, resolve conflict, and promote or resist organizational change.
The American culture of individualism, self-reliance, and independence celebrates the legend of the lone entrepreneur. However, for many years, research has shown that team-founded ventures achieve better performance than those founded by individuals. This paper reviews why entrepreneurs form teams, and the process of securing the various types of capital required, to increase the probability of success. A particular focus is placed on social capital and how when complimented with social competence, it can be leveraged to secure financing and build a highly effective, high-performance team.
In this article, I endeavors to develop an emerging paradigm of leadership for our organizations known as "leaderful practice." Leaderful practice constitutes a direct challenge to the conventional view of leadership as "being out in front." It is submitted that in the 21st Century organization, everyone will need to share the experience of serving as a leader, not sequentially, but concurrently and collectively. In other words, leaders co-exist at the same time and all together. In addition, each member of an organization will be encouraged to make a unique contribution to its growth, both independently and interdependently with others. In this sense, organizational members will aspire to become fervently collaborative, which in turn is derived from their compassion toward other human beings. Their well-developed sense of self permits them to develop a deep consideration of others. Thus, the article makes the case that the only possible way to lead ourselves out of trouble in management is to become mutual and to share leadership.
Leadership effectiveness a multi-factorial model dr. m. roussety mba, m led,...jameskandi
Dr. Maurice Roussety is an Executive Consultant at DST Advisory and Lecturer in Small Business, Franchising and Entrepreneurship at Griffith University in Queensland, Australia. Maurice holds a PhD from the Griffith University in Intellectual Property and Franchise Goodwill Valuation. He also holds a Master’s degree in Leadership and a Master of Business Administration.
Writekraft Research and Publications LLP was initially formed, informally, in 2006 by a group of scholars to help fellow students. Gradually, with several dissertations, thesis and assignments receiving acclaim and a good grade, Writekraft was officially founded in 2011 Since its establishment, Writekraft Research & Publications LLP is Guiding and Mentoring PhD Scholars.
Our Mission:
To provide breakthrough research works to our clients through Perseverant efforts towards creativity and innovation”.
Vision:
Writekraft endeavours to be the leading global research and publications company that will fulfil all research needs of our clients. We will achieve this vision through:
Analyzing every customer's aims, objectives and purpose of research
Using advanced and latest tools and technique of research and analysis
Coordinating and including their own ideas and knowledge
Providing the desired inferences and results of the research
In the past decade, we have successfully assisted students from various universities in India and globally. We at Writekraft Research & Publications LLP head office in Kanpur, India are most trusted and professional Research, Writing, Guidance and Publication Service Provider for PhD. Our services meet all your PhD Admissions, Thesis Preparation and Research Paper Publication needs with highest regards for the quality you prefer.
Our Achievements:
NATIONAL AWARD FOR BEST RESEARCH PROJECT (By Hon. President APJ Abdul Kalam)
GOLD MEDAL FOR RESEARCH ON DISABILITY (By Disabled’s Club of India)
NOMINATED FOR BEST MSME AWARDS 2017
5 STAR RATING ON GOOGLE
We have PhD experts from reputed institutions/ organizations like Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Indian Institute of Management (IIM) and many more apex education institutions in India. Our works are tailored and drafted as per your requirements and are totally unique.
From past years our core advisory members, research team assisted research scholars from various universities from all corners of world.
Subjects/Areas We Cover:
Management, Commerce, Finance, Marketing, Psychology, Education, Sociology, Mass communications, English Literature, English Language, Law, History, Computer Science & Engineering, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Pharmacy & Healthcare.
Writekraft Research and Publications LLP was initially formed, informally, in 2006 by a group of scholars to help fellow students. Gradually, with several dissertations, thesis and assignments receiving acclaim and a good grade, Writekraft was officially founded in 2011 Since its establishment, Writekraft Research & Publications LLP is Guiding and Mentoring PhD Scholars.
Our Mission:
To provide breakthrough research works to our clients through Perseverant efforts towards creativity and innovation”.
Vision:
Writekraft endeavours to be the leading global research and publications company that will fulfil all research needs of our clients. We will achieve this vision through:
Analyzing every customer's aims, objectives and purpose of research
Using advanced and latest tools and technique of research and analysis
Coordinating and including their own ideas and knowledge
Providing the desired inferences and results of the research
In the past decade, we have successfully assisted students from various universities in India and globally. We at Writekraft Research & Publications LLP head office in Kanpur, India are most trusted and professional Research, Writing, Guidance and Publication Service Provider for PhD. Our services meet all your PhD Admissions, Thesis Preparation and Research Paper Publication needs with highest regards for the quality you prefer.
Our Achievements:
NATIONAL AWARD FOR BEST RESEARCH PROJECT (By Hon. President APJ Abdul Kalam)
GOLD MEDAL FOR RESEARCH ON DISABILITY (By Disabled’s Club of India)
NOMINATED FOR BEST MSME AWARDS 2017
5 STAR RATING ON GOOGLE
We have PhD experts from reputed institutions/ organizations like Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Indian Institute of Management (IIM) and many more apex education institutions in India. Our works are tailored and drafted as per your requirements and are totally unique.
From past years our core advisory members, research team assisted research scholars from various universities from all corners of world.
Subjects/Areas We Cover:
Management, Commerce, Finance, Marketing, Psychology, Education, Sociology, Mass communications, English Literature, English Language, Law, History, Computer Science & Engineering, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Pharmacy & Healthcare.
Writekraft Research and Publications LLP was initially formed, informally, in 2006 by a group of scholars to help fellow students. Gradually, with several dissertations, thesis and assignments receiving acclaim and a good grade, Writekraft was officially founded in 2011 Since its establishment, Writekraft Research & Publications LLP is Guiding and Mentoring PhD Scholars.
Our Mission:
To provide breakthrough research works to our clients through Perseverant efforts towards creativity and innovation”.
Vision:
Writekraft endeavours to be the leading global research and publications company that will fulfil all research needs of our clients. We will achieve this vision through:
Analyzing every customer's aims, objectives and purpose of research
Using advanced and latest tools and technique of research and analysis
Coordinating and including their own ideas and knowledge
Providing the desired inferences and results of the research
In the past decade, we have successfully assisted students from various universities in India and globally. We at Writekraft Research & Publications LLP head office in Kanpur, India are most trusted and professional Research, Writing, Guidance and Publication Service Provider for PhD. Our services meet all your PhD Admissions, Thesis Preparation and Research Paper Publication needs with highest regards for the quality you prefer.
Our Achievements:
NATIONAL AWARD FOR BEST RESEARCH PROJECT (By Hon. President APJ Abdul Kalam)
GOLD MEDAL FOR RESEARCH ON DISABILITY (By Disabled’s Club of India)
NOMINATED FOR BEST MSME AWARDS 2017
5 STAR RATING ON GOOGLE
We have PhD experts from reputed institutions/ organizations like Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Indian Institute of Management (IIM) and many more apex education institutions in India. Our works are tailored and drafted as per your requirements and are totally unique.
From past years our core advisory members, research team assisted research scholars from various universities from all corners of world.
Subjects/Areas We Cover:
Management, Commerce, Finance, Marketing, Psychology, Education, Sociology, Mass communications, English Literature, English Language, Law, History, Computer Science & Engineering, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Pharmacy & Healthcare.
Writekraft Research and Publications LLP was initially formed, informally, in 2006 by a group of scholars to help fellow students. Gradually, with several dissertations, thesis and assignments receiving acclaim and a good grade, Writekraft was officially founded in 2011 Since its establishment, Writekraft Research & Publications LLP is Guiding and Mentoring PhD Scholars.
Our Mission:
To provide breakthrough research works to our clients through Perseverant efforts towards creativity and innovation”.
Vision:
Writekraft endeavours to be the leading global research and publications company that will fulfil all research needs of our clients. We will achieve this vision through:
Analyzing every customer's aims, objectives and purpose of research
Using advanced and latest tools and technique of research and analysis
Coordinating and including their own ideas and knowledge
Providing the desired inferences and results of the research
In the past decade, we have successfully assisted students from various universities in India and globally. We at Writekraft Research & Publications LLP head office in Kanpur, India are most trusted and professional Research, Writing, Guidance and Publication Service Provider for PhD. Our services meet all your PhD Admissions, Thesis Preparation and Research Paper Publication needs with highest regards for the quality you prefer.
Our Achievements:
NATIONAL AWARD FOR BEST RESEARCH PROJECT (By Hon. President APJ Abdul Kalam)
GOLD MEDAL FOR RESEARCH ON DISABILITY (By Disabled’s Club of India)
NOMINATED FOR BEST MSME AWARDS 2017
5 STAR RATING ON GOOGLE
We have PhD experts from reputed institutions/ organizations like Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Indian Institute of Management (IIM) and many more apex education institutions in India. Our works are tailored and drafted as per your requirements and are totally unique.
From past years our core advisory members, research team assisted research scholars from various universities from all corners of world.
Subjects/Areas We Cover:
Management, Commerce, Finance, Marketing, Psychology, Education, Sociology, Mass communications, English Literature, English Language, Law, History, Computer Science & Engineering, Electronics & Communication Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Pharmacy & Healthcare.
