Charisma and confrontation

Posted on February 26, 2016 by knlistman

Face_Off copyPeople of high charisma are not immune to personal attacks. When there is severe criticism or antagonism leveled at them, they may call on their skill to change the desires of their followers to match their own. Often the critical or antagonistic person is dealt with by the followers not the leader.

The charismatic person probably fears being rejected by others more than any other type of personality. They often rely on those followers who are not as “inspirational” and therefore willing to deal with voices of dissent. Typically that means aggression action towards them rather than appeasement. I recall meeting a congenial politician during the 1980 presidential elections whose front man was easily angered if every preparation was not made perfectly. His aggressive nature allowed the candidate to have the expected friendly and relaxed attitude towards the crowd.

There are basically four ways that a person can deal with a confrontation. One is to try to win the confrontational person over with an emotional appeal and enthusiasm. That may work for the person that feels neutral towards you. But if he already has a heated disagreement with you, more of the same will not work.

The other three methods are aggression, compliance and detachment. Aggression or attack is similar to dealing with your opponent as they have dealt with you. Only typically people increase the amount of aggression through ridicule or criticism. These critical sentiments are more effective if spread by multiple sources. Politicians make good use of the media to do this for them prior to an election.

The next way is to comply with or appease the critic, usually by offering a compromise.  The idea is to try to give them enough of what they want that they will be satisfied. If the other person has a legitimate complaint and the compromise is sincere, this will work. However, leaders often send negotiators to work out the compromise for them so they do not appear to lose face.

The final way is to detach from or avoid the person confronting you.  While this does not work on the national level, it is often effective on the smaller level of an organization. The confronter must escalate to bring attention to his complaint and risks looking overly aggressive if this is done. While we flock to the TV to see newscasters and politicians angrily denouncing others, most people really do not want to watch confrontation in their daily life.

Leaders with strong influence over the others collect loyal followers around them. They well aware of the power of the crowd, but often not aware of the danger of isolating themselves in such a manner. If you look at the history of leaders that appear charismatic you will see a higher number of assassination attempts (some successful) compared to other types of leaders. This may be due to jealously over popularity but often it is because the highly disgruntled assassin feels the sacrifice the leader is calling the people to make is too great. The leaders is on a pedestal above his or her followers, but when others feel that the leader has become unreachable, the consequences are not good.

Horney,K. Our Inner Conflicts, Norton, 1945.
Marston, W.M.(1999; originally published 1928) Emotions of Normal People. Taylor & Francis Ltd.

 

Posted in Emotional intelligence, Group psychology, Leadership, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How charisma can be lost.

Posted on February 17, 2016 by knlistman

20121026_0531_20121026_0433_Almada_&_Cacilhas_fallStable personality traits are those which appear throughout most of life. As innate, or inborn traits they are already part of the personality in childhood and become notable characteristics or patterns of behavior in adulthood. However, a person’s perceived level of charisma does not seem to be stable. This is not necessarily because behaviors that increase your ability to influence others can be taught and practiced (similar to taking acting lesson). In studies in which managers were provided with this kind of coaching, changes occurred but these were minimal compared to the difference that already existed between the most and least charismatic people in the group.

Apparently a small portion of the population does have the personality characteristics that the public consider as belonging to leaders that they would like to follow. However, the public can change their idea about who is a charismatic leader, and it doesn’t take the revelation of some notorious act by the leader to do this. Remember, a charismatic leader appeals to emotions and values, both of which change over time. The environment of crisis in which people are looking for an emotional expressive leader that paints a convincing picture of promising future is not the same environment that exists once the crisis begins to fade.

When a new leader arises that inspires other to follow they are willing to work harder, and make more sacrifices – for a limited time only. Emotional involvement is exhausting. in work situations, employees begin to slow down, burn out, or look for a position where there is less emotional drain. The leader has not changed, but has failed to realize that the high level of involvement they are expecting is not sustainable.

Another component of charismatic leadership is ability to build a strong group identity and a sense of core values. This is often based on assuming superiority over other groups, which results in prejudice which can dirty the leader’s reputation. It can also lead to competitive behavior, which can back-fire if a group needs  cooperation from the other groups.

