S. Alexander Haslam, Stephen D. Reicher, Michael J. Platow
This is a test
This is a test
Buch teilen
266 Seiten
English
ePUB (handyfreundlich)
Ăber iOS und Android verfĂŒgbar
eBook - ePub
The New Psychology of Leadership
Identity, Influence and Power
S. Alexander Haslam, Stephen D. Reicher, Michael J. Platow
Angaben zum Buch
Buchvorschau
Inhaltsverzeichnis
Quellenangaben
Ăber dieses Buch
This groundbreaking book provides a refreshing introduction to the field of leadership and is jam-packed with theoretical and practical insights derived from a wealth of applied scientific research conducted by the authors and their colleagues around the world over the last three decades.
It starts from the premise that leadership is never just about leaders. Instead it is about leaders and followers who are joined together as members of a social group that provides them with a sense of shared social identity â a sense of "us-ness". In these terms, leadership is understood as the process through which leaders work with followers to create, represent, advance, and embed this sense of shared social identity. The new edition of this award-winning book presents a wealth of evidence from historical, organizational, political and sporting contexts to provide an expanded exploration of these processes of identity leadership in action. In particular, it builds upon the success of the first edition by examining the operation of identity leadership in contemporary society and fleshing out practical answers to key organizational and institutional challenges.
Drawing on real-world examples and rich data sources, this book will appeal to academics, researchers, and students of psychology, business, and management, as well as to practitioners, policy makers, and anyone interested in the workings of leadership, influence, and power.
HĂ€ufig gestellte Fragen
Wie kann ich mein Abo kĂŒndigen?
Gehe einfach zum Kontobereich in den Einstellungen und klicke auf âAbo kĂŒndigenâ â ganz einfach. Nachdem du gekĂŒndigt hast, bleibt deine Mitgliedschaft fĂŒr den verbleibenden Abozeitraum, den du bereits bezahlt hast, aktiv. Mehr Informationen hier.
(Wie) Kann ich BĂŒcher herunterladen?
Derzeit stehen all unsere auf MobilgerĂ€te reagierenden ePub-BĂŒcher zum Download ĂŒber die App zur VerfĂŒgung. Die meisten unserer PDFs stehen ebenfalls zum Download bereit; wir arbeiten daran, auch die ĂŒbrigen PDFs zum Download anzubieten, bei denen dies aktuell noch nicht möglich ist. Weitere Informationen hier.
Welcher Unterschied besteht bei den Preisen zwischen den AboplÀnen?
Mit beiden AboplÀnen erhÀltst du vollen Zugang zur Bibliothek und allen Funktionen von Perlego. Die einzigen Unterschiede bestehen im Preis und dem Abozeitraum: Mit dem Jahresabo sparst du auf 12 Monate gerechnet im Vergleich zum Monatsabo rund 30 %.
Was ist Perlego?
Wir sind ein Online-Abodienst fĂŒr LehrbĂŒcher, bei dem du fĂŒr weniger als den Preis eines einzelnen Buches pro Monat Zugang zu einer ganzen Online-Bibliothek erhĂ€ltst. Mit ĂŒber 1 Million BĂŒchern zu ĂŒber 1.000 verschiedenen Themen haben wir bestimmt alles, was du brauchst! Weitere Informationen hier.
UnterstĂŒtzt Perlego Text-zu-Sprache?
Achte auf das Symbol zum Vorlesen in deinem nÀchsten Buch, um zu sehen, ob du es dir auch anhören kannst. Bei diesem Tool wird dir Text laut vorgelesen, wobei der Text beim Vorlesen auch grafisch hervorgehoben wird. Du kannst das Vorlesen jederzeit anhalten, beschleunigen und verlangsamen. Weitere Informationen hier.
Ist The New Psychology of Leadership als Online-PDF/ePub verfĂŒgbar?
Ja, du hast Zugang zu The New Psychology of Leadership von S. Alexander Haslam, Stephen D. Reicher, Michael J. Platow im PDF- und/oder ePub-Format sowie zu anderen beliebten BĂŒchern aus Psychology & History & Theory in Psychology. Aus unserem Katalog stehen dir ĂŒber 1Â Million BĂŒcher zur VerfĂŒgung.
Effective leadership involves influencing others so that they are motivated to contribute to the achievement of group goals. This process lies at the heart of human progress. Scarcely any advance that civilization has made would have been possible without it â whether in arenas of politics and religion, science and technology, art and literature, sport and adventure, or industry and business. For good or for ill, leaders are widely recognized as the proper focus for our attempts to understand the tides and shape of history. As a result, from an early age, we are told wonderful stories about the role that great leaders have played in making history and initiating the changes that have created the world as we know it.
