The romance of leadership hypothesis suggests we tend to gravitate towards the magnetic, narcissistic leaders.
We get the leaders we deserve, and we can do real good by choosing socialized charismatic leaders over narcissists.
MORE IDEAS FROM THE ARTICLE
Research shows that humble leaders improve the performance of a company, creating more collaborative environments. They are balanced, appreciative and open to new ideas and feedback. They know their strengths and shortcomings as well.
Humble CEOs become enablers for the top management team to provide their fullest potential. The CEO's humble attitude, mannerisms and the way they conduct themselves become contagious among subordinates.
Charismatic professionals execute a certain magnetism and presence that automatically lead others to endorse them as leaders.
They have high levels of energy, unconventional behaviour and seem to be doing heroic deeds. We seem to be hardwired to seek and endorse over-glorified 'Superhero' like leaders.
Charismatic leaders can also be narcissists in some cases, having self-serving and grandiose intentions, taking advantage of their followers and abusing their power.
Even though they are generally perceived as arrogant, their bold vision and fearless attitude make them radiate an image of effective leaders, making them a high-risk, high-reward proposition.
We tend to assume that confident people have more potential for leadership.
However, there is little overlap between how good people think they are at something, and how good they actually are.
Performance humility is admitting that you fall short and make mistakes.
Those who seek negative feedback get better performance reviews. It means that they want to learn, and they put themselves in a stronger position to learn.
Max Weber defined charisma as “[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.”