This post is in response to Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic’s HBR blog:
Saddam Hussein; a classic example of charisma leading to power, rather than passion to do something positive with power leading to it.
This blog post initially intrigued me with its unique position on charisma. In today’s society, charisma is viewed as a positive characteristic of a leader; this post stands for everything undesirable about it. It talks to how charisma is valued far too much in politics and business, and employees who’s successes are brought about by their charisma can cause political disaster and run firms out of business. The blog brings up the interesting point of dictators: essentially all dictators throughout written world history have been immensely charismatic. I had never made this connection, but it makes perfect sense. I always questioned how a people with such detrimental motives manages to get so far in politics, and I now know the answer: raw charisma.
In regards to business, charisma generally has little to do with actual knowledge of how to do a job. However, many times one will move up within a company based primarily off charm and how much one’s superiors are fond of them. A solution to this, assuming a company wants to maximize its profits, would be to promote only its most efficient employees. This would guarantee that those best at their jobs are the ones who are moving forward, rather than those who are liked the most.