International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management

Emerald Article: Islamic perspectives on leadership: a model Abbas J. Ali

Article information:
To cite this document: Abbas J. Ali, (2009),"Islamic perspectives on leadership: a model", International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, Vol. 2 Iss: 2 pp. 160 - 180 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17538390910965167 Downloaded on: 28-06-2012 References: This document contains references to 46 other documents To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com This document has been downloaded 1960 times since 2009. *

Users who downloaded this Article also downloaded: *

Khaliq Ahmad, Ogunsola O.K., (2011),"An empirical assessment of Islamic leadership principles", International Journal of Commerce and Management, Vol. 21 Iss: 3 pp. 291 - 318 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10569211111165325 James DeLisle, Terry Grissom, (2011),"Valuation procedure and cycles: an emphasis on down markets", Journal of Property Investment & Finance, Vol. 29 Iss: 4 pp. 384 - 427 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14635781111150312 Hans Losscher, (2011),""Being seen as" and "seeing as"", Kybernetes, Vol. 40 Iss: 3 pp. 494 - 506 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03684921111133700

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM For Authors: If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service. Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1753-8394.htm

IMEFM 2,2

Islamic perspectives on leadership: a model

Abbas J. Ali
Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana, Pennsylvania, USA
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this research is to address the notion of leadership in Muslim countries. It seeks to develop a model for understanding leadership in Islamic culture and discusses the factors which give rise to two types of leadership: the prophetic and caliphate. Design/methodology/approach The article briey surveys the socio-economic and political forces which facilitate the emergence of certain leadership styles. The paper, then, suggests a model of leadership relevant to Islamic culture. Findings Two types of leadership were identied. Furthermore, the paper addresses the conict between idealism and realism and the rise of authoritarian leaders. Practical implications This paper offers policymakers and researchers various avenues on how to address the issue of leadership in an Islamic culture and presents a theoretical model for understanding issues pertaining to leaders and leadership in Muslim societies. Specic propositions pertaining to the effect of culture and society on leadership are offered. Originality/value The paper offers a genuine reection on the nature of leadership. The issue of leadership and its linkage to culture has often been overlooked in the literature. In part, this is because most of the literature on leadership has been focused primarily on personality-based relationships and relationships between leaders and followers. In this paper, it is argued that culture shapes personality and gives meaning to contextual and relational aspects of leadership. Keywords Islam, Leadership, Culture, Motivation (psychology), Charisma Paper type Conceptual paper

160

International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management Vol. 2 No. 2, 2009 pp. 160-180 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1753-8394 DOI 10.1108/17538390910965167

Setting the scene: a model of Islamic perspectives on leadership Throughout history, thoughtful and agonizing leaders, alike, have left their marks on civilization and the journey of mankind. Certain circumstances have led to the rise and fall of leaders. The speed of the emergence and demise of leaders and their impact seem to vary signicantly across cultures. Some have left everlasting achievements and have been a source of cultural pride and identity. Other leaders have not looked upon favorably and their legacy is discredited. While each culture views leaders from a different lens, all civilizations, however, appear to value contributions that energize and sustain cultural continuity and revitalization. In particular, rich cultures, offer the intellectual depth and the fertility for transforming those with potential into great leaders. That is, the depth and strength of a culture are pivotal for the emergence and evolution of leaders. Likewise, the presence of a great leader strengthens cultural vitality and continuity. Sound leaders are uniquely positioned to take initiative and embark on purposeful changes. Their vision and foresight and their ability to motivate and energize people enable them to navigate new terrains without ignoring present and potential mineelds. Their concerns and commitment to the aspirations and general welfare of the public and their unshakeable condence in the ability to make positive contributions enable them to achieve goals timely and effectively. These leaders map

their environment, recognize and succinctly articulate followers aspirations, provide logical vision, and make change feasible, desirable, and practical. There is a dialectic relationship between culture and leaders. Culture not only shapes the art of leadership but also nurtures and facilitates the emergence of leaders. Across history, culture gives meaning to what leaders do and eases or impedes the inuence process and induces followers to respond and act in a particular way. Indeed, culture serves as a yardstick and a sifter which reminds leaders of what works and what does not work. That is, culture determines the boundaries of effective conduct and sound leadership. Furthermore, each culture has its own assumptions and notions about idealism and pragmatism. Some of these assumptions change overtime but others persist and are deeply cherished. The latter differentiate among cultures and are assumed to shape perceptions about leaders and leadership. Dramatic events and rapid political changes coupled with a deep sense of vulnerability at home and abroad have brought to the surface the importance of leaders and leadership. Indeed, vulnerability is largely a result of an absence of collective condence in leaders. In all aspects of human affairs, effective leadership makes the difference. This is because leadership encompasses both practical and idealistic concerns. Lack of wisdom and a practical vision leads to disaster and setbacks. It is the presence of foresight, responsibility, receptivity, creativity, courage, integrity, and compassion that ensures progress and prosperity. The history of humankind evidences that leadership has been the pivotal factor in dening reality and designing and shaping events. In fact, the rise and fall of nations and organizations have been attributed largely to the presence or absence of effective leaders. The importance of leadership stems not only from organizational competencies, but also from the ability to arouse curiosity among followers, the courage to confront abuses and assume responsibility and the foresight to articulate a purposeful vision to make change desirable and look at new possibilities positively. In this context, leaders assume various roles and functions. These roles and functions differ in their signicance over time and across cultures. Changing circumstances and situations necessitate different leadership roles and functions. Despite this, however, leaders have to coordinate functions and innovatively maintain creativity with order, and order with creativity (Collier, 1971). This paper is designed to tackle the issue of culture and leadership in Muslim cultures. It suggests a model of leaderships and distinguishes between two types of leaders often found in Muslim societies. The model attempts to capture the essence of the culture and the interplay of the forces within the society that facilitate the emergence of the leader. In addition, the paper offers a theoretical reasoning for the rise of authoritarian leaders in business organizations and society. The paper explains how certain aspects of personality founded in the culture lead to either benevolent or absolute authoritarian. Literature review of perception of leadership Leadership studies, whether conceptual or empirical, have provided a rich literature on the nature and aspects of leadership. While the majority of the research agrees on the centrality of leadership in meeting goals and moving forward, the literature offers a wide range of perspectives, often contradictory, on what constitute effective leadership. As Hunt and Conger (1999) assert, the range in new leadership conceptions is

