Editing Charismatic authority (section)

== Characteristics ==

===Charisma===
Weber applies the term ''charisma'' to

{{blockquote|[A] certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, 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. . . . How the quality in question would be ultimately judged from an ethical, aesthetic, or other such point of view is naturally indifferent for the purpose of definition.<ref>Weber, Maximillan. ''Theory of Social and Economic Organization.'' Chapter: "The Nature of Charismatic Authority and its Routinization" translated by A. R. Anderson and [[Talcott Parsons]], 1947. Originally published in 1922 under the title [http://www.textlog.de/7415.html ''Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft'' chapter III, § 10] (available online)</ref>{{refn|group=lower-alpha|Original German: "»Charisma« soll eine als außeralltäglich (ursprünglich, sowohl bei Propheten wie bei therapeutischen wie bei Rechts-Weisen wie bei Jagdführern wie bei Kriegshelden: als magisch bedingt) geltende Qualität einer Persönlichkeit heißen, um derentwillen sie als mit übernatürlichen oder übermenschlichen oder mindestens spezifisch außeralltäglichen, nicht jedem andern zugänglichen Kräften oder Eigenschaften oder als gottgesandt oder als vorbildlich und deshalb als »Führer« gewertet wird."}}}} In the modern era, some psychologists have defined charisma in terms of practical outcomes (i.e. charismatic leaders are effective).<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=BASS|first1=BERNARD M.|last2=AVOLIO|first2=BRUCE J.|title=Transformational Leadership and Organizational Culture |date=1993|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/40862298|journal=Public Administration Quarterly|volume=17|issue=1|pages=112–121|jstor=40862298 |issn=0734-9149}}</ref> However, such a definition results in circular in reasoning.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=MacKenzie|first=Scott B.|date=2003-06-01|title=The dangers of poor construct conceptualization|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070303031003011|journal=Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science|language=en|volume=31|issue=3|pages=323–326|doi=10.1177/0092070303031003011|s2cid=5930358 |issn=1552-7824}}</ref> The conclusions derived from such definitions (and measures) cannot be refuted given that the proponents claim something akin to ''if effective, therefore charismatic''.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last1=Antonakis|first1=John|last2=Bastardoz|first2=Nicolas|last3=Jacquart|first3=Philippe|last4=Shamir|first4=Boas|date=2016-03-21|title=Charisma: An Ill-Defined and Ill-Measured Gift|journal=Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior|volume=3|issue=1|pages=293–319|doi=10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062305|issn=2327-0608|doi-access=free}}</ref> Charisma, however, can be studied scientifically if seen as a costly signal, using values, symbols, and emotions.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Ernst|first1=Brittany A.|last2=Banks|first2=George C.|last3=Loignon|first3=Andrew C.|last4=Frear|first4=Katherine A.|last5=Williams|first5=Courtney E.|last6=Arciniega|first6=Luis M.|last7=Gupta|first7=Roopak K.|last8=Kodydek|first8=Georg|last9=Subramanian|first9=Dilip|date=2021-07-01|title=Virtual charismatic leadership and signaling theory: A prospective meta-analysis in five countries|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984321000461|journal=The Leadership Quarterly|volume=33 |issue=5 |language=en|pages=101541|doi=10.1016/j.leaqua.2021.101541|s2cid=237810120 |issn=1048-9843}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Meslec|first1=Nicoleta|last2=Curseu|first2=Petru L.|last3=Fodor|first3=Oana C.|last4=Kenda|first4=Renata|date=2020-12-01|title=Effects of charismatic leadership and rewards on individual performance|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984320300503|journal=The Leadership Quarterly|language=en|volume=31|issue=6|pages=101423|doi=10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101423|s2cid=219745203 |issn=1048-9843}}</ref> It was shown to correlate strongly with general intelligence <ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Akstinaite |first1=Vita |last2=Jensen |first2=Ulrich Thy |last3=Vlachos |first3=Michalis |last4=Erne |first4=Alexis |last5=Antonakis |first5=John |date=2024-12-01 |title=Charisma is a costly signal |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1048984324000390 |journal=The Leadership Quarterly |volume=35 |issue=6 |pages=101810 |doi=10.1016/j.leaqua.2024.101810 |issn=1048-9843|doi-access=free }}</ref> and observers infer that those signaling charisma are more competent.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Antonakis |first1=John |last2=Fenley |first2=Marika |last3=Liechti |first3=Sue |date=September 2011 |title=Can Charisma Be Taught? Tests of Two Interventions |url=http://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amle.2010.0012 |journal=Academy of Management Learning & Education |language=en |volume=10 |issue=3 |pages=374–396 |doi=10.5465/amle.2010.0012 |issn=1537-260X}}</ref> Its economic value in consequential settings has also been scientifically examined.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Antonakis|first1=John|last2=d’Adda|first2=Giovanna|last3=Weber|first3=Roberto A.|last4=Zehnder|first4=Christian|date=2021-12-28|title="Just Words? Just Speeches?" On the Economic Value of Charismatic Leadership|url=https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/mnsc.2021.4219|journal=Management Science|volume=68 |issue=9 |pages=6355–6381 |doi=10.1287/mnsc.2021.4219|hdl=2434/892725 |s2cid=245547078 |issn=0025-1909|hdl-access=free}}</ref> Thus Weber's insights were valuable in naming the construct of charisma, although his definitions and insights did not allow for its scientific study. Modern social science however, has found supports for the notion that charismatic leaders can, under certain conditions, be very persuasive.