But the biggest reason that a leader can lose charisma is the failure to meet the follower’s expectations. It is assumed that a more effective leader will influence followers to make greater effort in their work. So the employee improves,and people coalesce behind a political leader. But leader may not improve. Remember there is a distance between the leader and followers, and the tendency to see the leader as being above the crowd. If the leader remains just as unresponsive and unwilling to share the power as before, there is a drop in the expectation that the leader will be influenced by the followers.  Unresponsiveness in a formerly respected leaders is more likely to cause rejection by people than if they uncover these same characteristics in their co-workers.

So it is not enough for a leader to learn how to inspire other, they must learn how to be inspired and influenced by the very people they are leading.

Harrison,  R.  (1987). Harnessing  personal  energy:  How  companies  can  inspire  employees. Organizational Dynamics (Autumn), 4–21
Porter,  L.  W.,  &  Bigley,  G.  A.  (1997). Motivation  and  transformational  leadership:  Some organizational context issues. Unpublished paper, University of California at Irvine.
Photo by By Mark Ahsmann – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=25341605
Posted in Group psychology, Leadership, Persuasion | Leave a comment

Charisma in close quarters

Posted on February 5, 2016 by knlistman

A_village_wedding_-_geograph bWe see political leaders that have been coached to appeal to the masses on television. They carry themselves erect (confident in the clothes, hair and makeup that their stylist has spent hours on). They smile warmly and expressively, acknowledging associates they recognize in the crowd (who may or may not exist). They speak with authority (having spent many hours listening to their own voice with the assistance of a coach). However, if you want to appeal as a leader that is actually present with a group of people, a different set of skills can make or break your ability to lead. You must be able to identify with the group you are speaking to and show that you are trustworthy and competent.

As a consultant, I recall seeing trainers who could charm upper level management struggle to communicate with engineers being trained for their first management position. The trainers spoke the language of emotional appeal, but forgot that their audience was composed of highly logical people. The audience of engineers wanted detailed specifics on how to deal with managing employees who were older than they, had been at the company longer and yet lacked skills in current technology. However, the trainers struggled with technology themselves, as public speaking was their area of excellence. A less engaging speaker who knew more about transitioning people to new technology would have had more connection with the audience.

In another instance I recall, human resource manager asked the audience what they thought the overall level of confidence in their management was. In this public meeting the raised hands indicated it was above normal. However, the anonymous surveys that had just been completed showed the opposite. People know their bosses expect them to respectful, but it is dangerous to assume this behavior is anything more than a social obligation. Leaders that are really connected are trustworthy. They can listen to complaints without recriminating.

Finally, I recall the upper level managers lined up in front of workers, answering questions fairly effectively until one worker asked about the effects lengthy down-time due to malfunctioning equipment. The manager who could have responded to this question was not present, and the others could have cared less. His mannerisms seemed cold and uncaring. However now as each one stared at the other, they desperately wished for his presence. Their embarrassment was not helped by the muffled laughter of a few in the audience. The other managers needed to acknowledge their dependence on this person, and keep open lines of communication with him, even though his style of leadership was not like theirs.

No matter how compelling a speaker, if he or she does not understand their audience’s view point, people seated in the same room can sense this disconnect. The audience will not buy what the speaker says. But leaders may never realize this if they have don’t make the effort to connect with and actually listen to the people.

Photo detail from picture by By Ruth Jowett, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=9144841
Posted in Group psychology, Leadership | Leave a comment

Creativity and Charisma

Posted on January 21, 2016 by knlistman

DSCN0565c.jpgLook though recent articles on leadership and you will find that creativity to be in high demand. IBM’s Institute for Business Value conducted a survey of 1,500 chief executives and discovered that creativity had risen to top as the most valuable attribute of a leader. The ability to generate new idea, and solve problems creatively has become the new competency that is supposed to ensure the success of a business in tight economic times. [1]

But you cannot keep adding to new competencies without some sacrifice.  Basically any business needs to consider which attributes, such as team player or works well with others, that they are willing do without in when they hire a creative person. Øyvind L. Martinsen of the BI Norwegian Business School recommends that “An employer would be wise to conduct a position analysis to weigh the requirements for the ability to cooperate against the need for creativity.” [2]

One of those attributes that might have to be sacrificed to obtain a creative leader, is having a person who fits the appearance of leadership.  Research from Netherlands indicates that in business culture, groups expect the leader to conform to the norms. Those who establish a group identity and are typical of a group tend to be more influential because it appears that their self interests are also the group’s interest. [3] Following company culture to ensure success is pretty much the opposite from being original.