Islamic perspectives on leadership 161

IMEFM 2,2

162

quite abroad. While this state is necessary and healthy, it may lead unintentionally to ambiguity and generalization. Recently, Howell and Shamir (2005) reviewed the literature and conclude that most of leadership theories have been simple, unidirectional, and focus almost exclusively on the leaders personality and behavior. In the process, the role of followers and the cultural environment that gives rise to the leadership are often neglected. Traditionally, most of the research on leadership places considerable emphasis on specic attributes (Blau, 1963; Dow, 1969; Stogdill, 1974). Identifying attributes were thought important of differentiating effective leaders from others. Friedland (1964) and Wolpe (1968), among others, consider social and historical contexts as critical in determining leadership. Hughes et al. (2006) assert that leadership is a result of the interaction between a leader and followers. Willner (1984) argues that leadership is neither personality based nor contextually determined but is largely a relational and perceptual phenomenon. Conger and Kanungo (1987) agreed with Willner and view leadership as an attribution phenomenon. The authors suggest that leadership, and specically charismatic one, is an attribution made by followers who observe certain behaviors on the part of the leader within organizational contexts. They propose that attribution of charisma to leaders depend on four interrelated components: the degree of discrepancy between the status quo and the future goal or vision championed by the leader, the use of innovation and unconventional means for achieving the desired change, a realistic assessment of environmental resources and constraints for bringing about such change, and the nature of articulation and impression management employed to inspire followers in the pursuit of the identied vision. Howell and Shamir (2005) argue that in the context of charismatic leadership there are two types of relationships: personalized and socialized. The rst relationship is based primarily on followers personal identication with the leader. The socialized relationship revolves primarily on followers social identication with the group or organization. This approach attempts to answer most of the shortcoming in the leadership theory; especially charismatic leadership process. Nevertheless, the approach does not offer any direct link to societal culture. Peterson and Hunt (1997) make a serious attempt to address the leadership theory from a global and historical perspective. The coverage, however, was primarily focus on the USA and the linkage between leadership and culture was neither clear nor systematic. Societies differ in their perception of leadership and the effectiveness of the leader. Hofstede (1980, 1999) attributed such differences to cultural values. He argues that values are specic to national cultures, never universal. Values represent what is desirable and generally they are a preference of specic states of affairs over others. These broad tendencies are ranked hierarchically according to their relative importance. Societies differ not only in their values but also in the way they rank these values; value system. The value system helps in establishing priorities, solving conicting demands, and categorizing leaders. Shaw (1990) suggests that each culture appears to categorize leaders differently. He argues that cultural perception of whether or not a person is a leader involves simple categorization. In fact, he proposes that in each culture there are pre-existing leadership prototypes and expectations which are a potential source for variation across cultures. The attributes and practices that differentiate cultures from each other are predictive of the leader attributes and

