Abstract
The discussion so far, on the subjective, perceptual, and dialectical nature of reality, seems to indicate that a framework for the analysis of charisma requires a qualitative approach and that, more particularly, a case study approach may suit the analysis of charismatic leadership.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Concerning Western social science, there are at least two major epistemological traditions: the humanistic and the positivistic. The humanistic tradition on the one hand (especially influenced by Kant) posits a distinction between different types of reality: the phenomenal and the noumenal. The phenomenal includes the many dimensions of the natural and human environment, and animal biochemistry; it is governed by “laws of nature” and is capable of being known and understood through the systematic use of the senses. The noumenal includes the social world, is governed by “laws of freedom,” and is capable of being understood principally if not exclusively through “sympathetic reason.” The positivistic tradition, on the other hand, sees no qualitative distinctions in reality.
- 2.
- 3.
See Abbott’s (1992) essay, “What Do Cases Do? Some Notes on Activity in Sociological Analysis.” p. 55.
- 4.
Ibid., pp. 61–62.
- 5.
Weber argues that a meaningful understanding of a phenomenon that entails more than a concrete relation between variables requires “the empathetic understanding of which is naturally a problem of a specifically different type from those which the schemes of the exact natural sciences in general can [solve] or seek to solve” (In Shils & Finch, 1949: 74).
- 6.
Human activity (in the broader, Weberian sense of the term) must therefore be “understood” (“Verstehen”) as being meaningful to the actors in society, or in Weber’s terms, it must be “interpreted.” Weber developed the idea of “Verstehen” – the importance of understanding the full dimensions of social life in social and historical research.
- 7.
Weber understands that “as soon as we attempt to reflect about the way in which life confronts us in immediate concrete situations, it presents an infinite multiplicity of successively and coexistently emerging and disappearing events, both within and outside ourselves” (In Shils & Finch, 1949: 72).
- 8.
Abbott, op. cit., p. 61.
- 9.
Ibid., pp. 63–64.
- 10.
See his essay, “Cases, Causes, Conjunctures, Stories, and Imagery” in What is a Case? Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry, 1992. pp. 217–218.
- 11.
This phenomenological aspect further reinforces the argument that charismatic leaders cannot be efficiently measured by positivistic methods, because it is basically a social phenomenon in which the reality is inevitably filtered through a process of social perception, and therefore what establishes a charismatic relationship is not only the “factual” characteristics of the leader, but also their reconstruction and perception in the followers’ minds.
- 12.
Therefore, to understand the essence of leadership, we should focus on the individual perspective, while we may need to look into the psychological aspects at times.
- 13.
Weber’s definition is an ideal classification that does not necessarily exist as such, but to make a critical theoretical analysis of the concept and the phenomenon it is of good sense to focus mainly on cases that are as close as can be to the ideal type.
- 14.
The definition of “alternative” is formed in relation to the definition of the mainstream and hence inherently relativistic. Although charisma can be considered as yet another type of alternative authority (as was Weber’s initial stimuli for the classification of charisma), there is a particular aspect that defines the cases from other alternative authorities: they differ in being an agency that engages in the deconstruction and reconstruction of the basic underlying assumptions of the society of which they themselves are a part. Not all alternative authorities seek to change the underlying basic assumptions. The theme of charisma as engaging with the underlying assumptions was dealt with in Chap. 4 and will be empirically treated in Chaps. 7 and 8. This dimension seems to be the most distinguishable aspect of charisma and is clearly not an integral part of alternative authority as such.
- 15.
The notion of “alternative” is different from the normative aspect that the concept of “variety” bears; while “variety” refers to something that has common similarities and can basically coexist or collaborate within the mainstream, an “alternative” implies a contention of the mainstream. In a centralized social system, such a situation underlies a question in relation to the notion of opposition: how far can this “pure” charisma function and insist on being outside the centrally controlled establishment without being considered as yet another version of subversive sociopolitical opposition? The boundaries are notoriously unclear, and the notion of “subversiveness” may constantly hover above such leaders’ heads.