This focus fuels widespread fascination with the lives of leaders, and more particularly with their individual psychology. How were they brought up? What key events shaped their intellectual and social development? What are their defining psychological characteristics and traits? What makes them so special?
To answer such questions, a vast industry has grown up in which all manner of people have found voice: not only psychologists but also management theorists, historians, politicians and political scientists, theologians, philosophers, journalists, and a range of social commentators. Their contributions include scientific analyses, scholarly biographies, and popular accounts of leadersâ lives. The nature of these contributions is varied and far-reaching, and a great many are both very insightful and highly readable. However, almost without exception, these various treatments advance an individualistic understanding of leadership that sees this as grounded in the nature of leaders as unique persons. In this way, leadership is seen to arise from a distinctive psychology that sets the minds and lives of great leaders apart from those of others as different, special, superior.
This book does not seek to diminish the contribution that great leaders have made to the shaping of society, nor does it seek to downplay the importance of their psychology. What it does do, however, is question and provide an alternative to this individualistic consensus. Rather than treating leadership as something that derives from leadersâ psychological uniqueness, we argue the very opposite: that effective leadership is grounded in leadersâ capacity to embody and promote a psychology that they share with others. Stated most baldly, we argue for a psychology that regards leadership as the product of an individualâs âwe-nessâ rather than of his or her âI-ness.â
As we will see, this perspective forces us to see leadership not as a process that revolves around individuals acting and thinking in isolation but as a group process in which leaders and followers are joined together â and perceive themselves to be joined together â in shared endeavor. It also follows from this point that in order to understand leadership properly, our gaze needs to extend beyond leaders alone. It needs to encompass the followers with whom they forge a psychological connection and whose effort is required in order to do the work that drives history forward. It also needs to encompass the group in which leaders and followers come together: its history, its culture, and its relations to other groups in any given context.
We need this broad gaze because the proof of leadership is not simply the emergence of a big new idea or the development of a vision for sweeping change. Rather, it also involves the capacity to convince others to contribute to processes that turn ideas and visions into reality and that help to bring about change. For this reason, leadership is always predicated on followership, and the psychology of these two processes is inextricably intertwined. Critically too, we will see that followers can only be moved to respond enthusiastically to a leaderâs instruction when they see the leader as someone whose psychology is aligned with theirs â when he or she is understood to be âone of usâ rather than someone who is âout for themselvesâ or âone of them.â
We readily recognize, however, that persuading readers of the merits of this approach to leadership is no easy task. Not least, this is because the traditional psychology of leadership remains deeply ingrained both in psychological theorizing and in popular consciousness. Its intellectual shackles are both tight and heavy.1 Accordingly, we need to start our journey by inspecting those shackles and then loosening ourselves from their grasp.
Leadership in history: The âgreat manâ and his charisma
If there is one model of leadership that exemplifies the individualistic consensus that we have identified as lying at the heart of the old psychology of leadership, it is that of the âgreat man.â This, indeed, is one of the cornerstones of traditional academic and popular understandings of leadership. It is the model we were first introduced to in childhood books about monumental figures such as Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Abraham Lincoln. It is the model that is found in those history texts that recount the feats and extol the virtues of extraordinary figures who seem a race apart from the rest of us. It is the model that informs the biographies of leading businessmen that line the shelves of airport bookstalls and that invite us to follow in their footsteps to success, influence, and tremendous personal wealth. It makes for wonderful reading, but as a window into the causes of great leadersâ success it is deeply flawed. Not least, this is because by defining its subject matter in a manner that precludes interest in âgreat women,â the approach displays its partiality from the outset (Haslam, 2010).
One of the earliest formal statements of the âgreat manâ model is found in Platoâs Republic (380 BC/1993), a text that takes the form of a dialogue between the master, Socrates, and his student, Adeimantus. Socrates starts by asserting that only a rare class of philosopher-ruler is fit to lead the uneducated and brutish majority and that, without such people, democracy itself is in peril:
Socrates: Look at it in the context of what we were saying earlier. We agreed that a philosopher has a quickness of learning, a good memory, courage, and a broadness of vision.
Adeimantus: Yes.
Socrates: From his earliest years, then, heâll outclass other children at everything, especially if he is as gifted physically as he is mentally, wonât he?
Adeimantus: Of course.
