Charisma: An Ill-Defined and Ill-Measured Gift

By John Antonakis, Nicolas Bastardoz, Philippe Jacquart, Boas Shamir. 2016

344 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/36d6e4b61caf9cf833d212ab3b4dd1a550f91f40

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Charismatic leadership: Eliciting and channeling follower emotions (2018, background): “This combination of early, underdeveloped theory and subsequent definition-by-measurement has interfered with building a clear understanding of the cause-and-effect relationships between charismatic leader attributes and subsequent outcomes (Antonakis et al., 2016).”
Construct redundancy in leader behaviors: A review and agenda for the future (2017, neutral): “…• Charismatic (Bass, 1985) Relational Correlates • Trust in leader • Fairness • Social exchange LMX • VDL LMX Values based and Moral leader behaviors • Authentic • Charismatic (Antonakis et al., 2016 ) • Ethical • Servant Follower behavioral effectiveness criteria • Job performance • OCB •…”
Warning for excessive positivity: Authentic leadership and other traps in leadership studies (2019, background): “Confusions around notions like charisma and transformational leadership has made the fog over the leadership landscape thicker still (Antonakis et al., 2016, p. 294), and with the contemporary popularity of authentic leadership and its siblings, uncritical thinking in dominant leadership theory…”
Charisma as signal: An evolutionary perspective on charismatic leadership (2017, background): “…attempt to reiterate the long history of the scientific study of charisma – there remains very little to say that has not been covered in the exhaustive critiques already published in the management and leadership literatures (cf Antonakis et al., 2016; van Knippenberg & Sitkin, 2013; Yukl, 1999).”
A meta-analytic review and future research agenda of charismatic leadership (2017, methodology): “…kind that investigates a range of stable individual differences (e.g., leader cognitive ability, leader gender, education, and age) as antecedents to charismatic leadership at thedimension level, as called for by several scholars (Antonakis et al., 2016; vanKnippenberg & Sitkin, 2013; Yukl, 1999).”
Careless responding in questionnaire measures: Detection, impact, and remedies (2020, background): “Alternative measures could be questionnaires with items that more clearly map on well-defined constructs (Antonakis et al., 2016; Banks et al., 2018) or, even better, objective measures such as video materials, transcripts of speeches, and other archival sources (Antonakis et al., 2016).”
Servant Leadership: A systematic review and call for future research (2019, background): “This is not unique to servant leadership and there have been a number of efforts to improve survey design within the leadership field (see Antonakis et al., 2010; Antonakis et al., 2016; Antonakis, Bendahan, et al., 2014; Antonakis & House, 2014).”
COVID-19 and the workplace: Implications, issues, and insights for future research and action. (2020, background): “In other words, effective leaders strive (in any time period) to project vision – a symbolic state of affairs with which the collective identifies (Antonakis et al., 2016).”