behavior (House et al., 2001). Recent empirical studies provide support for such proposition. Brodbeck (2000) led a group of researchers to study cultural variations of leadership prototypes across 22 European countries. The results indicate that leadership concept is culturally bound. Clusters of European countries which share similar cultural values are found to share similar leadership concepts but different from other European clusters. Nordic countries, for example, ranked high the attributes for outstanding leadership as integrity, inspirational, visionary, team integrator, and performance. In contrast, managers in Latin countries ranked the attributes of team integrator, performance, inspirational, integrity, and visionary, in order, as the most desired. Islamic perspectives on leadership In the Islamic religion and philosophy, the subject of leadership is given considerable attention. This is because, in Islam, leadership is perceived to be the most signicant instrument for the realization of an ideal society. The ideal society is based on justice and compassion. Both qualities are an integral part of leadership. In Islamic thinking, neither creativity nor order can be sustained without justice and compassion. That is, justice is the mainstay of a nation (Imam Ali, died 661). Leaders are held responsible for promoting and enforcing justice. The Quran (4:58) instructs its believers: When ye judge between people that ye judge with justice. Indeed, the thriving of justice is closely linked to the subject of leadership and leaders. It should be noted that Muslims hold the early period of Islam (about 622-661) as the most just, compassionate, and ideal in Islamic history. Muslim scholars argue that during these early years, an Islamic society most closely resembled the ideal state. Probably, this state did not take place again except during the era of Caliph Omer Ben Abdul Aziz (717-720) and for a short period during the Abbasid Empire (750-1258). Muslim scholars claim that justice was then fairly meted out and leaders were morally guided and responsible. Therefore, a sense of idealism has evolved in the psyche of most Muslims, resulting in an infatuation with what is termed a Prophetic leader, as opposed to the Caliph model of leadership. Both concepts will be discussed later. In this paper, leadership is dened as a process of inuence, shared in nature, whereby a leader and followers engage in certain activities to achieve mutual goals. The paper provides an insight on the nature of leadership in Islam and the evolution of the concept and its practice. The paper highlights, too, that the nature and view of leadership, in the Muslim World, have changed over centuries. At the outset, it should be mentioned that the traditional view of leadership in Islam is that leadership is a shared inuence process. Leaders are not expected to lead or to maintain their roles without the agreement of those who are led, and at the same time, decisions made by these leaders were expected to be inuenced by input from their followers. The process is dynamic and open ended and the ultimate aim is to sustain cohesiveness and effectiveness. The Quran clearly calls for a leader to be exible and receptive to followers and states, (88:21-22) So thou reminding; thou art only a reminder. Thou art not, over them a compeller. The basis for understanding and leading has to be fundamentally based on wisdom and spirited debate, otherwise followers becomes resentful and dissatised. The role of a receptive leader is captured in the Quranic instructions which state, (16:125) Argue with them in manners that are best and most gracious as (3:159) Wert thou severe or harsh-hearted, they would

Islamic perspectives on leadership 163

IMEFM 2,2

164

[break] away. The leader is obliged to exemplify openness, a willingness to listen and compassion in dealing with subordinates or followers. For example, during the course of a public meeting, an individual criticized the second Caliph, Omer. Some in the audience thought the criticism was harsh. Omers answer was that it was the duty of the leader and followers to listen to each other and to voice concerns. He was quoted saying, When followers do not participate and provide input, they are not contributing something useful. And we are not useful if we do not consent to their contributions. Omer thought that public participation is fundamental and, as the Prophet Mohamed insisted, that it is a policy choice. Omer, however, pursued the matter further when he informed followers, When you see me engage in a wrong doing, straighten me out. In this context, the shared inuence is not only built on two way inuence through dialogue and debate, but also on the right of subordinates to take a proactive role in confronting and correcting the leader. This foresighted model was possibly founded on Prophet Mohameds instruction, which made it mandatory that followers not blindly follow leaders: Obedience is due only in that which is good. Before discussing the changing view of leaders and leadership in Islamic thought, it should be pointed out that in the history of Muslims, after the era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs (632-661), the subject of leadership has been ercely debated, but there has been no consensuses on what makes up either the qualities of a leader or traits that predict who will emerge as a leader. In fact, the concept of leaders and leadership has evolved across centuries and has been largely inuenced by the nature of power structure and sectarian allegiances. To be sure, however, the evolution of the thinking on leadership has been shaped by powerful events, dynasties, rulers and individuals. These forces have had a considerable stake in reshaping the image and religious conceptualization of what leaders should be. In traditional Muslim societies, proper religious justications and assertions are essential for sustaining and validating power and authority. The perceptions and realities of leadership have evolved dramatically in the Muslim World. The dramatic change in the concept of what constitutes a leader and leadership has been most likely inuenced by the rise and fall of ideology (faith) and openness in the society. As the following discussion shows, the Islamic view of leaders and leadership has been in a state of alternation. While the degree of strength of faith and openness primarily inuences this trend, outside forces and instability have accelerated the trend. Historical evidence and current research suggest, in general, the changing nature of leaders and leadership went through seven stages: the Prophet era, Rightly Guided Caliphs, the Ommeyade dynasty, the early Abbasid era, the late Abbasid era, the era of stagnation, and the era of instability (Ali (2005) for detail). Since, the rst two periods are considered by Muslim thinkers and authorities as the ones that capture the essence of Islam and genuine practice, the focus will be on the conception of leadership during these two eras. The Prophet Era (610-632) Mohamed served as a prophet and as a statesman. Under his leadership, profound cultural and political changes took place in Arabia. Armstrong (1992) argues that the immediate spread and acceptance of Islam reected the unique message of Islam and was clearly a reection of the genius of Mohamed. She suggests, however, that the Arabs were not sufciently developed for a sophisticated Islamic monotheism. According to Armstrong (p. 53):

Christianity took root in the Roman empire where Jewish communities had paved the way and prepared the minds of the pagans. But Mohamed had to start virtually from scratch and work his way towards the radical monotheistic spirituality on his own.