In a study in India, employees were rated for “leadership potential and creative idea expression.” The result showed that employees perceive as creative were not perceived as good leaders. The same is true in the United States. However, in research people expressing creative ideas are more accepted as leaders if they are also charismatic. Unfortunately this research fed the creative ideas to people with  presented them in a highly charismatic manner and those whose acted in a more staid manner. Both groups were acting, and the ideas presented by them were the same. The control environment in which research studies are performed makes it hard to determine how creativity personality traits and charisma actually interact. [4]

Research on creative people almost never mentions charisma. Most indicate people like the ones that observed by Martinsen, who “are obstinate and find faults and flaws in ideas and people.” They are more concerned about what they achieve rather than how much others like them. So employees may like leaders who exhibit charisma and businesses may demand leaders who are creative. But the chances of getting both are very rare.

 

[1] Kern, F. (2010,  May 18)  What Chief Executives Really Want. Bloomberg Businessweek. Retrieved Jan 13, 2014 from  http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/may2010/id20100517_190221.htm
[2] BI Norwegian Business School (2013, April 2). The hunt for the creative individual. Science Daily. Retrieved January 11, 2014, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­/releases/2013/04/130402091133.htm
[3] van Knippenberg, D., van Knippenberg, B., De Cremer, D., & Hogg, M. A. (2004). Leadership, self, and identity: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(6), 825-856
 [4] Mueller, J. S. Goncalo, Jack. Kamdar, Dishan (2011) Recognizing Creative Leadership: Can Creative Idea Expression Negatively Relate to Perceptions of Leadership Potential. Cornell University ILR School.  Retrieved 2014, Jan 13 from http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1342&context=articles
Posted in Creativity, Group psychology, Leadership | 1 Comment

How to inspire others

Posted on January 14, 2016 by knlistman

Picture 012a3Ask the average Joe on the street what makes a good leader and a frequent answer will be high confidence. But that is only part of the equation. Charismatic leaders must show solidarity with the people in order to win their approval. They must be seen as representative of the group. People want to know that leaders share their sentiments– feel the same way that they do. 

If a leader wishes to be a pathfinder, out of in front of the crowd, the crowd will not perceive them to be as appealing. This results is pressure on the leader not only to perform, but also to appear to belong.

Leaders must also express the high standards that they hold for themselves along with the confidence that followers can meet these standards simply by association. One of the most important rules of speaking to enhance charisma is to make statements that show moral conviction. New leaders often initially gain sway over their audiences by appealing to the moral high ground.[1]

The more emotional the appeal of the leader, the more influential the leader is. Also, the more likely the followers will act harshly against those they reject due to a perceived lack of morality.  One of the problems with a charismatic leader in politics is that an appeal to fight against the common enemies is often a way to rise to fame. This often creates an “us against them” culture with people who are not that much different.

Still, the search is on to learn the secrets of enhancing one’s influence. In a study at the University of Lausanne, managers at Swiss companies were taught principles of charismatic leadership over a 3 month period. The specific skills: how to  “inspire” other to buy in to their ideas using non-verbal influencing such as emotional expressiveness. They also learned to talk about the hot topics of leadership, such as moral convictions and lofty goals. They learned to speak like a leader using analogies and anecdotes. After three months there was some change. However the researchers admitted, “Our results also showed that a substantial investment must be made to produce medium effects.” [2]

So, charismatic behavior can be taught. Are moderate effects enough to justify the investment of money and time required for training and practice of the skills to inspire?  The question remains–can other skills that could be learned during this same time frame more valuable?

[1] Howell, J. M., & Frost, P. J. 1989. A laboratory study of charismatic leadership. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43: 243–26
[2] Antonakis, J., Fenley, M., & Liechti, S., Can Charisma Be Taught? Tests of Two Interventions. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2011, Vol. 10, No. 3, 374–396

 

Posted in Emotional intelligence, Leadership, Manipulation, Persuasion | 1 Comment

Literary devices and charisma

Posted on January 7, 2016 by knlistman

Edwin_Escobar_Luz

“Edwin Escobar Luz” by Herbert Rouge – Own work. Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons –

Most people determine a leader’s charisma using nonverbal characteristics, such as conveying emotional states, demonstrating passions through gestures and compelling use of vocal intonation. But charismatic leaders still have to have some to content their speeches. The goal of charisma, after all is to inspire people to act on your words.  However, be careful to keep your message simple and not say too much. The more complex the speech is, the more the listeners have to use of higher level thinking, and the less inspired they will be by the speaker. So what techniques do you use to fill in the words if you only have one simple point to make?