===Authority===
Weber interchanges authority and dominance<blockquote>[H]as been considered in [[Sociological theory|sociological]] terms as indicating the [[Legitimacy (political)|legitimate]] or socially approved use of power. It is the legitimate power which one person or a group holds and exercises over another. The element of legitimacy is vital to the notion of authority and is the main means by which authority is distinguished from the more general concept of power. Power can be exerted by the use of force or [[violence]]. Authority, by contrast, depends on the acceptance by [[subordinate]]s of the right of those above them to give them orders or directives.
Charismatic authority is often the most lasting of regimes because the leader is seen as infallible and any action against him will be seen as a crime against the state. Charismatic leaders eventually develop a [[cult of personality]] often not by their own doing.</blockquote>{{blockquote|[P]ower legitimized on the basis of a leader's exceptional personal qualities or the demonstration of extraordinary insight and accomplishment, which inspire loyalty and obedience from followers.<ref>Kendall, Diana, Jane Lothian Murray, and Rick Linden. ''Sociology in our time'' (2nd ed.), 200. Scarborough, On: Nelson, 438–439.</ref>}}

Leadership is the power to diffuse a positive energy and a sense of greatness. As such, it rests almost entirely on the [[leadership|leader]]. The absence of that leader for any reason can lead to the authority's power dissolving. However, due to its idiosyncratic nature and lack of formal [[organization]], charismatic authority depends much more strongly on the perceived [[Legitimacy (political)|legitimacy]] of the authority than Weber's other forms of authority. For instance, a charismatic leader in a [[religion|religious]] context might require an unchallenged [[belief]] that the leader has been touched by [[God]], in the sense of a [[prophet]].<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://atheism.about.com/od/religiousauthority/a/types_2.htm |title=Charismatic Authority: Emotional Bonds Between Leaders and Followers<!-- Bot generated title --> |access-date=2005-05-01 |archive-date=2006-03-06 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060306031922/http://atheism.about.com/od/religiousauthority/a/types_2.htm |url-status=dead }}</ref> Should the strength of this belief fade, the power of the charismatic leader can fade quickly, which is one of the ways in which this form of authority shows itself to be unstable.

In contrast to the current popular use of the term ''charismatic leader'', Weber saw charismatic authority not so much as character traits of the charismatic leader but as a relationship between the leader and his followers. The validity of [[charisma]] is founded on its "recognition" by the leader's followers (or "adepts" – {{Lang|de|Anhänger}}).
His charisma risks disappearing if he is "abandoned by God" or if "his government doesn't provide any prosperity to those whom he dominates".{{refn|group=lower-alpha|A Weber-style charismatic leader need not be a positive force;<ref name=":1">''International Encyclopedia of Economic Sociology'' By Jens Beckert, Milan Zafirovski, Published by Routledge, 2006, {{ISBN|978-0415286732}}, p. 53</ref> both [[Benito Mussolini]] and [[Adolf Hitler]] qualify. Furthermore, sociology is [[axiology|axiologically]] neutral (''Wertfreie Soziologie'') towards various forms of charismatic domination: it does not differentiate between the charisma of a [[Berserker]], of a [[shaman]] or of that displayed by [[Kurt Eisner]]. For Weber, sociology considers these types of charismatic domination in "an identical manner to the charisma of [[hero]]es, prophets, the "greatest saviours according to common appreciation".}}

=== Routinizing charisma ===
Charismatic authority almost always endangers the boundaries set by [[traditional authority|traditional]] (coercive) or [[Rational-legal authority|rational]] (legal) authority. It tends to challenge this authority, and is thus often seen as [[revolutionary]].<ref>[http://cbae.nmsu.edu/~dboje/teaching/503/weber_links.html WEBER LINKS page http<!-- Bot generated title -->] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050426080033/http://cbae.nmsu.edu/~dboje/teaching/503/weber_links.html |date=April 26, 2005 }}</ref><ref>Kunin, Seth D. "Religion; the modern theories" University of Edinburgh 2003 {{ISBN|0748615229}} p. 40</ref> Usually this charismatic authority is incorporated into society. Hereby the challenge that it presents to society will subside. The way in which this happens is called ''routinization''.{{Citation needed|date=September 2024}}

By routinization,  the charismatic authority changes:
{{blockquote|[C]harismatic authority is succeeded by a bureaucracy controlled by a rationally established authority or by a combination of traditional and bureaucratic authority.<ref>Turner, Beeghley, and Powers, 1995 cited in Kendal et al. 2000</ref>}}

A religion which evolves its own [[priest]]hood and establishes a set of laws and rules is likely to lose its charismatic character and move towards another type of authority. For example, [[Muhammad]], who had charismatic authority as "The Prophet" among his followers, was succeeded by the traditional authority and structure of [[Islam]], a clear example of routinization.{{Citation needed|date=September 2024}}

In politics, charismatic rule is often found in various [[Authoritarianism|authoritarian states]], [[Autocracy|autocracies]], [[dictatorship]]s and [[Theocracy|theocracies]]. To help to maintain their charismatic authority, such regimes will often establish a vast [[personality cult]]. When the leader of such a state dies or leaves office, and a new charismatic leader does not appear, such a regime is likely to fall shortly thereafter, unless it has become fully routinized.<ref name=":1" />