Leadership Styles and Organizational Citizenship Behavior.docxjeremylockett77
Leadership Styles and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Mediating
Effect of Subordinates’ Competence and Downward Influence Tactics
Lee Kim Lian
UCSI University
Low Guan Tui
Vesseltech Engineering Sdn Bhd
The objective of this study is to test a theory-based model predicting the relationships between leadership
styles, subordinates’ competence, downward influence tactics and outcome of organizational citizenship
behavior in Malaysian-based organizations. Data was collected from 347 respondents that represent
major industries like services, manufacturing, mining and construction companies. Path analysis
technique was used to test the model developed. The results show that the transformational leadership
style has significant positive relationship with subordinates’ organizational citizenship behavior, whereas
the transactional leader style is negatively related to organizational citizenship behavior. This result
illustrates the direct effects of leadership styles on the subordinates’ outcome. In addition, inspirational
appeals and consultation tactics, as downward influence tactics, were found to mediate the relationship
between transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behavior. Likewise, subordinates’
competence mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and consultation tactics.
These results only partially support the efficacy of the influence theory, and therefore lend support to
contingency theories of leadership. Implications for research and direction for future research are also
discussed.
INTRODUCTION
This study explores how superior leadership styles may impact subordinates’ organizational
citizenship behavior (OCB). The importance of leadership style as predictor of OCB has been well
established in Western settings (Bass, 1985; Organ, 1988; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Morrman & Fetter,
1990; Howell & Avolio, 1993; Lowe, Kroeck & Sivasubramaniam, 1996; Podsakoff, MacKenzie &
Bommer, 1996; MacKenzie, Podsakoff & Rich, 2001; Geyer & Steyrer, 1998; Wang, Law, Hackett,
Wang, Chen, 2005; Schlechter & Engelbrecht, 2006; Boerner, Eisenbeiss, Griesser, 2007). However,
there is scant research explore the indirect effects between this two variables. Hence, the inclusion of
subordinates’ competence and downward influence tactics served to investigate the role of intervening
effect between leadership styles and OCB.
Several researchers have suggested that leadership research needs to focus more on the “fundamental”
issues, such as influence processes that characterize leader-follower interaction (Bass, 1990; Hollander &
Offermann, 1990; Yukl, 1989). Research has also shown that effective leaders must have the ability to
recognize when to use different tactics of influence as well as the skill necessary to effectively carry out
Journal of Applied Business and Economics vol. 13(2) 2012 59
these influence attempts (Kipnis, Schmidt & Wilkinson, 1980; Yu.
Leadership Styles and Organizational Citizenship Behavior.docxcroysierkathey
Leadership Styles and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Mediating
Effect of Subordinates’ Competence and Downward Influence Tactics
Lee Kim Lian
UCSI University
Low Guan Tui
Vesseltech Engineering Sdn Bhd
The objective of this study is to test a theory-based model predicting the relationships between leadership
styles, subordinates’ competence, downward influence tactics and outcome of organizational citizenship
behavior in Malaysian-based organizations. Data was collected from 347 respondents that represent
major industries like services, manufacturing, mining and construction companies. Path analysis
technique was used to test the model developed. The results show that the transformational leadership
style has significant positive relationship with subordinates’ organizational citizenship behavior, whereas
the transactional leader style is negatively related to organizational citizenship behavior. This result
illustrates the direct effects of leadership styles on the subordinates’ outcome. In addition, inspirational
appeals and consultation tactics, as downward influence tactics, were found to mediate the relationship
between transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behavior. Likewise, subordinates’
competence mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and consultation tactics.
These results only partially support the efficacy of the influence theory, and therefore lend support to
contingency theories of leadership. Implications for research and direction for future research are also
discussed.
INTRODUCTION
This study explores how superior leadership styles may impact subordinates’ organizational
citizenship behavior (OCB). The importance of leadership style as predictor of OCB has been well
established in Western settings (Bass, 1985; Organ, 1988; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Morrman & Fetter,
1990; Howell & Avolio, 1993; Lowe, Kroeck & Sivasubramaniam, 1996; Podsakoff, MacKenzie &
Bommer, 1996; MacKenzie, Podsakoff & Rich, 2001; Geyer & Steyrer, 1998; Wang, Law, Hackett,
Wang, Chen, 2005; Schlechter & Engelbrecht, 2006; Boerner, Eisenbeiss, Griesser, 2007). However,
there is scant research explore the indirect effects between this two variables. Hence, the inclusion of
subordinates’ competence and downward influence tactics served to investigate the role of intervening
effect between leadership styles and OCB.
Several researchers have suggested that leadership research needs to focus more on the “fundamental”
issues, such as influence processes that characterize leader-follower interaction (Bass, 1990; Hollander &
Offermann, 1990; Yukl, 1989). Research has also shown that effective leaders must have the ability to
recognize when to use different tactics of influence as well as the skill necessary to effectively carry out
Journal of Applied Business and Economics vol. 13(2) 2012 59
these influence attempts (Kipnis, Schmidt & Wilkinson, 1980; Yu ...
Leadership, Ethics, and Communications: Foundations of a Sustainable Organiza...Bryan Hill
Links between effective organizational leadership, ethics, integrity, and communications. Impact of ethics on organizational communications; strategy; culture; human resources; organizational development and change; organizational and personal reputation; and impact on other organizational aspects. Organizational ethics policies and global ethics declarations. Scriptures from Judeo-Christian, Muslim, and Buddhist religions foundational to leadership, ethics, and communication principles.
r Academy of Management Journal2015, Vol. 1015, No. 1, 1–9..docxmakdul
r Academy of Management Journal
2015, Vol. 1015, No. 1, 1–9.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.4006
FROM THE EDITORS
RETHINKING GOVERNANCE IN MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
In the field of management, the study of gover-
nance has primarily dealt with decision-making by
boards of directors, chief executives, and senior
managers. The corporate governance literature has
generated important insights regarding incentive
alignment, risk taking, and coordination chal-
lenges. Emerging trends, highlighted in this issue,
raise new questions regarding managerial roles,
organizational contexts, internal and social pro-
cesses, and changes in governance over time. We
encourage management scholars to rethink their
approach to governance research by considering
stakeholder engagement, the implications of big
data, social impact, global dimensions, and com-
parative analysis of governance. A broadened con-
ceptualization of governance may also deal with the
dynamics of interorganizational arrangements, in-
cluding the co-creation of organizations of varying
governance forms.
WHAT IS GOVERNANCE?
In this “thematic issue,” we assembled articles
that reflect evolving practices in governance.1
Corporate governance is the system by which
companies are directed and controlled. Boards of
directors are responsible for the governance of
their companies. The shareholders’ role in gover-
nance is to appoint the directors and the auditors
and to satisfy themselves that an appropriate gov-
ernance structure is in place. The responsibilities
of the board include setting the company’s strategic
aims, providing the leadership to put them into
effect, supervising the management of the business,
and reporting to shareholders on their stewardship.
The board’s actions are subject to laws, regulations,
and the shareholders in general meeting (Cadbury,
1992). Corporate governance is therefore about
what the board of a company does and how it sets
the values of the company, but is distinct from the
operational management of the company by full-
time executives.
These views of corporate governance stem pre-
dominantly from a financial perspective. For ex-
ample, Shleifer and Vishny (1997: 737) address
corporate governance as “the ways in which sup-
pliers of finance to corporations assure themselves
of getting a return on their investment. How do the
suppliers of finance get managers to return some
of the profits to them? How do they make sure
that managers do not steal the capital they supply
or invest it in bad projects? How do suppliers
of finance control managers?” These views stem
primarily from an agency theoretical perspective
that investigates the consequences of separation of
ownership and control in the modern corporation
(Jensen & Meckling, 1976). Recent corporate ac-
tivity and views, however, have an expanded view
of governance as involving stewardship and lead-
ership, in addition to the narrower financial pru-
dence role. From a survey of board members from
15 countri ...
T h e J o u r n a l o f D e v e l o p i n g A r e .docxperryk1
T h e J o u r n a l o f D e v e l o p i n g A r e a s
Special Issue on Sydney Conference Held in April 2015
Volume 49 No. 6 2015
THE EMERGING ROLE OF
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
Mostafa Sayyadi Ghasabeh
Claudine Soosay
Carmen Reaiche
University of South Australia, Australia
ABSTRACT
This paper presents a literature review of leadership over the years and the emerging role of
transformational leadership. We also argue that this form of leadership is appropriate in the context
of globalized markets, where there is increasing diffusion of goods, services, values and technologies
globally, which results in the convergence of societies toward a uniform pattern of economic,
political and cultural organization. There are various issues and consideration existing in the
leadership literature as “the core of the criticism in the literature is that organisations of all sorts
(corporations, government agencies, and not-for-profit organisations) tend to be over-managed
(and/or over-administrated) and under-led” (Mills 2005, p.19). Mills (2005) highlights the vital
importance of leadership in both political and business areas, and argues that organisations in both
areas, in the absence of effective leadership, are not capable of effectively implementing changes at
the organisational level. This paper adopts a conceptual approach aiming to convey the importance
of transformational leadership amongst other styles. In this paper, we review the role of leadership
in the business area and establish the need to investigate transformational leadership, as an ideal
leadership form in enabling firms to accomplish sustainable competitiveness as they operate in global
markets. Based on the various leadership theories discussed be further argued that leadership is highly
essential for business organisations to achieve a sustained change and eventually higher degree of
effectiveness, especially when operating in global markets. Transformational leadership, comprising
characteristics of idealised influence, individualised consideration, intellectual stimulation, and
inspirational motivation has been found to have implications for higher leadership effectiveness in
new market environments and production locations. Various empirical studies highlighted
transformational leadership as an enabler of innovation. To demonstrate the role of transformational
leadership in organizational innovation, it can be argued that these leaders facilitate the generation
of new knowledge and ideas through applying intellectual stimulation aspect that motivates
employees to approach organizational problems in a more novel approach. Accordingly, we establish
the appropriateness of transformational leadership as a managerial-based, output-based as market-
based competency for firms in globalized markets. We conclude by providing suggestions and scope
for empirical investi.