Mohamed strongly believed that leadership must be based on three foundations: Rehema (mercy), ehsan (kindness), and adel (justice). Once these foundations are met, race should not be an issue in selecting a leader. As Mohamed asserted, Listen to and obey whoever is in charge, even though he is an Ethiopian [black]. Mohamed developed a pattern of behavior that facilitated the change in Arabia: . He developed a vital community of believers and envisioned what this community should look like. While faith was an important instrument in energizing his followers, Mohamed had to engage in dramatic social changes: he established a new form of social association (muakhat two Muslims were paired together and declared brothers, replacing the traditional blood relationship). He announced that faith would replace blood as the base for social relationship (Siddiqui, 1987). Furthermore, Mohamed had a deep understanding that Arabs are highly individualistic and unreceptive to central authority and strict personal orders. Therefore, contrary to prevailing practices of show of power he declared that he was not a compeller, but a messenger of God; that his job, primarily, was to preach, warn and guide, to do good and avoid vice. This demonstrates how Mohamed understood the unique Arab psyche and situated himself as an impersonal conveyer of the new faith. . Initially, Mohamed focused only on promoting the message of Islam and creating an environment to facilitate cultural change. Once the new community became large and a city-state was established instructions regarding law and order were specied. Furthermore, cooperation among members of the Muslim community was encouraged and brotherly relationships were extended far beyond the original Muslim community. When various regions in Arabia and surrounding areas adopted Islam, Mohamed assigned walis (governors), local administrators and market commissioners among others to govern. These were given autonomy in running their affairs (Siddiqui, 1987). . Various forms of alliances were established. These alliances were aimed at ensuring safety and stability and that certain principles were observed in an environment that was characterized mainly by the absence of law and order. More importantly, alliances sought to strengthen and spread the faith. The alliance with the Jewish communities and other tribes in different geographical localities were intended to build the foundation of the faith and convey the message to a wider audience (Jasim, 1987). Mohamed viewed leadership as a process of shared inuence. In his general conduct of affairs, whether religious or otherwise, Mohamed utilized a public open forum where members of the community had immediate input and contributed on the spot to civic and administrative matters. He instructed his representatives by saying, God blesses those who benet others. That is, leadership is valid only when it results in a benet to a society, regardless of the setting. He was reported to have said:
Everyone of you is a leader and every one of you shall be questioned about those under his supervision; the Imam is a leader and shall be questioned about his subjects; and the man is a

Islamic perspectives on leadership 165

IMEFM 2,2

leader in his family and he shall be questioned about those under his care; and the woman is a leader in the house of her husband, and shall be questioned about those under her care; and the servant is a leader in taking care of the property of his master, and shall be questioned about those under his care.

166

In this broad concept of leadership, Mohamed implied that shouldering responsibility is essential for cohesiveness, smooth performance and improving the welfare of the society. In addition, Mohamed highlighted two necessary qualities for leadership: persuasion and moderation. In terms of persuasion, Mohamed asserted the necessity of debating and arguing in ways that are the best. Moderation was viewed as an avoidance of extremism and seeking the middle way stating that the best state of affairs is the middle way and Quran (2:143) Thus, we have made you a middle way nation. The Rightly Guided Caliphs (632-661) There were four caliphs during this period. Their sayings and practice are relevant to understanding the nature of leadership and organization. During that time, the community was in the early stage of development, politically and economically. The ideology (faith) was a potent motivational factor. Accordingly, allegiance to the group and identication with the faith was strong. The rst Caliph, Abu Baker, in his inauguration speech, dened what a Muslim leader should be. He stated:
I have been given authority over you, but I am not the best of you. If I do well help me, and if I do ill, then put me right [. . .] The weak among you shall be strong in my eyes until I secure his right if God wills; and the strong among you shall be weak in my eyes until I wrest the right from him [. . .] Obey me as long as I obey God and his apostle, and if I disobey them you owe me no obedience (Quoted in Armstrong, 1992, p. 258).

During this period there was a consensus that the quality of a leader was primarily built on three foundations: the approval of followers, justice, and performance. Imam Ali (656-661) succinctly stated, Good leaders are known by what their subjects say about them. So, the best deed is the deed that benets others. The four Caliphs, in general, reafrmed that leadership is a shared inuence. This was captured by a saying attributed to the second Caliph, Omer: If you see me doing wrongs, then straighten me. Most importantly, at this stage, despite an attempt to the contrary during the era of the third Caliph, Othman, the Muslims and Caliphs, viewed the role of Caliph as a secular position that represented a successor to the Prophet, but that was neither an heir to his right nor a replacement for him (Arkoun, 1986; Ashmawy, 1992). In Islam, the government is considered a civic system that is entirely built on the will of the community. The approval of the community of how things should be run is the only validation that the leader needs to be in power. This understanding differentiates the traditional Islamic conception of the leader and government and that of Christianity and leadership. The latter views the leader as having a divine order. This was articulated in (Romans 13:1), Let everyone submit himself to the ruling authorities, for there exists no authority not ordained by God and in (Mathew 16:19) And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Furthermore, in Islam, there is an understanding that followers usually observe and deduct certain qualities from the behavior of those in charge. Accordingly, they make

attributions whether the person is a leader or not. Imam Ali (656-661), in his letter to one of his governors, considered the approval of the followers as the base of authority and he abhorred the abusive use of power. He stated (p. 303):
Good rulers are known by what their subjects say about them. So, the best stock you can build is your good deeds[. . .] Do not say. I am in charge and I shall be obeyed. This is a sign of weakness in the heart and of a shaken faith, and an invitation to trouble.