Start by collecting stories and anecdotes that convey the idea of your point. During one of the typically boring college dinner presentations that I attended, the professor retold a summary of the plot of Moliere’s Tartuffe, a comedy about a religious hypocrite. His account focused on how the characters behaved in ways that were for show, instead of being honest. There wasn’t really any more to his speech than that one simple point of the importance of being honest. However recounting the story, even though it was a fictional play, made it interesting.

Next, learn to master the use of metaphors, or the use of symbolic images to relay a point. However, be careful of over using them. I recall a particular associate at work who constantly used cooking metaphors to explain procedures. Of course the idea of comparing difficult work to the making of a delicious cake or hearty stew was appealing so I listened raptly. However, after a while I realized these culinary comparisons really provided no clue how to obtain the goals he had in mind.  Charismatic leaders have to have at least one clear action that they want their followers to perform.

Do you want your speech to be remembered? Think about the memorable quotes from past political leaders and you will see something in common. They use rhetoric devices, which is basically a way of saying statements in manner that resembles poetic writing.

An example of repetition with variation is John F. Kennedy famous statement from his inaugural address:

 “My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.”

Another rhetoric example is the use of contrasting ideas, tied together with alliteration and parallel syntax in this quote by Winston Churchil:

“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.”

If you boil these memorable statements down to their essence you realize that each politician is asking their audience to give up something. In Kennedy’s case he asked people to actively support to their country; Churchill requested they keep trying after obvious national failure during World War II. Both of these requests required sacrifice, dressed up through the use of rhetorical devices.

There are other core verbal characteristics of charismatic leaders, but these are the basic literary devices used to extend a simple idea into a stirring speech. Remember literary devices from past English classes? Maybe you learned something useful in them that you did not realize at the time.

Posted in Leadership, Literary devices, Manipulation, Persuasion | 1 Comment

Next generation of charisma

Posted on December 30, 2015 by knlistman

rocker aOne of the buzz words used to promote teaching managers charismatic behavior is transformational leadership. It is touted as the next generation improvement on the old standby, transactional leadership. Transactional leadership is based on providing extrinsic motivators. In other words transactional leaders provided more rewards for better performance. A contingent reward system apparently works up to a certain point and then no more. Perhaps the employees are satisfied with their current recompense, or find the rewards are not worth the effort. Most likely employees don’t want to consume their entire life with work.

Transformational leadership is a theory that replaces part of the contingent reward system by providing an intrinsic motivation. In other words it supposed to make follower’s increase their own expectations of themselves.  Of course, employees still expect pay and expect pay increases with increased experience.  Only an infinitesimal number of people work for the sheer pleasure of it. Still how exactly does one change people’s ideas of how much they are willing to give to their company? Transformational leadership theories provides a three-pronged approach.

The first and most important is providing employees with a sense of vision and mission for their job. Think back to when you were a child and were asked “What do you want to be when you grow up?” Only the would-be comics answered “cubicle worker.” Many of us replied with a “service” profession; doctor, teacher, policeman, etc. because their work seemed applicable to us in a way that actuary, accountant and environmental engineer did not. For most people it requires someone with gift of persuasion to convince employees they should redouble their effort because what they do actually matters, whether it is a service position or not. So charisma is one of the major components of transformational leadership.

The second is making the work itself more interesting and fulfilling.  Part of this is empowerment, or allowing people make decisions and have more inputs into their work. However before employees have power to make decisions, they need know how to predict results and be responsible for the failure when they do not come out as predicted. Transformational leadership adds the idea of employees learn to think critically about their work. This also means they may question decisions that management makes or constantly suggest improvements to the chagrin of co-workers who are used to the way things are. Most important they need a boss that will allow them to push their limits, try new things and fail. Ouch!

The third component really depends on which theory of transformational leadership that you ascribe to. Bernard M. Bass found individualized consideration to be a key point of transformational leadership. The leader is to provide development plans for employees based on individual needs. Although he noted that focus on team or organizational goals increased the sense of mission, this had to be balanced by one on one coaching and mentoring. Inspiring speeches had to be moderated by individual attention. Boas Shamir, on the other hand, proposes greater emphasis on sense of belonging. Therefore the goal of leadership should be to provide social identification with the group so that employees will go the extra mile.