Corporate social responsibility institutional drivers a comparative study fro...Adam Shafi Shaik PhD.
ABSTRACT
This study develops an internal–external institutional framework that explains why firms act in socially responsible ways in the emerging country context of India and Saudi Arabia. Utilizing a mixed method of in-depth study selected companies & individuals, the author found that internal institutional factors, including ethical corporate culture and top management commitment, and external institutional factors, including globalization pressure, Government embeddedness, and normative social pressure, will affect the likelihood of firms to act in socially responsible ways. In particular, implicit ethical corporate culture plays a key role in predicting different aspects of corporate social responsibility (CSR), while external institutional mechanisms mainly predict market-oriented CSR initiatives. This study contributes to the research on CSR antecedents by showing that in the emerging economy of India and Saudi Arabia, CSR toward non market stakeholders is more close
Running head ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 1ANNOTA.docxSUBHI7
Running head: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
1
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
2
Annotated Bibliography
Shawn Harden
Southern Wesleyan University
July 19, 2017
Article 1
According to the article “Too Much of a Good Thing,” intellectual roots of organizational and management theory involves the Japanese leaders approach to quality improvement. The topic is related to organizational behavior in that it discusses quality and its compatibility with innovation. Innovation is a subtopic in human behavior in the workplace and its impact on the company. This topic makes a difference in management in that it discusses how organizations can properly manage quality improvement activities and thus achieve innovations. This article discusses strategy methods such as the waterfall methodology, which makes employees especially programmers more productive. Strategy formulation involves activities geared at creating a particular strategy such as the waterfall strategy. Strategy implementation involves using the formulated strategy to achieve results. Management can change significantly by responding to radical innovation.
Article 2
According to the second article “Rebuilding companies as communities,” the intellectual roots of organizational and management theories are based on the concept of making companies a place where employees can engage and are committed to one another. The topic is related to organizational behavior in that it discusses the idea of organizational culture and employee’s attitude towards building companies as communities. The topic contributes to management in that it suggests the kind of leadership that would best work for this kind of an organization suggesting that distributed and engaged leadership would be effective. The article suggests community-ship as a strategy of improving modern age organizations. According to this article, management can improve through leadership activities such as the creation of a work atmosphere that promotes trust.
Article 3
According to the third article, “Making management matter” the roots of organizational and management involve leadership and must struggle to be rigorous and interdisciplinary. The topic is related to organizational behavior in that it talks about leadership, which is a subtopic or organizational behavior and influencing employee’s behavior and attitude towards an achievement. The topic adds to management by arguing that a major requirement of management research need to be rooted in practical issues and finding the right balance between interdisciplinary research and drawing from diverse disciplines. A good strategy in business, especially for a leader, is to have a sense of where the company wants to achieve and working with the team to make things happen. Management can improve through the research that draws from academic disciplines to allow managers to comprehend the content of detailed issue they are handling.
Article 4
In the fourth article, “It’s ...
Running Head FOUR-FRAME MODEL 1FOUR-FRAME MODEL7Fou.docxcowinhelen
Running Head: FOUR-FRAME MODEL
1
FOUR-FRAME MODEL
7
Four Frame Model
Rubin Wilkins
Module 5 Assignment 2
Argosy University Los Angeles
Professor: Dale Mancini
February 15, 2017
Four-frame Model
Introduction
Bolman and Deal synthesized the foregoing leadership theory into four contemporary cognitive perspectives which they further organized into frames to assist leaders in the decision-making process in relation to each individual situation. It was their understanding that the use of such frames would assist leaders in analyzing respective events in a different manner and perspective. In essence, they provide ‘windows’ that enhance the leaders’ to have a broader understanding of the challenges being faced by the organization and solutions that are potentially available. This insightful piece therefore proceeds to help in understanding the frames.
The Four-Frame Model of leadership is a creation stemming from the meshing of various organizational theories to form a wide-encompassing one. These consolidated theories include; the trait theory, power and influence theory, situational and contingency theory, and the behavioral theory (Bateman, 2007). They have been developed over a span of many years. The multiple perspectives emanating from the various theoretical underpinnings are the ones termed as frames by the two theorists; through which an organization is viewed by the leaders and other related persons. These ‘windows’ further operate to bring an organization into focus and subsequently serve as filters which offer the leaders order and assist them in making decisions. Furthermore, the frames comprise of the structural frame, human resource frame, political frame and the symbolic frame. Each individual frame represents a perspective
accompanied by its own assumptions and attributes.
The structural frame is used in viewing the world from an orderly point of view furnished with a multiplicity of rules and procedures. The human resource frame then comes in to assume that goals are best achieved through the meeting of organization members’ needs and fully appreciating the workforce as fundamental part of the organization. The political frame appertains to the conflicts, alliances and bartering of respective parties to properly use and allocate the scares resources owned by and charged to the organization. Finally, symbolic frame relates to the issues of culture, symbols and rituals of an organization as opposed to the established rules and procedures.
Theme among articles
Song, Kim and Kolb (2009) set out to research on the effect of learning an organization’s culture and the established linkage between interpersonal trust and the general commitment to an organization. The sample used in this study was primarily obtained from various employees working to conglomerate entities of Korea. Resultantly, it was established that learning an organization’s culture worked as a mediating factor in the explanation of associations betwe ...
1. NOTE
BRINGING OUT CHARISMA: CEO CHARISMA
AND EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS
ANGELO FANELLI
HEC School of Management, Paris
VILMOS F. MISANGYI
University of Delaware
We present a theory detailing the processes through which CEO charisma affects
participants outside the organization. In order to reach this goal, the model extends
the range of current theory beyond internal organizational members, linking CEO
charisma to those outsiders key to organizational effectiveness: institutional interme-
diaries and external stakeholders. We discuss several implications suggested by this
framework to facilitate future research in this area.
Charismatic CEOs are fueling a heated de-
bate in the United States, especially regarding
their contribution to stock market success. For
example, the May 15, 2000, cover of Fortune
shouted: “Is John Chambers the best CEO on
earth? Is it too late to buy his stock?” (Serwer,
2000). Others remain skeptical: “Naive investors
. . . chose to follow stars—such as Anita Roddick
of Body Shop and Asil Nadir of Polly Peck—
without looking too closely at the numbers.
Then, as now, it often ended in tears” (Econo-
mist, 2002). Accordingly, the Wall Street Journal
calls for academics to “explore whether CEOs
have gained outsized bargaining power in rela-
tion to shareholders and boards. Our guess is
yes because so much of a company’s stock mar-
ket value these days depends on the image and
reputation of the CEO” (Jenkins, 2002: A23).
Yet, to those asking whether CEO charisma
contributes to stock market success, research
has little to offer; a surprisingly small number of
studies, with limited results (e.g., Tosi, Mi-
sangyi, Fanelli, Waldman, & Yammarino, 2004;
Waldman, Ramirez, House, & Puranam, 2001),
denotes the frailty of the theoretical framework
linking charisma to organizational effective-
ness. Current theory (e.g., Cannella & Monroe,
1997; Waldman & Yammarino, 1999) focuses al-
most exclusively on the effects of charisma on
organizational members, and this “internal fo-
cus” needlessly constrains understanding of the
charisma-effectiveness relationship in at least
two ways.
First, it neglects an important function of the
executive: to manage the external environment
of the firm. Executives represent the organiza-
tion to outside stakeholders, rally support and
obtain resources for the firm, and engage in
political dynamics with government officials
and other corporate actors (Pfeffer, 1981; Pfeffer
& Salancik, 1978). All these activities are only
loosely coupled with what executives do inside
the organization (Thompson, 1967) yet are cru-
cial to organizational effectiveness (Mintzberg,
1973).
Second, internally focused research implicitly
assumes that organizational effectiveness cor-
responds to the sum of the individual and group
task performances of organizational members.
Such internal task performance constitutes only
a portion of organizational effectiveness, how-
ever, since effectiveness stems from the coali-
tional nature of firms (Cameron & Whetton, 1983;
Scott, 1998) and is perhaps better conceptualized
as “an external standard applied to the output
or activities of the organization . . . applied by
all individuals, groups, or organizations that are
affected by, or come in contact with, the focal
We thank Rich Weiss for his comments, which helped to
strengthen the manuscript. We also express our gratitude to
Martin Kilduff and three anonymous reviewers for their en-
couragement and developmental feedback. Both authors
contributed equally.
Academy of Management Review
2006, Vol. 31, No. 4, 1049–1061.
1049
2. organization” (Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978: 34). Thus,
organizational effectiveness is necessarily mul-
tidimensional, wherein internal and external in-
dicators may be only loosely coupled (Meyer &
Gupta, 1994; Scott, 1998), and, to be successful,
CEOs must be concerned with affecting all di-
mensions.
Exploring the charisma-effectiveness linkage
thus requires overcoming an exclusive concen-
tration on organizational members and extend-
ing both theory and research to external stake-
holders—in other words, “bringing out” CEO
charisma. To this end, we first review current
understanding of CEO charisma. Second, we ex-
plicate some key differences between internal
and external organizational participants with
regard to their relations with the CEO and or-
ganizational effectiveness. We then present a
model of the processes through which CEO cha-
risma affects external stakeholders. Finally, we
discuss implications for future research.