Islamic perspectives on leadership 167

In terms of openness, he argued that people in authority must be (p. 283), modest and benevolent to the people. Receive them cheerfully and treat them equally. He indicated that a legitimate leader is the one who act according to the followers expectations; otherwise, that person is not a leader. He stated (p. 256):
If the elected person rejects or contests their [people] decision, they will bring to his attention the issues that need to be addressed. If he persists in his deviation, they will ght him for not following the consensus of the Muslims.

The relationship between the leaders and followers are reciprocal as there will be neither leaders nor leadership without followers. Imam Ali asserted that reciprocity between a leader and followers was the basis of legitimacy (p. 245):
God has made it an obligation for his creatures to observe their obligations toward each other. He made them equitable and interdependent. The greatest of those obligations are the mutual rights of the ruler and the ruled. God has made them reciprocal so that they constitute a basis for their cohesion.

In the centuries that follow the early era of Islam, various dynasties cam to power and since then the Muslim World has been the subject of relentless foreign invasions and occupations. These events have left their impact and have created a state of turmoil and uncertainty. Consequently, various leaders have attempted to promote their view of leaders and leadership irrespective of the wishes of the followers. In all probability, these leaders have deviated from the original Islamic thinking and have institutionalized a form of leadership that is inconsistent with early Islamic instructions. For example, Al-Masudi (died 968, Vol. 3, pp. 41-43) reported that during the Ommeyyades era (661-750), the concept of leadership was mostly authoritarian and that followers aspirations and expectations were ignored. According to Al-Masudi (p. 101), during this era, people were ordered to fear and obey the Caliph, rather than God. This was embedded in the behavior of many Ommeyyade Caliphs and their representatives. He reported (p.151) that Al-Hajaj ben Yousef Al-Thaqa, one of the most feared military leaders of the Ommeyyade State, was quoted saying:
God says fear God as you could. This concerns God and has exception. And God says listen and obey. This specically meant the servant of God, Caliph, and the favorite of God, Abdul Malik [the fth Ommeyyade Caliph]. I swear in the name of God that if Abdul Malik ordered the people to move into this valley and they went somewhere else, I would shed their blood.

Similarly, the collapse of Baghdad and the end of the Abbasid era after the Mongol invasion in 1258 had left most of the Muslim societies in total disarray. In terms of leadership, the thinking of Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406) and Ibn Taimiya (1263-1328) became generally accepted. Ibn Khaldun (1989, p. 112) argued that goodness and inclination for collective or group feeling are a prerequisite for any leader. Lacking of these qualities, he asserted, would be like appearing naked before people. He

IMEFM 2,2

168

prescribed several qualities needed by leaders to ensure acceptance by followers. These are: generosity, forgiveness of error, tolerance toward the weak, hospitality toward guests, support of subordinates, maintenance of their indigent, patience in adverse circumstances, faithful fulllment of obligations, liberty with money for the preservation of honor, respect for the religious law and for the scholars who are learned in it, thinking highly of religious scholarship, belief in and veneration for men of religion and a desire to receive their prayers, great respect for old men and teachers, justice for those who call for it, fairness to and care for those who are too weak to take care of themselves, humility toward the poor, attentiveness to the complaints of supplicants, fulllment of the duties of the religious law and divine worship in all details and avoidance of fraud, cunning, deceit, and shirking of obligations. Ibn Taimiya (died 1328) witnessed the era of fragmentation, chaos, and foreign invasion of the Arab and Muslim lands. Naturally, at the time of defeat and humiliation, security becomes a more urgent concern and people tend to be more inclined to accept a pessimistic and simple view. Ibn Taimiyas thinking captured the essence of that period. He recognized the qualities of good leaders like his Muslim predecessors (e.g. honesty, compassion, enforcement of justice, etc.) but gave considerable attention to restoring stability. Therefore, he asserted the need to obey a leader even if he is an oppressor, corrupt, and unjust. Ibn Taimiya believed that how a leader obtained his power was less important than how he used it and even if the leader [ruler] was unjust or impious, it was generally accepted that he should still be obeyed, for any kind of order was better than anarchy (Hourani, 1991, p. 144). Ibn Taimiya strongly advocated the obedience to an unjust leader as obligatory, therefore, deviating from clear Islamic instruction exemplied by the Prophets sayings, Obedience is due only in that which is good and When one sees a wrongdoing, he has to change it by force, if he cannot, then by voicing concern, and if he could not then by denouncing it in his heart; this however, is the weakest faith. Leadership traits and skills Hawi (1982) attempted to synthesize the most desired traits and qualities of leaders in Islamic thinking. He relied on history and the early years of the Islamic state to come up with an all encompassing list. He described the attributes of an Islamic leader as having the ability to reason or act rationally, to be knowledgeable, mentally stable, courageous, in control of desires, generous, wise, in control of his temper, forgiving, caring, exible, relying on evidence, abiding by promises, honest, able to keep secrets, acting decisively, being cunning, humble, free from hatred and envy, patient, thankful, diplomatic, not listening to slanderers and backbiters, not appointing the non-faithful as deputies, following up and processing work, receptive and willing to give advice, attentive, a good organizer, rewarding and recognizing achievers and respectable in their appearance. In the context of business, Asaf (1987) provided two categories of traits and qualities that a leader must have: moral discipline which includes eight attributes identied under moral categories; goodness, patience, forgiveness, an ability to make peace among conicting parties, selessness, cooperative, a sense of responsibility, and tenderness and kindness in conversation. These attributes must be accompanied by the avoidance of lies, arrogance, enviousness, anger and suspicion and spying. In addition, the traits of a leader deemed to be essential for effective conduct in business