As well as disagreeing on the major components of transformational leadership, there other areas the transformational theorists need to clear up. The underlying processes required to provide employees with a sense of vision and mission, and ways to make work more interesting and fulfilling are not delineated, but tend to rely on anecdotal information. Research has been conducted on transformational leadership for over 30 years now. People may have a more favorable perception of charismatic leaders, but what exactly do they do to contribute to people’s performance?

Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M.B. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept theory. Organizational Science, 4(4), 577-594.
Bass, B.M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership; Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19-36.
Posted in Leadership, Persuasion | Leave a comment

Charisma’s black eye

Posted on December 23, 2015 by knlistman

black eye 2Research on charisma which shows that people who exhibit emotional expressiveness are rated the highest in charisma by others. People can be taught this very skill, and improve it by spending time delivering speeches in front of the mirror, watching their face and hand gestures, and recording their voice to improve inflection. One response was difficulty with teaching people to be charismatic, was teaching them this skill without enabling them to become like Hitler who did practiced these techniques.

With the rise of appealingly and strong but eventually destructive leaders in the twentieth century, charisma has gotten a black eye. People who want to work a crowd can become skilled in replicating facial expressions, voice and movements to convey strong feelings. They can learn to use settings to maximize their appearance of presence. And it does work; at least it worked well for one of the leaders rated as the most charismatic speakers of the 20th century. Adolf Hitler spent hours mastering the delivery of speeches that drew crowds like a magnet. Before he did his ideas were largely ignored.

Charismatic leadership skill peddlers have renamed the techniques they teach. “Transformational leadership” is one of the new monikers used for those who can induce others to follow their vision in today’s businesses. This kind of leadership also includes mastering skills to determine what vision should be, and the best method to achieve it. But it is mainly based on the ability to sell that vision. Therefore, behaving and speaking in a charismatic manner are the cornerstones of transformational leadership.

The classic idea is of a charismatic leader that arises in a country in crisis (runaway inflation, massive unemployment, etc.) This leaders promises better life, an economic turn-around. And the cost is current sacrifice. Neo-charisma is aimed at corporations.Why has charismatic leadership in business has become so important?

The growth of cost competition has made the prospect of maintaining profits increasingly difficult. Companies need to have their employees producing more, without paying more. They need an economic turn-around. People are more willing to sacrifice and spend more time spent at work for a charismatic leader. This is the ideal way for the board of directors wants to sell their vision for bringing a company out of pending crisis. Maybe, there is not that much difference between the classic idea of charisma and the new one.

Antonkias, J. Fenley, M. and Liechti, S. Can Charisma Be Taught? Tests of Two Interventions. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2011, Vol. 10, No. 3, 374–396.
Barling, J. Weber, T. Kelloway, E. K.. Effects of transformational leadership training on attitudinal and financial outcomes: A field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 81(6), Dec 1996, 827-832
Friedman, H. S. Prince, L. M. Riggio, R. E and DiMatteo, M. R. Understanding and Assessing Nonverbal Expressiveness: The Affective Communication Test, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1980, Vol. 39, No. 2, 333-351
Macias, A. “Why Hitler was such a successful orator” Business Insider. May 13, 2015, 1:35 PM  
Posted in Leadership, Persuasion | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Charisma and Emotions

Posted on December 9, 2015 by knlistman

DSC_3033 smileEmotional expressiveness seems to be the major component of charisma. When other people can reflect our emotions, or show reactions to events that match our own, we are more likely to trust them.  In order to reflect another person’s emotions you need to have emotional sensitivity, or the ability to detect how someone else is feeling. Reading emotions is akin to feeling what others are feeling, but does not necessarily provide insight into what drives others into action. Understanding motives to act requires reading thought processes, which is a cognitive skill. Sensitivity to emotions, on the other hand is closely related to be empathy.

The ability to empathize may be more intuitive and innate than learned. Higher levels of empathy are connected with higher quantities of the hormone oxytocin  Higher levels of empathy also means higher level of anger against those that causing pain to the group whom is regarded with sympathy. The student of charisma can learn how to can learn how to engender empathy for one group in order to manipulate an outburst of hatred against an opposing group.