BACKGROUND
To Weber, charisma is an ideal-typical (i.e., an
abstract) form of authority, resting on the “devo-
tion to the specific and exceptional sanctity, her-
oism or exemplary character of an individual
person, and of the normative patterns or order
revealed or ordained by him” (1947: 328). Char-
ismatic leadership theory (CLT; Conger & Ka-
nungo, 1987, 1998; House, 1977; House & Aditya,
1997; House, Spangler, & Woycke, 1991; Klein &
House, 1995; Shamir, 1995; Shamir, Zakay,
Breinin, & Popper, 1998; Waldman & Yammarino,
1999) modifies Weber’s conception, focusing on
charisma as “a relationship between an individ-
ual (leader) and one or more followers based on
leader behaviors combined with favorable attri-
butions on the part of the followers” (Waldman
et al., 2001: 135). In CLT, charismatic leaders
have their primary effects on followers through
the social influence process of identification (Et-
zioni, 1975; Gardner & Avolio, 1998; House, 1977;
Howell, 1988; Shamir, House, & Arthur, 1993).
Leaders’ behaviors, such as displays of extraor-
dinary emotional expressiveness, self-confi-
dence, self-sacrifice, determination, risk taking,
and optimism (Shamir et al., 1998), serve to sym-
bolize for subordinates the traits, values, beliefs,
and behaviors that are desirable and legitimate
to develop (Shamir et al., 1993). These exemplary
leader behaviors inspire followers’ confidence,
raise followers’ self-efficacy, and lead to identi-
fication with, and admiration for, the leader
(Shamir et al., 1993).
CLT also stresses “symbolic and emotionally
appealing leader behaviors” (House & Aditya,
1997: 440), such as visionary, frame-alignment,
and image-building behaviors, that act as a
“conceptual roadmap” to connect subordinates’
personal and social identities to the collective
organizational identity and the leader’s vision
of the future (Conger, Kanungo, & Menon, 2000;
Shamir et al., 1993). In short, CLT generally takes
a leader-driven approach to the charismatic re-
lationship, where “leaders’ behaviors form the
basis of followers’ attributions” (Conger & Ka-
nungo, 1987: 645) and where identification plays
a central role: the charismatic “leader’s empha-
sis on . . . collective identity . . . [is] related to
subordinates’ level of identification with the
leader and trust in the leader, heightened moti-
vation and willingness to sacrifice for the unit,
identification with the unit, and attachment to
the unit” (Shamir et al., 1998: 404).
Theory and research in the CLT literature fo-
cus on internal organizational members. For in-
stance, Bass (1985) argues that transformational
leadership is additive to transactional leader-
ship, whereby the latter coincides with the tra-
ditional definition of hierarchical authority—an
exchange of inducements and contributions
(Barnard, 1938; March & Simon, 1958; Simon,
1945). Similarly, empirical studies focus on how
charismatic leaders affect their hierarchical
subordinates (Bycio, Hackett, & Allen, 1995;
Hater & Bass, 1988; Howell & Avolio, 1993), or
they embed experimental subjects within an au-
thority relation whereby the leader, charismatic
or not, is nonetheless a hierarchical superior
(Howell & Frost, 1989).
This internal focus is also present in current
theory regarding CEO charisma (Waldman &
Yammarino, 1999), which centers on the effects
of charisma on close and distant subordinates.
The direct interaction of the CEO with the former
results in heightened cohesion and effort among
top executives, which then “cascades” down to
more distant subordinates through role-model-
ing behaviors. Furthermore, as a consequence of
charismatic attributions stemming from CEO
behaviors, distant subordinates experience
heightened motivation, commitment, and strong
organizational identification. Thus, CLT has
brought the charismatic phenomenon entirely
1050 OctoberAcademy of Management Review
3. within the boundaries of the organization, shift-
ing the focus “from meta and macroleadership
to microleadership” (Shamir, 1995: 20). As a co-
ordination mechanism, CLT’s charisma operates
within rational-legal authority, rather than in
opposition to it, as Weber postulated.
An exception outside the CLT domain is
Meindl and Thompson’s (2004) theory of CEO
charisma as a social representation constructed
by the media that reifies firms and provides
explanations for organizational performance.
These researchers suggest that CEO charisma
is a publicly created persona symbolizing con-
trol over organizational performance—a simpli-
fied archetypical image that results from the
celebration and romance of leadership: “The
pinnacle of leadership celebration occurs with
the imputation of a CEO as ’charismatic’”
(Meindl & Thompson, 2004: 18). As with reputa-
tions in general, such CEO images have distrib-
utive and collective properties that change over
time. Initially, media constructions are gener-
ally unstructured and unorganized, but as inter-
est builds, more accounts appear and a conver-
gence occurs, aided by cross-referencing and
confirmation from similar others (Pfeffer, 1981).
In short, the view here is that CEO charisma is
an attribution created by observers’ explana-
tions of organizational performance, a process
rife with the “belief that individuals determine
the fate of organizations” (Chen & Meindl, 1991:
524).
Limited research regarding CEO charisma
has been conducted within CLT, yet its evidence
suggests that CEO charisma contributes to or-
ganizational effectiveness through relation-
ships both internal and external to the organi-
zation (Flynn & Staw, 2004; Tosi et al., 2004;
Waldman et al., 2001). Waldman et al. (2001)
found that CEO charisma is related to an inter-
nal indicator of firm performance (return on
sales) under conditions of perceived environ-
mental uncertainty. Tosi et al. (2004) found that
charismatic CEOs outperform their industry
peers on an external indicator of performance
(shareholder returns) under conditions of per-
ceived environmental uncertainty, but not inter-
nally (return on assets). And Flynn and Staw
(2004) found that charismatic CEOs outperform
their peers on both internal (return on sales) and
external (shareholder returns) indicators and,
also, that they may affect investor decision mak-
ing in a simulation involving college under-
graduate students.
The dearth of theory as to the processes
through which CEO charisma affects external
aspects of organizational effectiveness, as well
as the shortcomings of the current theoretical
frameworks, is evident. CLT, with its exclusive
focus on internal organizational members, pro-
vides a great deal of understanding on the in-
ternal aspects of this relationship but virtually
neglects the external. Meindl and Thompson’s
(2004) exclusive focus on attributions of CEO
charisma provides a limited understanding of
the relationship that CEO charisma has with
organizations’ external environments, purpose-
fully omitting any role that the “leader’s side” of
the relationship may play toward these attribu-
tions. Given these limitations in current theory,
we now turn to developing an understanding of
the processes through which CEO charisma af-
fects external stakeholders. In so doing, we rec-
ognize the complexity and multidimensionality
of organizational effectiveness (Meyer & Gupta,
1994), but we focus exclusively on this external
aspect of the CEO charisma-organizational ef-
fectiveness linkage with the hope of furthering
this critical avenue of research. In the next sec-
tion we therefore examine some key differences
between internal and external organizational
participants.
INSIDERS, OUTSIDERS, AND THE CEO
In an effort to clearly identify the major differ-
ences that exist between charismatic relation-
ships within the organization and those in the
external environment, we treat internal (“insid-
ers”) and external (“outsiders”) stakeholders as
ideal types (Roach & Bednar, 1997), stressing
their respective differences and emphasizing
their internal homogeneity.1
As Table 1 sug-
gests, insiders and outsiders differ along three
main dimensions; the first reflects differences in
motivations between insiders and outsiders,
1
We recognize, however, that, in reality, both insiders
and outsiders comprise different subpopulations with di-
verse social characteristics, roles, and cognitive frames
(DiMaggio, 1997; Powell & DiMaggio, 1991; Waldman & Yam-
marino, 1999), which may lead to similarities between them,
as well as some degree of internal heterogeneity. Empirical
research should specify, on a case-by-case basis, the degree
to which the ideal type approximates reality.
2006 1051Fanelli and Misangyi
4. whereas the second and third distinguish the
contexts where charisma operates.
The first row of Table 1 suggests an important
difference between insiders and outsiders—
their motivation.2
Once they decide to join the
organization, insiders contribute to organization-
al effectiveness via their decision to produce
(March & Simon, 1958), which is what CEOs must
affect in order to achieve task performance and,
ultimately, (internal) effectiveness. Insiders’ de-
cision to participate is also relevant to the CEO
but, once made, is less of an issue compared to
their motivation to produce (Barnard, 1938). In-
deed, the “internal focus” of CLT centers on this
question. Outsiders, however, contribute pri-
marily to organizational effectiveness via their
decision to participate, which corresponds to
supplying the organization with resources,
based on an evaluation of whether participation
helps to achieve their goals, as well as an eval-
uation of the organization’s legitimacy (Barnard,
1938; Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978). Examples include
shareholders’ contribution to organizational
success in their decision to purchase the firm’s
stocks and customers’ decision to purchase the
firm’s products.
The second row of Table 1 outlines a key dif-
ference contextually between insiders and out-
siders. Insiders are subordinates in a hierarchi-
cal structure that endows CEOs with rational-
legal authority. CEOs enjoy no such authority
over outsiders, however, since outsiders interact
with the CEO within a network structure of
nonhierarchical relations. As Simon puts it, “Of
all the modes of influence, authority is the one
that chiefly distinguishes the behavior of indi-
viduals as participants of organizations from
their behavior outside such organizations” (1945:
177). This relational difference has an important
consequence: because their power over outsid-
ers is relatively unstructured and unpredictable,
CEOs must resort to influence mechanisms, par-
ticularly symbolic management.