are: experience and knowledge, justice, caring, exemplary behavior, willingness to consult, a trust in God and persuasiveness through goodness. Those leaders who exhibit these qualities are assumed to show kindness, moderation, a willingness to consult and delegate and not to inict intentional damage on others, as well as a commitment to the development and growth of the organization. Most of the above qualities and traits stand in sharp contrast to qualities that were recommended by Machiavelli (1469-1527) and which seem to be practiced in contemporary world. The latter asserted that cruelty is essential for keeping followers united and faithful, that it was safer to be feared than loved, and that a leader must imitate the fox and the lion. These qualities are perceived in Islamic thinking to be destructive and are impediments to nurturing thriving and healthy organizations. Those who espoused such qualities during the history of successive Muslim states have been labeled as oppressors and aggressors, simply because these qualities are more likely to violate the foundations of leadership: mercy, kindness, and justice. While most of the qualities identied above seem to be essential leadership traits, not all leaders display these qualities simultaneously. Furthermore, the absence of any of them does not necessarily preclude leaders from being effective or ineffective. There are, of course, certain situational factors that may give more weight to some attributes over others or that may lead to the neglect of sanctioned qualities. For example, during the Mongol invasion and the fragmentation of the Islamic World honesty, kindness and openness were often overlooked as essential qualities for leaders. An ability to maintain law and order, protection of the land and decisiveness were appreciated by most of the people. Muslim perspectives on leadership and leaders have always been linked to the nature of followers. Indeed, according to a Muslim saying: The leader reects the quality of his people. That is, in a situation where followers are educated and responsible the leader will be receptive and participative. But in a situation where followers are dependent and avoid initiative and responsibility the leader may have to be decisive and in control. This dialectic relationship between leaders and followers was captured by Imam Ali. He stated (p. 244):
Constituencies will prosper only if they have a responsible leader, and for a leader to be great, the constituencies must be upright. When both the constituencies and leader observe each others due, right is strengthened, religion tenets are respected, justice prevails and the society will benet.

Islamic perspectives on leadership 169

Imam Ali believes that the relationship between the leader and followers is reciprocal and is shaped by common expectations and the situation. Model of leadership Islamic teachings and Quranic instructions have been instrumental in maintaining rich traditions across generations and vast and dispersed geographical areas. The teaching, however, has created an inclination among most Muslims, especially the religiously informed ones, to be infatuated with the ideal forms, even when they know that these ideal forms are contradicted by reality. This situation should be differentiated from having beliefs conict with facts. For example, in the USA, Davies (2003) reported that many Americans avoid having an experience of cognitive dissonance when presented with facts that are inconsistent with their beliefs. In this situation, people are not

IMEFM 2,2

170

infatuated with the ideal; rather, they blindly follow and trust leaders. They disregard facts that contradict information provided by leaders, thereby strengthening the leaders position. On the other hand, people who are infatuated with ideals consider a leader who has deceived them to be corrupt, thus enlarging the psychological gulf between themselves and the leader. In the context of leadership, the Muslim infatuation with ideals has hindered the development of sound and practical leadership theories. This is because when the ideal is treated as identical to practice, rather than merely constituting the criterion by which practice is to be judged, disappointments and frustrations take place. Furthermore, the infatuation with the ideal in an authoritarian environment may solidify autocratic tendencies among individuals in authoritative positions. That is, the feeling of indispensability nds a fertile ground in this environment. One of the most promising Islamic-derived leadership models that successfully captures the interplay of personalism and individualism and leadership was developed by Khadra (1990). Indeed, Khadras prophetic-caliphal model is an attempt to cast light upon a phenomenon in the Arab world where contradictory forces constrain leaders and obstruct societal development. The model has four elements, personalism (a subjective, egocentric view of the relationships of an individual to others), individualism (a tendency to make decisions irrespective of the opinion of the group), lack of institutionalization (lack of institutional arrangement to address the issues of accession, succession, and conict), and the importance of the great man. The last two are perceived to be the output of the interaction between the rst two elements. The model depicts a situation where qualities of personalism and individualism undermine the quest to build institutions. Lack of institutionalism is thought to create a vacuum in society. As such, neither the overriding concept (ideology) nor an overriding group is essential in lling the vacuum. Khadra suggests that the role and quality of the individual leader takes on an added value. If the leader happens to be an ordinary person, the model that emerges is the caliphal model an authoritarian leadership model. If the leader happens to be a great person (visionary), a prophetic model emerges a compassionate, attentive, exible leader who displays a remarkable condence in his behavior and action. Khadra, however, over looks the role of the infatuation with the ideals in the rise of either the authoritarian or the visionary leader. Furthermore, the author did not provide a clear and direct link to culture. This model is useful in calling attention to important societal and organizational problems in the Arab world. Nevertheless, the Model was primarily developed for the Arab culture. In this paper, an attempt is made to improve the Model to make it applicable to broader Islamic culture. Unlike the Arab World, not all Muslim countries exhibit strong personalism and individualism, simultaneously. That is, while almost all Muslims display the quality of personalism, not all of them are individualistic. Nevertheless, the infatuation of Muslims with the ideal and their longing for a just leader and society play a signicant part in their daily lives. For this reason, individualism is replaced and idealism is introduced in the Model. Idealism in the Arab and Islamic culture is considered a necessary social element. In fact, despite their current relative economic and political failure, people in Muslim countries still bemoan the loss of a glorious past and hope for a bright future. Muslims infatuation with idealism is a powerful force that often prevents them from dealing effectively with contemporary world events. It could be, however, a potent factor in energizing their