Emotional control is another important component of charisma. While emotional sensitivity allows you to read others emotions, even when they try to hide them, strong emotional control allows you to hide your own emotions. It enables you to appear calm to others, even when deep down inside you are panicking, by simply thinking of a situation in which you would be calm. The goal here is not to remain cold, aloof and uncaring in appearance, but to hide fear, distress, disgust etc. by masking them with another emotion. The key to emotional control is the ability enact emotions on cue when you do not want to be transparent. This kind of control can be taught, but not without learning emotional expressiveness also.

Social expressiveness, like emotional expressiveness, is a skill that can be learned. In fact the characteristics of charisma that involve learning the rules of society and how to play a role in society must be learned. However, some people seem to pick them up which less effort. These are people who pay more attention to people than things and processes. These are the people who are more likely to learn the unwritten rules of society or what society expects them to behave like as a leader. These people spend a great deal of their life observing how other behave and monitoring other’s reactions to one’s own behavior. Unfortunately these people who are high in the social aspects of charisma, tend to be not to be high in creativity or highly skilled in use of technology.

The request managers to be creative, tech savvy and charismatic, will only perpetuate the necessity of hiring them for one set of skills and teaching them another. Evidently, business leaders think it is easier to teach them emotional expressiveness, sensitivity and control.

Ronald E Riggio Ph.D., Cutting-Edge Leadership, What Is Your Charisma Quotient? Psychology Today, Sept 21, 2014
Body Language Of Empathy Is Genetically Wired Say Scientists Published: Wednesday 16 November 2011 at 2am PST http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/237743.php
Paul Bloom, September 25, 2015 The Dark Side of Empathyhttp://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/09/the-violence-of-empathy/407155/
Posted in Creativity, Emotional intelligence, Leadership, Manipulation, Persuasion | Leave a comment

Teaching Charisma

Posted on December 2, 2015 by knlistman

Caspar_enderlein,_retorica,_1610-11_ca. (1)Charisma can be learned. This is not a new revelation. For millennia people have been teaching others the how to speak in a persuasive manner. In fact if you look up the definition of “rhetoric” you will find it was taught to achieve the same goals as “charisma,” the purpose being to move your audience to action.

Rhetoric was once part of formal education not only in ancient Greece, but also in the Middle East, China and Europe. Aristotle broke rhetoric down into its components – the three types of arguments that could be combined to persuade any audience: emotional, logical, and moral.  Romans then created the rules for designing a persuasive discourse called the five canons. Uncover the three types of arguments, put them together using the five canons, and the speaker should become ultimately persuasive. But they also began to sound a lot like each other.

So what is the difference between rhetoric and charisma? For one thing charisma is based more on the appearance of the speaker than the content of the speech. People judge others as being charismatic when their body language shows they are open and friendly, but also when they show great power. The charismatic person must strike a balance: too friendly is soft, too powerful is frightening. Finally there is the skill of showing presence or seeming larger than life.

Also charisma is not concerned with appeal to logic and emotions, but mostly rests on appeal to emotions. Observers that rate charisma in research show it is largely based on the use of non-verbal communication to send emotional signals. In order to teach people how to have emotional expressiveness, it has to be broken down into measurable factors. Essentially learning charisma is like taking acting lessons. People learn to control facial expressions, body movement and vocal intonations.

When people hear the word rhetoric; it also brings to mind a negative connotation. It is not just method for making persuasive speeches. It may mean an insincere argument, or words that are spoken without any significance.  How did rhetoric, a once respected subject, come to have a derogatory connotation in our modern culture? Perhaps it was due to its codification. Now that the components of charisma have been examined and deconstructed, the same thing may happen to it. I can imagine people discussing the latest speech by their leader “He talked a lot, but really didn’t say anything. It was just so much charisma.”

O.F. Cabane. The Charisma Myth: How Anyone Can Master the Art and Science of Personal Magnetism
S. Friedman, L. M. Prince, R. E. Riggio, and M. R. DiMatteo. Understanding and Assessing Nonverbal Expressiveness: The Affective Communication Test, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1980, Vol. 39, No. 2, 333-351
Photo: “Caspar enderlein, retorica, 1610-11 ca.” by Sailko – Own work. Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons – https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Caspar_enderlein,_retorica,_1610-11_ca..JPG#/media/File:Caspar_enderlein,_retorica,_1610-11_ca..JPG
Posted in Emotional intelligence | Leave a comment