Symbolic action, which is used to influence
the attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, or values of
stakeholders, is “important in the exercise of
power” (Pfeffer, 1981: 184). Thus, with respect to
insiders, symbolic management supplements
CEOs’ rational-legal authority (i.e., the “addi-
tive” nature of transformational over transac-
tional leadership; Bass, 1985) and, perhaps more
important, may serve to obfuscate CEO abuse of
power (Pfeffer, 1981). Among outsiders, in con-
trast, symbolic management represents a pri-
mary means by which executives attempt to but-
tress their relatively less powerful position
(Pfeffer, 1981)—for example, by convincing
shareholders to delay selling stock despite the
availability of more attractive alternatives
(Zajac & Westphal, 1995) or by managing public
perceptions of their organization’s effectiveness
(Elsbach, 1994; Elsbach & Sutton, 1992; Elsbach,
Sutton, & Principe, 1998; Staw, McKechnie, &
Puffer, 1983; Sutton & Kramer, 1990). Although
symbolic management may be deceptive, this is
not always the case. Symbolic behaviors are
core to charismatic leadership (Conger & Ka-
nungo, 1998; Gardner & Avolio, 1999), and they
may help the CEO obtain commitment from
powerful external audiences in critical moments
of the organization’s life (Arnold, 1988; Cheney &
Christensen, 2001; Hambrick & Fukutomi, 1991).
For example, Lee Iacocca’s vision and testimony
before Congress generated confidence and the
legitimacy necessary to help save Chrysler (Ia-
cocca & Novak, 1984).
The last dimension portrayed in Table 1 refers
to the salience of CEO communications to insid-
ers versus outsiders. Communication is central
to charisma (Gardner & Avolio, 1998), and the
communication networks that CEOs establish
with insiders differ from those established with
outsiders. Insiders are relatively “captive” to the
CEO, whose communications will, at all times,
capture the attention of subordinates, regard-
2
This discussion builds on March and Simon’s (1958) con-
cepts of motivation to participate and motivation to produce.
Briefly, the former “is the decision to participate in the or-
ganization—or to leave the organization. The second is the
decision to produce or to refuse to produce at the rate de-
manded by the organization hierarchy” (March & Simon,
1958: 67).
TABLE 1
Differences Between Internal and External
Stakeholders
Dimension Insiders Outsiders
Motivation
relevant to
CEO
Decision to
produce
Decision to
participate
Relationship with
CEO
Hierarchical Network
Salience of CEO
communications
Captive Competitive
1052 OctoberAcademy of Management Review
5. less of the “social distance” (Shamir, 1995). In
contrast, the volatile communication networks
of the external environment are “competitive” in
nature. At any point in time, multiple actors
evaluate multiple firms and multiple leaders
(Thompson, 1967; Zuckerman, 2000). Thus, from
the viewpoint of the leader, outsiders’ attention
must be won. This difference between internal
and external networks leads to an interesting
paradox: where symbolic action is the primary
means of success (among outsiders), CEO com-
munication is not very salient—it is not neces-
sarily readily noticeable. Yet, among insiders,
where symbolic management is secondary to
legitimate authority, the CEO’s message is very
salient.
In summary, the three dimensions show that
the internal and external environments of orga-
nizations are rather different. In the latter, the
central issue, with regard to organizational ef-
fectiveness, is to affect outsiders’ decision to
participate. This is a difficult task for the CEO,
for authority is not available, and multiple (and
potentially equally attractive) alternatives ren-
der evaluation “an interpretive exercise” (Zuck-
erman, 1999: 1431) for outsiders. Despite these
differences, both insiders and outsiders strive to
develop an understanding of the world around
them. CEOs provide sensemaking and meaning
for organizational action in an attempt to satisfy
this necessity (Pondy, 1978; Weick, 1979), which
is “directed both internally, to produce orga-
nized and committed collective action, and ex-
ternally, as part of a process of legitimating the
organization” (Pfeffer, 1981: 188). Charismatic
behaviors and symbolism allow the CEO to cre-
ate “meaning that inspires others to pursue their
vision” (Gardner & Avolio, 1998: 33). Further-
more, CEO charisma increases an awareness of
the CEO and the organization in the external
environment. Ultimately, these features of CEO
charisma increase outsiders’ identification with,
and participation in, the organization. We now
propose a theory of CEO charisma to account for
such effects, leaving aside the effects on insid-
ers amply discussed in the CLT literature (e.g.,
Waldman & Yammarino, 1999).
CEO CHARISMA AND EXTERNAL
STAKEHOLDERS
As with insiders, CEO charisma has its effects
on external stakeholders primarily through the
identification process. In order to reduce com-
plexity, outsiders try to distill what defines an
organization, what about the organization per-
sists over time and across interactions, and
what distinguishes it from other organizations
(Rindova & Fombrun, 1998). An organization’s
core, enduring, and distinctive characteristics
influence identification with the organization
(Albert & Whetten, 1985), and such identification,
in turn, affects outsiders’ decision to participate
(Dukerich, Golden, & Shortell, 2002). As an exam-
ple, Scott and Lane offer the Body Shop, whose
customers identify with and thus participate in
the organization “because they define both
themselves and the Body Shop as animal rights
supporters” (2000: 49).
CEO charismatic behaviors and symbolism—
strong values, vision for the future, unconven-
tional and risk-taking behaviors—serve to in-
crease identification among external stakeholders
with CEOs and, by extension, their organizations.
CEOs, as “the most visible members of an organi-
zation, give a face to an otherwise abstract social
category, resulting in outsiders’ viewing manag-
ers as the organization” (Scott & Lane, 2000: 47).
The following description of Nucor Corporation,
based on its CEO, John Correnti, exemplifies well
this overlap between the image of the CEO and
the image of the organization:
Key to Nucor’s success has been the company’s
willingness to take risks. While John Correnti was
the general manager at Nucor Plymouth and Nu-
cor Yamato, he developed a reputation for taking
risks. . . . ‘In this life, it’s big risk, big reward,’
Correnti says. ’You can’t have a fear of failure’
(Iron Age New Steel, 1998: 56; emphasis added).
Thus, CEO charisma encompasses the transfor-
mation of the CEO into a symbol of the organi-
zation (Meindl & Thompson, 2004). Similar to,
and in conjunction with, organizational identity,
it affords outsiders with a cognitive shortcut that
allows them to reduce their evaluative uncer-
tainty by triggering identification with the CEO
and organization.
Figure 1 depicts the process through which
CEO charisma affects two categories of outsid-
ers: external stakeholders and institutional in-
termediaries. The former control and exchange
resources vital to organizations, and it is their
decision to participate that is of ultimate con-
cern. The latter are interested observers (e.g.,
2006 1053Fanelli and Misangyi
6. media, stock analysts) who participate in the
social construction of organizational and CEO
images (Chen & Meindl, 1991; Deephouse, 2000;
Meindl & Thompson, 2004; Rindova & Fombrun,
1998). These act not only as “mirrors of reality
reflecting firms’ actions, but also act as active
agents shaping information” (Fombrun & Shan-
ley, 1990: 240). CEO charisma increases external
stakeholders’ identification with organizations,
which positively influences their decision to
participate (Dukerich et al., 2002). It also influ-
ences the images “refracted” by institutional in-
termediaries, as well as organizational reputa-
tions, in a favorable manner. Refracted images
and reputations inform external stakeholders’
beliefs about how others perceive CEOs (and
their organizations) and, thus, strongly shape
their participation in, and identification with,
organizations (Dutton, Dukerich, & Harquail,
1994).
We first examine CEO charisma with respect
to outsiders and its “direct” effects on external
stakeholders.
CEO Charisma and External Stakeholders’
Decision to Participate
In defining CEO charisma, we build on CLT
but recognize that “charisma may arise from the
leader’s behavior, follower attributions, or some
combination of the two” (Gardner & Avolio, 1998:
34; emphasis added). This view emphasizes that
outsiders’ attributions of CEO charisma play an
active role in constructing the charismatic rela-
tionship (Gardner & Avolio, 1998; Meindl, 1995).
Therefore, CEO charisma is a relationship be-
tween the CEO and organizational participants
that is a function of both the CEO and followers’
attributions of the CEO. As shown in Figure 1,
the “leader’s side” of the CEO charismatic re-
lationship comprises both CEO charismatic
behaviors and the projection of CEO charis-
matic images (CCI) through various forms of
organizational discourse (i.e., advertising,
firm logo, letters to shareholders, financial re-
porting, press releases, public relations initi-
atives, etc.). The former affect primarily insid-
FIGURE 1
The Effects of CEO Charisma on External Stakeholders
Note: Relationships not explored are depicted by dashed arrows (----‹).
1054 OctoberAcademy of Management Review
7. ers (Waldman & Yammarino, 1999), the latter
primarily outsiders.
An essential difference from previous treat-
ments is the importance that CCI play in the
charismatic relationship. Organizational dis-
course is a primary source of attributions for a
vast majority of potential external stakeholders.
Indeed, direct observation of a CEOs’ traits and
behaviors is generally precluded (Rindova &
Fombrun, 1998), as well as not efficient for out-
siders in order to compare the firm with multiple
competing alternatives. For example, although
securities analysts occasionally experience di-
rect contact with a CEO, such as via road shows
or conference calls,3
evaluations are mainly
based on organizational documents and com-
munications (Clemente, 1988). Furthermore,
leaders tend to restrict outsiders from directly
observing their behaviors, for outsider scrutiny
tends to distract resources, effort, and attention
away from substantive activities (Sutton & Ga-
lunic, 1996). Thus, given this lack of direct obser-
vation, as well as the characteristics of the ex-
ternal environment (i.e. “network” relationships,
“competitive” salience), CCI are expected to be
an effective means of influence, being analo-
gous to, and often overlapping with, the strate-
gic projections and organizational images un-
derlying corporate reputations (Fombrun &
Shanley, 1990), strategic positions (Rindova &
Fombrun, 1998), and stakeholder identification
with the firm (Scott & Lane, 2000).