activities and revitalizing their economies. Furthermore, unlike Khadras prophetic-caliphal model, the current Model introduces culture as a major player in inuencing and shaping the nature and type of leadership. We differentiate between two types of culture: weak and strong. The interplay of culture, personalism and idealism shapes peoples expectations and subsequently the state of the society (empathy and indifference vs content and positive involvement). Toward an Islamic model of leadership Since both the Quran and the Prophets teachings (Sunaa) place emphasis on social cooperation and idealism, there is a need for a model that reects the essence of the Islamic message, while capturing the nature of leadership in the Muslim World. In this section, a leadership model is proposed (Figure 1). The suggested model explains how two primary types of leaders come to exist. The model has four elements: personalism, idealism, great expectation and culture. Personalism here is viewed as the tendency among people in a society to relate to each other in a warm, friendly, and subjective manner. That is, people place a high value on personal relationships and relate to individuals in the context of their reputation in the community and societal norms. In early childhood, individuals are socialized to place great emphasis on personal reputation and the necessity to carefully guard ones own standing in the community. They come to understand that they are not only part of a larger community but are integral factor in complex social, religious, and professional networks. Individuals, therefore, develop a high sense of self in the context of dynamic social relations with a specic and clear set of values and accepted societal norms. The supremacy of personal relationships allows followers to relate to the leader both on the basis of personal character and the nature of the advocated vision. Their input and approval are important to sustaining leadership position. This may constitute the reason, as previously discussed, that in Islamic teaching and early tradition the followers almost always observe and deduct certain qualities from the behavior and action of those in a position of responsibility and accordingly they provide or withheld support. That is, in an open environment, followers make attributions whether the person is a leader or not. The following proposition is suggested:
Social characteristics Culture Weak shared beliefs and values Personalism Great expectation Deeply and widely shared beliefs and values Sources: Ali (2005) Idealism State of the society Empathy and indifference Types of leadership Ordinary person Leadership model Caliphal model Outcome

Islamic perspectives on leadership 171

Lack of institutionalism

Content and positive involvement

Great person

Prophetic model

Institutionalism

Figure 1. Islamic model of leadership.

IMEFM 2,2

P1.

Followers expectations and attributions of certain qualities to a person in charge, largely determine whether or not that person as a leader is acceptable.

172

The personalized aspects have certain advantages. Chief among them are that problems can be solved directly through intermediaries, that concession and compromise are the norm, that there is ease in social interactions and formation of group/team work, that this results in strong loyalties and cohesiveness if applied intelligently, that it is easy to enhance commitment to goals and that, in many cases, clients needs can be satised in a friendly manner. Personalism, however, can have a devastating impact as it may facilitate fragmentation and divided loyalties thereby allowing minor problems to linger. In many cases, personal considerations, emotional and subjective attachment, and personal loyalty to a particular individual not only divert attention from major issues but also lead to group disintegration and polarization. Idealism is dened as an aspiration to attain and an infatuation with the highest possible state of existence or perfection. In idealism, absolute perfection is sought and considered to be a virtue. The interplay of personalism and idealism produces great expectations within society. Followers motivated by and infatuated with ideal and governed by personal identication with and admiration to the vision advocated by a leader, place a considerable hope that the leader will lead to a better future where their needs and aspirations are optimally met: P2. Followers with strong personalism and idealistic orientations will show high-personal identication with and expectations of the leader in meeting their aspirations.