- 16.
Some writers even deny that there is a charismatic personality type. Willner (1984), for example, argues that there is a common misconception about charisma that links it directly to the personality of the individual who is credited with it. She argues that apart from similarities, the variations in the individual personalities seem so great that the probability of teasing out a composite “charismatic personality type” seems small. Moreover, the fact that charisma consists of social interactions (as well as based much on impression formation and social attributions) means to her, that it is not what the leader is, but how people see the leader.
- 17.
In this respect, it is much closer to the view of the recent new genre of leadership theories. See Chap. 1.
- 18.
Extreme nonnormative human traits might lead to negative social labeling, such as deviance.
- 19.
In his essay, “An attribution theory of leadership,” Calder said: “Hollander (1958) has advanced the well-known premise that leaders obtain “idiosyncrasy credits,” that is, implicit permission to differ in their behavior in order to benefit the group. Granting of these credits is related to the supposed earlier conformity of leader (…) perhaps one of the most frequent distinguishing characteristics of evidential behavior is simply the extremity of that behavior. People who do more of something are likely to be perceived as leaders (or else deviants)” (1977: 188–189).
- 20.
Ibid., p. 188.
- 21.
As argued by Schein (1985), Willner (1984), Bensman and Givant (1975). Attributes considered truly exceptional in one culture may be seen as no more than relatively rare in another. Similarly, different cultures may have different measures for how much of any quality so far surpasses the normal human range as to be considered as transcending human potential.
- 22.
Hence, qualities such as a great sense of humor, great musical talent, a gift talent for painting or dancing or running (although being positive traits and skills, and even if being outstandingly virtuosi) are indifferent in terms of leadership. They might deliver a great artist or comedian but not by definition a charismatic leader.
- 23.
See his Invitation to Sociology: A Humanistic Perspective (1967), p. 4.
- 24.
See Berger and Luckman’s The Social Construction of Reality (1966), pp. 82–83.
- 25.
Ibid., p. 94.
- 26.
Berger and Luckman (1966) op. cit., p. 96. Berger has summarized this dialectical process saying: “it is through externalization that society is a human product. It is through objectivation that society becomes a reality ‘sui generis.’ It is through internalization that man is a product of society” (1967: 4).
- 27.
In Knowledge and the Body-Mind Problem, 1994, p. 7.
- 28.
Popper, K.R. and Eules, J.C., The Self and Its Brain (1977), pp. 39–40.
- 29.
Ibid.
- 30.
Burns (1978), for example, suggests that such transformations should be defined by the existence of changes in specific aspects of life: in the psychological arena (a change in the individual’s attitudes and behaviors) and in the social arena (the reflection of the change at the institutional level, either by new institutions or by the change of institutions). He says: “By social change I mean here real change – that is, a transformation to a marked degree in the attitudes, norms, institutions, and behaviors that structure our daily lives. Such changes embrace not only new cultural patterns and institutional arrangement and new psychological dispositions, but changes in material conditions, in the explicit, felt existence, the flesh and fabric of people’s lives (…) real change means a continuing interaction of attitudes, behavior, and institutions, monitored by alterations in individual and collective hierarchies of values (1978: 414).”
- 31.
In the action-inclined perspective, individuals are not defined as charismatic leaders merely by their ability to articulate a vision, disapprove of the current circumstance, or preach for a change, but by their active attempts (at least) to implement new structures.
- 32.
Eight were academics, two journalists, and three social activists.
- 33.
With regard to three of the 15 nominees, we did not have enough written data to substantiate the extent of their proximity to the set criteria. We therefore interviewed three additional people who were considered knowledgeable about these particular people (most of whom were considered to be in close relations to these people).
- 34.
For example, Tay Kheng Soon was a leading figure in a number of organizations (such as the Singapore Planning and Urban Research group and the Singapore Institute of Architects) but he was not the founder. He did set up his own firm (which can be seen ultimately as a kind of a social institution) but its degree of proximity to the dimensions of “social constructs” is less solid than in the case of Kuo Pao Kun and Sister Prema.