Socrates: So when he grows up, his friends and fellow citizens will want to make use of him for their own affairs?
Adeimantus: NaturallyâŠ.
Socrates: That leaves us with only a tiny number of people, Adeimantus.
(Plato, 380 BC/1993, pp. 217â218)
Although only embryonic, Platoâs analysis set the scene for the larger body of subsequent leadership research that has gone on to focus attention on the psychology of the individual and to argue that it is the leaderâs distinctive and exceptional qualities that mark him (rarely, her) out as qualified not only for responsibility and high office but also for universal admiration and respect.
In essence too, work of this form provides a straightforward response to the perennial question of whether great leaders are born or made. It answers âborn.â It suggests that leaders are individuals who are superior to others by virtue of their possession of innate intellectual and social characteristics. In short, leaders are simply people who are made of âthe right stuffâ and this stuff is seen to be in short supply. Writing over a century before Plato, the pre-Socratic philosopher Heraclitus expressed this point very bluntly: âThe many are worthless, good men are few. One man is ten thousand if he is the bestâ (500 BC; cited in Harter, 2008, p. 69).
Moving forward over 2,000 years, similar views were articulated in an influential series of lectures on Heroes and Hero Worship delivered by Thomas Carlyle in May 1840 (see Figure 1.1). In the first of these lectures, âThe Hero as Divinity,â Carlyle declared that âUniversal history, the history of what man has accomplished in this world, is at bottom the History of the Great Men who have worked here.â He went on:
We cannot look, however imperfectly, upon a great man, without gaining something by him. He is the living light-fountain, which it is good and pleasant to be near. The light which enlightens, which has enlightened the darkness of the world.
(Carlyle, 1840, p. 5)
Once more, we are encouraged to regard the stuff of leadership not as the stuff of ordinary mortals but as the stuff of male gods.
Exactly what this stuff is has been a topic of intense debate for most of the 2,500 years that separate the world of Heraclitus from ours today. Commonly, though, it is conceptualized in terms of distinctive traits that are believed to make those who possess them inherently more adept at directing, managing, and inspiring the remainder of the population who require their direction, management, and inspiration.
Different analyses place an emphasis on the importance of different traits. For Socrates the defining characteristics of a great leader were quickness of learning, good memory, courage, and broadness of vision, as well as physical presence and prowess. Distilled into contemporary psychological thinking, these ideas are typically related to mental qualities such as decisiveness, insight, imagination, intelligence, and charisma. Of these, it is the last â charisma â that has received the most intense scrutiny. In many ways, this is because the idea of charisma captures particularly well the sense of âsomething specialâ surrounding great leaders and our relationship with them.
Reviewing the development of thinking about charisma, Charles Lindholm (1990) charts a lineage that progresses from John Stuart Millâs (1859â1869/1975) notion of the genius whose pleasures are of a higher order than the animalistic gratifications of the majority, through Friedrich Nietzscheâs (1885/1961) Ăbermensch (or âsupermanâ) who is impervious to both pleasure and pain, to Gustave Le Bonâs (1895/1947) notion of the hypnotic crowd leader. However, it was in the seminal writings of Max Weber (1921/1946, 1922/1947) that the concept of charisma was first introduced explicitly and explored in depth.
As Antonio Marturano and Paul Arsenault (2008) point out, in the original Greek the word âcharismaâ (ÏÎŹÏÎčÏΌα) has multiple meanings â including the power to perform miracles, the ability to make prophecies, and the capacity to influence others. Generally, though, the term is taken to refer to the idea of a leaderâs âspecial gift.â Yet rather than seeing this simply as a gift that leaders possess, Weberâs use of the term also referred to charisma as something that is conferred on leaders by those in the community that they lead. As he put it:
The term âcharismaâ will be applied to a certain quality of an individual personality by which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with 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 is treated as a leader.⊠It is very often thought of as resting on magical powers. How the quality in question would ultimately be judged from any ethical, aesthetic, or other such point of view is entirely indifferent for purposes of definition. What is alone important is how the individual is regarded by those subjected to charismatic authority, by his âfollowersâ or âdisciples.â
(Weber, 1922/1947, p. 359)
Unfortunately, the nuanced meaning that Weber gave the term has tended to get lost in more recent academic writing as well as in lay usage. In part this is because Weberâs writings on charisma were themselves inconsistent, sometimes treating it as an attribution to leaders and sometimes as an attribute of leaders (Iordachi, 2004; Loewenstein, 1966). In line with the latter reading, contemporary references to charisma tend to regard it as ...