In terms of the actual content of the images,
CCI refer to the degree to which organizational
discourse describes CEOs and their visions in
charismatic terms. Organizational discourse de-
scribing the persona of the CEO in terms of
exceptional qualities, such as the CEO’s ex-
traordinary emotional expressiveness, self-
confidence, self-determination, and high energy
level (House, 1977), as well as accounts of excep-
tional behaviors, such as those “involving great
personal risk, cost and energy” (Conger & Ka-
nungo, 1998: 56), should lead to attributions of
charisma and identification. Attributions of cha-
risma and identification may also result from
organizational discourse portraying the CEO’s
vision in charismatic terms (Conger & Kanungo,
1998): an evaluation of the status quo that dele-
gitimizes the past and emphasizes the need for
radical change, the formulation and articulation
of organizational goals using ideologically and
morally laden statements that emphasize the
positive aspects of the CEO’s vision and its con-
trast with the status quo, and a description of
the means to achieve the vision that expresses
the CEO’s concern for internal or external stake-
holders.
As Figure 1 depicts, CEO charisma, primarily
through CCI, directly influences external stake-
holders’ identification, which, in turn, affects
their decision to participate, for several reasons.
First, external stakeholders’ evaluations are
subject to the romance of leadership (Meindl,
Ehrlich, & Dukerich, 1985; Meindl & Thompson,
2004), to which CEO charisma and the charis-
matic leadership qualities portrayed in pro-
jected CCI play very well. Second, the archetypi-
cal nature of CEO charisma (Shamir, 1995;
Steyrer, 1998) is attractive to external stakehold-
ers, since such archetypes help to reduce uncer-
tainty regarding organizations’ attributes in the
minds of external participants, especially in en-
vironments characterized by high ambiguity
(Meyer & Gupta, 1994). Third, charismatic sym-
bolism increases the organization’s visibility
and its distinctiveness in the face of competi-
tion, thereby increasing outsider identification
(Dutton et al., 1994). Finally, the vision and val-
ues conveyed by charismatic symbolism favor-
ably affect the organization’s legitimacy, and
therefore identification, among outsiders (Scott
& Lane, 2000).
Before turning to a discussion of the “indirect”
effects of CEO charisma, it is worth noting that,
although recognized by the dotted lines in Fig-
ure 1, several relationships internal to the orga-
nization are not examined here. For example,
executives may use projected images such as
CCI to influence internal perceptions of organi-
zational identity (Gioia & Thomas, 1996). Also,
the charismatic images projected by discourse
may potentially become decoupled from the ac-
tual behaviors of the CEO. Finally, in situations
where outsiders interact with insiders (e.g., sup-
pliers interacting with top managers), the iden-
tification created by charismatic CEOs among
3
We in no way mean to disregard the important external
roles played by the CEO in those instances where outsiders
directly observe CEO behaviors (e.g., spokesperson, liaison,
and figurehead roles; Mintzberg, 1973). We expect that pre-
vious treatments of CEO charisma (Waldman & Yammarino,
1999) apply under such circumstances, especially because
CEO behavior is likely to be carefully scripted on such
occasions (Gardner & Avolio, 1998).
2006 1055Fanelli and Misangyi
8. organizational members (Shamir et al., 1993) in-
creases the likelihood of external stakeholder
identification (Dutton et al., 1994; Scott & Lane,
2000).
CEO Charisma, Refracted CEO Images, and
Organizational Reputations
The beliefs that external stakeholders have
about how others perceive CEOs and their firms
directly affect their decision to participate in, as
well as their identification with, those organiza-
tions (Dukerich et al., 2002; Zuckerman, 1999).
Refracted CEO images produced both by insti-
tutional intermediaries’ and organizational rep-
utations influence these beliefs. The former
make the organization more noticeable among
external stakeholders (Deephouse, 2000) and
more credible, since refracted images are “cre-
ated” by third parties (Rindova & Fombrun,
1998). The latter result cumulatively from imag-
ery and direct experiences with organizations
(Rindova & Fombrun, 1998), signal organization-
al legitimacy (Rao, 1994), and stabilize interac-
tions between the organization and external
stakeholders (Fombrun, 2001). Thus, when favor-
able, both refracted images and organizational
reputations lead to increased external stake-
holder identification with the organization and,
thus, to greater participation (Deephouse, 1996).
Given the legitimacy conferred by favorable re-
fracted images and reputations, and their cred-
ibility, they also directly affect external stake-
holders’ participation (see Figure 1).
CEO charisma influences institutional inter-
mediaries’ refracted images and organizational
reputations in several ways. First, projections of
CEO charisma increase the favorability of re-
fracted images and organizational reputations,
as well as the likelihood of intermediary cover-
age of the organization. CCI play very well to
the “charismatic archetyping” that occurs in the
refraction process, wherein the CEO image con-
structed by institutional intermediaries, “how-
ever celebrated and glorified, is conceived out of
the desire for a world in which human agency
reigns supreme, and capricious and dangerous
forces are held in check” (Meindl & Thompson,
2004: 29). Second, the archetypical nature of CCI
affords organizations that project them some in-
fluence (Hogg, 2001) over the constructions put
out by intermediaries within the business com-
munity (Chen & Meindl, 1991), given the appetite
for such images. Third, the attention garnered
for organizations by CEO charisma among insti-
tutional intermediaries also raises the visibility
of these organizations and all of their partici-
pants. Furthermore, reputational rankings make
status orderings in organizations’ environments
highly visible (Rindova & Fombrun, 1998), and
CEO charisma serves to increase organizations’
standings in such rankings. Thus, the effects
that projections of CEO charisma have on insti-
tutional intermediaries and organizational rep-
utations (favorability, coverage, visibility, sta-
tus) work to increase awareness of organizations,
as well as organizations’ attractiveness, among
external stakeholders, and thus identification
(Ashforth & Mael, 1989).
Besides influencing the actual content of the
refracted images, CEO charisma affects the
variance among images constructed by different
intermediaries, which, in turn, has an effect on
organizational reputation. Cognitive categoriza-
tion processes (Phillips & Lord, 1982) operate to
increase the convergence of institutional inter-
mediaries’ refracted images in a manner favor-
able to the firm. Convergence across intermedi-
aries in portraying the CEO increases the
awareness of the persona and vision among cur-
rent and potential external stakeholders and,
therefore, reinforces the direct effect of CEO cha-
risma on outsider identification. As Goffman
(1959) noted, external observers are aware that
acts of self-presentation on the part of a subject
are driven by self-interest and, therefore, might
not be an accurate description of the “true” char-
acteristics of the person. Thus, convergence
among multiple intermediaries serves to corrob-
orate and strengthen the credibility of the CEO’s
projected image, increasing the probability of
outsider identification (Ashforth & Mael, 1989)
and participation.
Certain forces, however, also play a role in
these effects. First, organizational performance
is a major determinant of both refracted images
and reputations (Fombrun & Shanley, 1990;
Meindl & Thompson, 2004). Superior perfor-
mance tends to reinforce the CCI projected by
organizations; inferior performance does not.
Second, refracted images and reputations exist
within competitive networks (i.e., industries)
and develop over time, depending on competi-
tors’ images and reputations (Meindl & Thomp-
son, 2004). Because charisma is a state of ex-
traordinariness, the number of charismatic
1056 OctoberAcademy of Management Review
9. constructions by intermediaries is limited
within any competitive domain: “There is only
so much charisma ’fairy dust’ to go around, and
the more it is sprinkled on one or a few CEOs,
the less there is to sprinkle on the others”
(Meindl & Thompson, 2004: 21). This suggests
that, although many organizations may project
CCI, only a few CEOs will be endowed as char-
ismatic by institutional intermediaries.
The “Dark Side” of CEO Charisma
So far, we have described the benefits of CEO
charisma for organizations with the assumption
that charismatic CEOs are concerned with the
achievement of organizational goals and that
these CEOs empower stakeholders to formulate
and achieve these goals (socialized power mo-
tivations; Howell, 1988; Waldman & Yammarino,
1999). Given this assumption, CEO charisma
may have long-term positive effects on organi-
zational effectiveness owing to its effects on in-
ternal performance (Lowe, Kroeck, Sivasubra-
maniam, 1996) and on external relationships
(Collins & Porras, 1995; Selznik, 1957). Stake-
holder identification with charismatic CEOs
who have personalized power motives, however,
may potentially be detrimental to the organiza-
tion and its stakeholders. Leaders with person-
alized power motivations are concerned with
their personal goals and, thus, tend to pursue
goals based on their own private motives (House
& Howell, 1922; Howell, 1988; McClelland, 1970),
and they are more likely to employ impression
management and deception in pursuit of those
goals (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999; Howell, 1988).
Richard M. Scrushy, the charismatic former
CEO of HealthSouth Corporation, provides an
example. The strong identification he achieved
among internal and external stakeholders al-
lowed him to foster a culture of greed and fraud
that ultimately led to the bankruptcy of the or-
ganization, along with the ruin of many of its
stakeholders and the community within which it
was embedded (Michaels, Roth, & Liu, 2003).
Thus, the beneficial effects of personalized char-
ismatic CEOs may be shorter in duration and,
above all, may reverse their course rather dras-
tically after some time; as the scandal surround-
ing Richard Scrushy and HealthSouth demon-
strates, facts have a way of catching up with
charismatic CEOs who pursue personal goals
that are detrimental to the organization and its
stakeholders.
IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH
The preceding framework suggests several
implications for future research on CEO cha-
risma. First, because “bringing out” charisma
entails studying the charismatic images pro-
jected by organizational discourse among out-
siders, future research in this area will require
new measurement tools. Conventional surveys
can and should be supplemented by “content
analysis of speeches and other communications,
as well as by verification of consistency in sto-
ries about the CEO as told by distant organiza-
tional members” (Waldman & Yammarino, 1999:
281). Discursive materials conveying CCI could
be analyzed with one of the various methods of
discourse analysis, such as content analysis
(Weber, 1988) or quantitative, text-based mea-
sures. For example, thematic text analysis
would allow the measurement of CCI as the
frequency of occurrence of charismatic expres-
sions within a text (Popping, 2000). Far from be-
ing merely an issue of measurement, the devel-
opment of discourse-based measures of
charisma would open up research into the di-
mensionality of the construct itself, possibly al-
lowing the identification of different facets of
charisma and their interrelationships.
Second, the above framework suggests that
the archetypical nature of CEO charisma in-
creases external stakeholder identification with
the CEO and organization because it reduces
outsiders’ uncertainty about the organization,
provides a basis for evaluating legitimacy, and
increases both the attractiveness and aware-
ness of the organization. Ultimately, such iden-
tification increases external stakeholders’ moti-
vation to participate in the organization. This
suggests that the relationship between CEO
charisma and external stakeholders’ participa-
tion is mediated by external stakeholders’ or-
ganizational identification. Future research is
needed to determine whether external stake-
holders identify with charismatic CEOs and
whether such identification is indeed associ-
ated with participation in organizations.
Third, as Figure 1 depicts, there are several
relationships to be investigated with regard to
the refracted images constructed by institu-
tional intermediaries, as well as organizational
2006 1057Fanelli and Misangyi
10. reputations. In future research scholars can ex-
amine whether CCI influence institutional inter-
mediaries in a manner that is favorable to the
organization. For example, securities analysts
play a very significant role in the stock market
as conveyors of information and investment
suggestions to investors (Zuckerman, 1999); thus,
researchers could examine whether analyst rat-
ings and recommendations are more favorable
for organizations that project CCI. With regard
to the media, researchers could study whether
the business press reproduces the charismatic
discourse put out by organizations. In this case,
researchers could repeat the text analyses used
to measure CCI with different texts and could
measure the similarity between the different
texts in terms of their insistence on the persona
and vision of the CEO. We also suggested that
CCI result in a convergence of images among
institutional intermediaries; thus, researchers
could examine the effect that CCI have on the
variability of institutional intermediaries’ as-
sessments. Finally, since CCI should have a fa-
vorable effect on organizational reputations, re-
searchers could examine what, if any, effect CCI
have on reputational rankings, such as For-
tune’s annual survey of America’s Most Admired
Corporations.
Fourth, although several relationships de-
picted in Figure 1 are beyond the purview of this
paper, future research and theory regarding
these relationships are warranted. For instance,
studies of symbolic management (e.g., Elsbach,
1994; Elsbach & Sutton, 1992; Pfeffer, 1981; Salan-
cik & Meindl, 1984; Staw et al., 1983; Zajac &
Westphal, 1995) suggest that the CEO charis-
matic imagery projected by organizations may
become decoupled from CEO charismatic be-
haviors. The result may be that external stake-
holders’ identification and participation in the
organization will be under false pretenses. Fu-
ture research is needed to examine whether or-
ganizations with noncharismatic CEOs project
CCI in their discourse and, if so, whether they
favorably influence institutional intermediaries’
constructions and the attributions of external
stakeholders to achieve external stakeholder
identification with and participation in the or-
ganization. This could be accomplished by ob-
taining conventional measures of CEO charis-
matic behaviors (e.g., Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire; Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999), as
well as measuring the CEO charismatic images
portrayed in organizational discourse in a man-
ner as described above.
CONCLUSION
For today’s corporations, external actors are
very important (Davis & McAdam, 2000; Elsbach,
1994; Hirsch, 1986; Zuckerman, 1999, 2000), and,
thus, CEOs’ management of their organizations’
external environments is a legitimate and im-
portant object of study. As such, CEO charisma
presents a major opportunity for researchers to
rehabilitate “a line of inquiry set adrift by orga-
nization theory in its formative years: the study
of how organizations affect the social systems in
which they are embedded” (Stern & Barley, 1996:
146). Charismatic leadership theory has been
successful in showing that charisma is an effec-
tive coordination mechanism operating within
hierarchical authority. Yet its focus on “superior-
subordinate relationships” (House & Aditya,
1997: 465) makes it ill-equipped for inquiries out-
side the organization’s boundaries.
Our theory of the external effects of CEO cha-
risma attempts to extend current views and to
“bring out” CEO charisma as a means of influ-
ence in the unstructured relationship between
the CEO and external stakeholders. Affording
the CEO the needed salience in the competition
for outsiders’ attention and evaluation, cha-
risma increases the likelihood of external stake-
holders’ identification with and participation in
the organization. Furthermore, within the exter-
nal environment, CEO charisma operates
mainly through charismatic images projected
by discourse. Therefore, future research should
focus on these images in order to untangle the
effects of CEO charisma on key outsiders and,
ultimately, on organizational effectiveness.
REFERENCES
Albert, S., & Whetten, D. 1985. Organizational identity. Re-
search in Organizational Behavior, 7: 263–295.
Arnold, J. E. 1988. Communications and strategy: The CEO
gets (and gives) the message. Public Relations Quar-
terly, 33(2): 5–14.
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. 1989. Social identity theory and the
organization. Academy of Management Review, 14: 20–
39.
Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. 1999. Re-examining the
components of transformational and transactional lead-
ership using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire.
1058 OctoberAcademy of Management Review
11. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychol-
ogy, 72: 441–462.
Barnard, C. I. 1938. The functions of the executive. Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bass, B. M. 1985. Leadership and performance beyond expec-
tations. New York: Free Press.
Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. 1999. Ethics, character, and
authentic transformational leadership behavior. Lead-
ership Quarterly, 10: 181–217.
Bycio, P., Hackett, R. D., & Allen, J. S. 1995. Further assess-
ment of Bass’s (1985) conceptualization of transactional
and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 80: 468–478.
Cameron, K. S., & Whetton, D. A. (Eds.). 1983. Organizational
effectiveness: A comparison of multiple models. New
York, Academic Press.
Cannella, A. A., Jr., & Monroe, M. J. 1997. Contrasting per-
spectives on strategic leaders: Toward a more realistic
view of top managers. Journal of Management, 23: 213–
237.
Chen, C. C., & Meindl, J. R. 1991. The construction of leader-
ship images in the popular press: The case of Donald
Burr and People Express. Administrative Science Quar-
terly, 36: 521–551.
Cheney, K. H., & Christensen, L. T. 2001. Organizational iden-
tity: Linkages between internal and external communi-
cation. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putman (Eds.), The new
handbook of organizational communication: 231–269.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Clemente, H. A. 1988. How to understand security analysts—
their needs, their motives. Financial Executive 4(6): 41–
45.
Collins, J. C., & Porras, J. I. 1995. Building a visionary com-
pany. California Management Review, 37(2): 80–100.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. 1987. Toward a behavioral
theory of charismatic leadership in organizational set-
tings. Academy of Management Review, 12: 637–647.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. 1998. Charismatic leadership
in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Conger, J. A., Kanungo, R. N., & Menon, S. T. 2000. Charis-
matic leadership and follower effects. Journal of Orga-
nizational Behavior, 21: 747–767.
Davis, G. F., & McAdam, D. (Eds.). 2000. Corporations, classes
and social movements after managerialism, vol. 22.
Greenwich: CT: JAI Press.
Deephouse, D. L. 1996. Does isomorphism legitimate? Acad-
emy of Management Journal, 39: 1024–1039.
Deephouse, D. L. 2000. Media reputation as a strategic re-
source: An integration of mass communication and re-
source based theories. Journal of Management, 26: 1091–
1112.
DiMaggio, P. 1997. Culture and cognition. Annual Review of
Sociology, 23: 263–287.
Dukerich, J. M., Golden, B. R., & Shortell, S. M. 2002. Beauty is
in the eye of the beholder: The impact of organizational
identification, identity, and image on the cooperative
behaviors of physicians. Administrative Science Quar-
terly, 47: 507–533.
Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M., & Harquail, C. V. 1994. Organi-
zational images and member identification. Administra-
tive Science Quarterly, 39: 239–263.
Economist. 2002. Fallen idols: The world is falling out of love
with celebrity chief executives. May 4:11.
Elsbach, K. D. 1994. Managing organizational legitimacy in
the California cattle industry: The construction and ef-
fectiveness of verbal accounts. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 39: 57–88.
Elsbach, K. D., & Sutton, R. I. 1992. Acquiring organizational
legitimacy through illegitimate actions: A marriage of
institutional and impression management theories.
Academy of Management Journal, 35: 699–738.
Elsbach, K. D., Sutton, R. I., & Principe, K. E. 1998. Averting
expected challenges through anticipatory impression
management: A study of hospital billing. Organization
Science, 9: 68–86.
Etzioni, A. 1975. A comparative analysis of complex organi-
zations (revised & enlarged ed.). New York: Free Press.
Flynn, F. J., & Staw, B. M. 2004. Lend me your wallets: The
effect of charismatic leadership on external support for
an organization. Strategic Management Journal, 25: 309–
330.
Fombrun, C. J. 2001. Corporate reputations as economic as-
sets. In M. A. Hitt, R. E. Freeman, & J. S. Harrison (Eds.),
Handbook of strategic management: 289–312. Malden,
MA: Blackwell.