- 35.
Abbott (1992) cites the following example: World War II has come to its end, but have its consequences?
- 36.
See Berger and Luckman (1966) and Giddens (1984). This assumption excludes from reality, the mere possibility of a static equilibrium phase, because even this “static” equilibrium needs actions to be taken for it to remain stable (either in the form of reproduction or in the form of preventing the oppositional processes of different possible variants within the social reality). It means that the equilibrium homeostasis is practically an ongoing reproduction process, in spite of its pseudo static-phase image.
- 37.
In The Change Masters (1984) p. 281.
- 38.
Kuo was a political detainee between the years 1976 and 1980.
- 39.
Tay says that sensing a “feeling of danger” he left Singapore in 1975 and returned around 1980. (During that period, he was in and out of the country but he only fully resumed work in Singapore a few years later).
- 40.
Khng Eu Meng, Singapore’s Extraordinary People (1995).
- 41.
We could have perhaps insisted more, but were afraid that she might withdraw her approval for this study. The interviewer therefore stopped right then and there, feeling that Sister Prema had perhaps hit a nerve when she the interviewer had spoken with an ex-volunteer who was critical of Sister Prema, or perhaps it was that Sister Prema was really uncomfortable with the fact that the interviewer was talking “about her” with “so many people.”
- 42.
Whereby its social interactions are based on the inclination to incorporate personal relationships in decision making, a “guanxi” interpersonal mode that is defined as a base on which two or more persons have a commonality of shared identification, which facilitates social exchange interaction. See Tong and Yong (1998: pp. 2–3).
- 43.
Also, at the time of these interviews, the interviewer was in an advanced stage of pregnancy. It could be that the “softer,” “round,” “feminine,” “motherly,” “containing” connotation of pregnancy did some good in this respect and “disarmed” them (or the interviewer herself). However, this is not to say that in order to facilitate cooperation, interviewers should be pregnant, as equally so it may have also “impaired” the interviewer’s “professional appearance” in the interviewees’ eyes. Alternatively, of course, it may have made her “less penetrating” and thus “less threatening.”
References
Abbott, A. (1992). What do cases do? Some notes on activity in sociological analysis. In H. S. Becker & C. R. Charles (Eds.), What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry (pp. 53–82). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bensman, J., & Givant, M. (1975). Charisma and modernity: The use and abuse of a concept. Social Research, 42(4), 570–614.
Berger, P. (1967). Invitation to sociology: A humanistic perspective. Garden City: Doubleday.
Berger, P. L., & Luckman, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. Garden City: Doubleday.
Brynman, A, Stephens, M, Campo, C. (1996). The importance of context: Qualitative research and the study of leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), Fall. 353–370.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper and Row.
Calder, B. J. (1977). An attribution theory of leadership. In M. B. Staw & R. G. Salancik (Eds.), New directions in organizational behavior (pp. 179–205). Chicago: St Clair.
Eu Meng, K. (1995). Singapore’s extraordinary people (pp. 44–55). Singapore: Television Corporation of Singapore and Landmark Books.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity.
Hollander, E. P. (1958). Conformity, status and idiosyncracy credit. Psychological Review, 65, 117–127.
Popper, K. R., & Eules, J. C. (1977). The self and its brain (pp. 36–50). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Schein, E. H. (1985). Organization culture and leadership: A dynamic view (pp. 85–111, 209–243). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Shils, E. A., Finch, H. A. (Trans. and Ed.) (1949). Max Weber on the methodology of the social sciences. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
Tong, C. K., & Yong, P. K. (1998). Guanxi bases, Xinyong and Chinese business network. The British Journal of Sociology, 49(1), 75–96.
Willner, A. R. (1984). The spellbinders: Charismatic political leadership. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hava, D., Kwok-bun, C. (2012). Methodological Operations. In: Charismatic Leadership in Singapore. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1451-3_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1451-3_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-1450-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-1451-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)