Charisma: an old concept for new realities?

The word charisma is of Greek origin, and in the terminology of early Christianity, charisma meant “gift of grace.” It was then first used in a religious context, especially in a specific reference to the second Epistle of the Corinthians in which there is a description of the different expressions of “divine grace.” The transformation of the concept and its use in a secular framework is attributed to the German philosopher Max Weber, who in his works on the sociology of religions and political sociology, established the main categories for the development of the theory of charisma. Although the concept has also changed since Weber’s time, it is important to note that his work set the basis for subsequent research on the topic.

Weber constitutes the departing point for any study on charismatic leadership. This paper makes an analysis of the ideas initially elaborated by Weber regarding this topic and later reviews and examines further academic consideration on the subject.

Inspired by Rudolph Sohm, who initially researched the subject of charismatic leadership within the Christian church, Weber began to develop his studies on social organization and the relationship between groups and leaders using the term charisma as explaining one of the qualities that legitimises the leader in front of his followers. This new

application opened the doors for the use of charisma in a wider and broader perspective.

Charisma, as interpreted by Weber (1964), becomes an “attribute” or “gift” that some types of personality posses. These “personalities” are characterised by their fervent and innovative spirit, which extends to rebellious feelings against the traditional systems of rational domination. These “special types of personality” do not only fully assume and believe in their roles of “saviours,” but also take clear and decisive actions to fulfil their mission.

Based on these observations and the analysis of important historical figures, Weber defines charisma as:

. . . a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with super natural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader (Weber, pp. 358-359).

Weber’s attention thus focused on the characteristics of the leader, on those qualities that made him or her “extraordinary” and due to which he was respected and obeyed. In his analysis, Weber gives examples of several charismatic leaders and explains how the “gift of charisma” is used to exercise authority over a group. From this definition we are able to extract the core or main idea regarding charismatic leadership, namely its uniqueness and its powerful nature compared to other types of political leadership.

2.1.1 Two “moments” in the charismatic phenomenon.

A careful reading of Weber's work on the subject leads to the conclusion that the charismatic phenomenon occurs in two clearly different moments: the first is the emergence of charisma and the second is the maintenance of the bond established with the followers. The first moment depends on beliefs, or in Weber’s words, on the recognition personally achieved by the leader from those who voluntarily submit themselves to his domination. In the

definition quoted above, Weber explicitly refers to the extraordinary qualities of the charisma-holder and an important part of his analysis focuses on explaining how these qualities elicit a response from the followers, mainly a form of obedience that legitimises the authority of the charismatic leader. Michels (1949) develops the point of the cult or veneration of the masses towards a leader in his major work on Political Parties. For Michels, the supremacy of leaders over the mass is not only the result of certain special characteristics of the leader, but also, and perhaps more importantly, this worship is based on the enormous superstitious reverence that masses tend to feel towards a given leader. The masses feel the need to “see themselves” in the eyes of those who represent their greatest ideals and personify their dreams. These forms of veneration, that Michels has termed “temporary divinities,”

become more blind depending on the masses’ way of life and their level of cultural development. In Michels’s view:

The adoration of the led for the leaders is commonly latent. It reveals itself by signs that are barely perceptible, such as the tone of veneration in which the idol’s name is pronounced, the perfect docility with which the least of his signs is obeyed, and the indignation which is aroused by any critical attack upon his personality But where the individuality of the leader is truly exceptional, and also in periods of lively excitement, the latent fervor is conspicuously manifested with the violence of an acute proxysm (Michels, p.64).

The work of Michels suggests that there is a disposition among followers to believe in a leader. In the case of charismatic leadership, this 'disposition' takes a new dimension given the special qualities of the leader. After his initial definition, Weber argues that charisma can only exist if the followers accept it. In Weber’s words: “It is recognition on the part of those subject to authority which is decisive for the validity of charisma” (p. 359). It can thus be argued that Weber does not explain charisma as a personal attribute, but rather he articulates it as a social product that depends on certain qualities of a leader and the validation given by the followers.

In the “second moment,” following Weber’s work, the recognition of the “first moment” is transformed and becomes what Weber believes to be the submission of the followers to the will of the leader once he is "power and in power." The leader thus demands, sometimes in an authoritarian fashion, respect for his authority. It is usually in this stage where the charismatic leader, in his pure form, may tend to become more inflexible and recurs to coercion as a control mechanism and for the maintenance of his status.

It is during the “first moment” when the leader shows several special characteristics that could perhaps be considered rather “exceptional,” as defined in the Weberian concept of charisma. Generally speaking, the behaviour of the charismatic leader is often observed repetitively in diverse historical conditions which have led some scholars of the subject to develop a set of categories related to the “qualities” attributable to charisma. These categories, nevertheless, have been severely criticized by the main detractors of the theory of charismatic leadership who find a lack of common agreement on the categorisation of the personal traits possessed by charismatic leaders. It is therefore important to review both positions in order to understand Weber's theoretical proposition.