Fombrun, C. J., & Shanley, M. 1990. What’s in a name? Rep-
utation building and corporate strategy. Academy of
Management Journal, 33: 233–258.
Gardner, W. L., & Avolio, B. J. 1998. The charismatic relation-
ship: A dramaturgical perspective. Academy of Manage-
ment Review, 23: 32–58.
Gioia, D. A., & Thomas, J. B. 1996. Identity, image, and issue
interpretation: Sensemaking during strategic change in
academia. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 370–
403.
Goffman, E. 1959. The presentation of self in everyday life.
New York: Doubleday.
Hambrick, D. C., & Fukutomi, G. D. S. 1991. The seasons of a
CEO’s tenure. Academy of Management Review, 16:
719–742.
Hater, J. J., & Bass, B. M. 1988. Superiors’ evaluations and
subordinates’ perceptions of transformational and
transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology,
73: 695–702.
Hirsch, P. 1986. From ambushes to golden parachutes: Cor-
porate takeovers as an instance of cultural framing and
institutional integration. American Journal of Sociology,
91: 800–837.
Hogg, M. A. 2001. Social identification, group prototypicality,
and emergent leadership. In M. A. Hogg & D. J. Terry
(Eds.). Social identity processes in organizational con-
texts: 197–212. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
2006 1059Fanelli and Misangyi
12. House, R. J. 1977. A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. In
J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership: The cutting
edge: 189–207. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University
Press.
House, R. J., & Aditya, R. N. 1997. The social scientific study of
leadership: Quo vadis? Leadership Quarterly, 23: 409–
473.
House, R. J., & Howell, J. M. 1992. Personality and charismatic
leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 3: 81–108.
House, R. J., Spangler, W. D., & Woycke, J. 1991. Personality
and charisma in the U.S. presidency: A psychological
theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 36: 364–396.
Howell, J. M. 1988. Two faces of charisma: Socialized and
personalized leadership in organizations. In J. A. Conger
& R. N. Kanungo (Eds.), Charismatic leadership: 213–236.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. 1993. Transformational leadership,
transactional leadership, locus of control, and support
for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated-business-
unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78:
891–902.
Howell, J. M., & Frost, P. J. 1989. A laboratory study of char-
ismatic leadership. Organizational Behavior and Hu-
man Decision Processes, 43: 243–269.
Iacocca, L., & Novak, W. 1984. Iacocca: An autobiography.
New York: Bantam Books.
Iron Age New Steel. 1998. Cultivating a culture of risk-taking.
14(8): 56.
Jenkins, H. W. 2002. Is the problem stock options—Or stock
prices? Wall Street Journal, April 24: A23.
Klein, K. J., & House, R. J. 1995. On fire: charismatic leader-
ship and levels of analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 6:
183–198.
Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N. 1996.
Effectiveness correlates of transformational and trans-
actional leadership: A meta-analytic review of the MLQ
literature. Leadership Quarterly, 7: 385–425.
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. 1958. Organizations. New York:
Wiley.
McClelland, D. C. 1970 The two faces of power. Journal of
International Affairs, 24(1): 29–47.
Meindl, J. R. 1995. The romance of leadership as a follower-
centric theory: A social constructionist approach. Lead-
ership Quarterly, 6: 329–341.
Meindl, J. R., Ehrlich, S. B., & Dukerich, J. M. 1985. The ro-
mance of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly,
30: 78–102.
Meindl, J. R., & Thompson, K. J. 2005. The celebrated CEO:
Notes on the dynamic ecology of charismatic construc-
tions. In J. F. Porac & M. Ventresca (Eds.), Constructing
industries and markets. Oxford: Elsevier.
Meyer, M. W., & Gupta, V. 1994. The performance paradox.
Research in Organizational Behavior, 16: 309–369.
Michaels, A., Roth, L. F., & Liu, B. 2003. Diagnosis of fraud:
How employees of HealthSouth fooled colleagues, audi-
tors and investors for 15 years. Financial Times, April 15:
13.
Mintzberg, H. 1973. The nature of managerial work. New
York: Harper & Row.
Pfeffer, J. 1981. Management as symbolic action: The creation
and maintenance of organizational paradigms. Re-
search in Organizational Behavior, 3: 1–52.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. 1978. The external control of
organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New
York: Harper & Row.
Phillips, J. S., & Lord, R. G. 1982. Schematic information
processing and perceptions of leadership in problem
solving groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 486–
492.
Pondy, L. R. 1978. Leadership is a language game. In M. W.
McCall, Jr., & M. M. Lombardo (Eds.), Leadership: Where
else can we go? 87–99. Durham, NC: Duke University
Press.
Popping, R. 2000. Computer-assisted text analysis. London:
Sage.
Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. 1991. The new institutionalism
in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chi-
cago Press.
Rao, H. 1994. The social construction of reputation: Certifica-
tion contests, legitimation, and the survival of organiza-
tions in the American automobile industry: 1895–1912.
Strategic Management Journal, 15: 29–44.
Rindova, V. P., & Fombrun, C. J. 1998. The eye of the beholder:
The role of corporate reputation in defining organiza-
tional identity. In D. A. Whetten & P. C. Godfrey (Eds.),
Identity in organizations: 59–66. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Roach, D. W., & Bednar, D. A. 1997. The theory of logical
types: A tool for understanding levels and types of
change in organizations. Human Relations, 50: 671–700.
Salancik, G. R., & Meindl, J. R. 1984. Corporate attributions as
strategic illusions of management control. Administra-
tive Science Quarterly, 29: 238–254.
Scott, S. G., & Lane, V. R. 2000. A stakeholder approach to
organizational identity. Academy of Management Re-
view, 25: 43–62.
Scott, W. R. 1998. Organizations: Rational, natural, and open
systems (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Selznik, P. 1957. Leadership in administration. New York:
Harper & Row.
Serwer, A. 2000. There’s something about Cisco. Fortune,
May 15: 114–127.
Shamir, B. 1995. Social distance and charisma: Theoretical
notes and an exploratory study. Leadership Quarterly, 6:
19–47.
Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. 1993. The motivational
effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept based
theory. Organization Science, 4: 577–594.
Shamir, B., Zakay, E., Breinin, E., & Popper, M. 1998. Corre-
lates of charismatic leader behavior in military units:
1060 OctoberAcademy of Management Review
13. Subordinates’ attitudes, unit characteristics, and supe-
riors’ appraisals of leader performance. Academy of
Management Journal, 41: 367–409.
Simon, H. A. 1945. Administrative behavior (4th ed.). New
York: Free Press.
Staw, B. M., McKechnie, P. I., & Puffer, S. M. 1983. The justi-
fication of organizational performance. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 28: 582–600.
Stern, R. N., & Barley, S. R. 1996. Organizations and social
systems: Organization theory’s neglected mandate. Ad-
ministrative Science Quarterly, 41: 146–162.
Steyrer, J. 1998. Charisma and the archetypes of leadership.
Organization Studies, 19: 807–828.
Sutton, R. I., & Galunic, D. C. 1996. Consequences of public
scrutiny for leaders and their organizations. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 18: 201–250.
Sutton, R. I., & Kramer, R. M. 1990. Transforming failure into
success: Impression management, the Reagan Adminis-
tration, and the Iceland arms control talks. In R. L. Kahn
& M. W. Zald (Eds.), International cooperation and con-
flict: Perspectives from organizational theory: 221–245.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Thompson, J. D. 1967. Organizations in action. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Tosi, H. L., Misangyi, V. F., Fanelli, A., Waldman, D. A., &
Yammarino, F. J. 2004. CEO charisma, compensation and
firm performance. Leadership Quarterly 15: 405–420.
Waldman, D. A., Ramirez, G. G., House, R. J., & Puranam, P.
2001. Does leadership matter? CEO leadership at-
tributes and profitability under conditions of perceived
environmental uncertainty. Academy of Management
Journal, 44: 134–143.
Waldman, D. A., & Yammarino, F. J. 1999. CEO charismatic
leadership: Levels of management and levels of analy-
sis effects. Academy of Management Review, 24: 266–
285.
Weber, M. 1947. The theory of social and economic organiza-
tion. (Translated by T. Parsons.) New York: Free Press.
Weber, R. P. 1988. Basic content analysis (3rd ed.). Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage.
Weick, K. E. 1979. Cognitive processes in organization. Re-
search in Organizational Behavior, 1: 41–74.
Zajac, E. J., & Westphal, J. D. 1995. Accounting for the expla-
nations of CEO compensation: Substance and symbol-
ism. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 283–309.
Zuckerman, E. W. 1999. The categorical imperative: Securi-
ties analysts and the illegitimacy discount. American
Journal of Sociology, 104: 1398–1438.
Zuckerman, E. W. 2000. Focusing the corporate product: Se-
curities analysis and de-diversification. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 45: 591–619.
Angelo Fanelli (fanelli@hec.fr) is an assistant professor in the Department of Man-
agement and Human Resources at HEC School of Management, Paris. He received his
Ph.D. from the Universita` di Bologna and the University of Florida. His research
interests include charismatic leadership, language, top executives, power, organiza-
tional knowledge, and the social dynamics of the stock market.
Vilmos F. Misangyi (vilmos@udel.edu) is an assistant professor of management in the
Alfred Lerner College of Business & Economics at the University of Delaware. He
received his Ph.D. in strategic management from the University of Florida. His re-
search examines the capacity of organizational top executives to affect organizational
outcomes.
2006 1061Fanelli and Misangyi