Charisma Isn’t Enough: What Really Makes a Great Leader.

Leadership is getting so much attention at the moment. Particularly charismatic leadership.

It seems everyone has an opinion and is an expert at spotting the best leaders.

But there's a problem - most people can't.

Director for USG Department of Defense, Luis Elizondo, says:

"The truth of the matter is, most people have an idea of what they think a "leader" should look like but few can explain the actual qualities and traits that make someone a leader."

Many boards, staff groups, and possibly whole nations are blinded by charisma.

People seek charismatic leaders because they think they are the ones who will help us safely through tough times. In fact, in the 1990s, when I did my postgraduate studies in business, charismatic leadership was the predominant and most popular theory.

But we've come a long, long way since then, thankfully.

Charisma is excellent when combined with high emotional intelligence, high IQ, and curiosity. In a fascinating 2017 study, Belgian academic Jasmine Vergauwe and her colleagues at Ghent University found, perhaps predictably, that the more charismatic the leader, the higher they rated their own effectiveness!

The best leaders trust their staff to know their jobs, and they take frank, fearless advice from their teams. Equally, they know how to test that advice, when to accept it, and when to leave it on the table.

They know when to be humble and when to be more strident. They employ adaptive behaviours as required in each circumstance. As Elizondo says in his article on Medium, "In order to lead, you must first learn to know what it's like to follow."

Charisma alone is not enough. Relying on it is dangerous. Charismatic leaders show traits of overconfidence and inflated self-esteem and are prone to trying to persuade people to do things their way without question.

I met a new chief executive some weeks back. They had joined the organisation following on from a highly charismatic previous incumbent.

In their first six months on the job, they found numerous problems hidden below the surface. It was now their job to fix those issues, and the staff group was pushing back.

The board, too, had been fooled and had omitted to do their due diligence while assuming that important things had been taken care of. Alarm bells were now ringing loudly for them.

The lesson here for all of us?

Let's be less quick to assume that a gregarious, fast-moving, decisive 'innovator' will make the best leader.

Very often, the people least likely to self-identify as leaders are the ones we should invest in.

I'd love your thoughts.