In a culture that is characterized by deeply held and widely shared beliefs and values the great expectation generates an environment conducive for positive and clear vision, involvement and cohesiveness, receptiveness and tolerance. In this environment the existing conditions ease, facilitate, and solidify the cultivation of admired leaders qualities. Consequently, the leader that emerges is a great person. The great person exemplies the ideal qualities (e.g. openness, thoughtfulness, foresight, articulation of vision, caring, condence in subordinates, optimism, integrity, accountability, etc.). The resulting leadership model is Prophetic: P3. In a culture that is characterized by deeply and widely held beliefs and values, the expectations will strengthen and thrive and thus are more likely to create a fruitful environment for the emergence of the great leader.

Under this model there is a two-way interaction between the leader and subordinates and caring, respect and love govern relationships. The leader is committed to the interest of followers and the latter trust and show affection to the leader. The mutual trust and understanding between the leader and the followers eventually institutionalizes the rules of law. This is not only the result of the mutual trust but also, as Imam Ali argued in the seven century, because the relationships between the leader and followers are reciprocal, equitable and interdependent. A Prophetic leader not only highlights the advantages of change, establishing traditions and institutional procedures, but also induces a continuing commitment to vision and goals. Once a commitment is made and a tradition is entrenched, transformation to a healthy environment can be realized:

P4.

In a culture which gives rise to the great leader, the relationship between the leader and followers is reciprocal and thus admired practices and advocated procedures easily gain legitimacy and are willingly institutionalized.

In a weak culture where beliefs and value are not widely and deeply shared, great expectations are more likely to translate into apathy, indifference, frustration and fragmentation. More likely, the emerging leader is a type of ordinary man. That is, the leader does not exhibit any idealized quality, is not concerned with purposeful change, and primarily focus on maintaining the status quo. In case that followers show frustration, and fear and mistrust the leader, the leader is more likely resort to punishment and coercion. At a societal level, with the absence of respect and love from the populace, the leader resorts to coercion and authoritarian practice to maintain power and submission. Thus, the emerging leadership model is Caliphal: P5. In a culture where beliefs and values are not widely shared and held, the great expectations are more likely to lead to feelings of apathy, confusion, and frustration among followers and to the rise of an ordinary leader.

Islamic perspectives on leadership 173

Under this model, law and order are contingent upon the will of the leader and subjectivity in decision making is almost the norm. Initially, subjectivity in conduct leads to frustration among followers. Over time, this state eventually transforms into apathy and indifference. Therefore, there will be no specic or admired organizational tradition resulting in a lack of institutionalism and agreed upon direction. The Caliphal model has been common in government, and in recent years a variation of it can be found in business organizations. In contrast, the Prophetic model is rarely found in contemporary Islamic governments. Nevertheless, variations of it can be found in family owned and small business organizations. The effectiveness of either model is difcult to judge. But using institutionalism as a desired end, the Prophetic model is certainly preferred. The economic stagnation and the lack of technological advancement and transparency in Muslim countries have been attributed to the determination of the leaders, lack of institutionalism and lack of public participation. For example, in the context of the Arab World, The United Nations Arab Human Development Report 2002 (vii) noticed that the predominant characteristic of the current Arab reality seems to be the existence of deeply rooted shortcomings in Arab institutional structures. These shortcomings pose serious obstacles to human development and are summarized as the three decits relating to freedom, empowerment of women and knowledge. They constitute weighty constraints on human capability that must be lifted. Because general environment inuences organizational life and culture, the identied reality in the Report certainly impedes creative and sound management practices. Idealism and realism When the French philosopher Rodinson (1981) wrote, that many sayings attributed to the Prophet Mohamed sound like contemporary liberal thoughts and, thus, must have had to be written in an era of openness and liberalism not in the environment of Arabia around 620s, he raised an intriguing issue. He stated (p.59):
There are some hadiths [the sayings of the Prophet] that clearly reect contemporary thinking rather than tendencies dating from the time of the Prophet. For example, many hadiths deal with the problem of racism.

IMEFM 2,2

174

Rodinsons astonishment, however, should be attributed to the state of Muslim societies today. Most of these societies are backward, authoritarian and behind other countries politically, socially and technologically. Their social and economic progress has been disappointing and has led to deep frustration among people of these societies. It is possible that scholars, especially in the West, may attribute such mediocre achievement to religion without careful understanding of the tenets of the religion and the internal and external conditions that have led to societal stagnation. For a Muslim, Exalted values are the fundamental components of his essence; they are inherent to his being, his living, his thinking, his loving (Shariati, 1979, p. 123). It is more likely, however, that in an environment of greed and political corruption and foreign domination, confusing ideal with reality becomes permissible and gradually habitual. Furthermore, most Muslim societies are still traditional in nature. In these countries religion is not separated from other aspects of life. In his investigation of the Arab culture, Patai (1983, p. 165) noted that the Arab preference for thought wishes, ideas, ideals, aspirations, and the like-over factual reality should not be conned to the era of religion, but should penetrate, together with religion, all other aspects of life. Such interplay of ideals and reality in actual life serves magnicently in sustaining hope and continuity under adverse conditions. Nevertheless, in the context of leadership, it may facilitate the emergence of authoritarian practice, especially in the absence of ideological clarity and widespread social cohesiveness: P6. In a culture where there is a lack of ideological clarity and social cohesiveness, intense yearning for ideals, irrespective of reality, could facilitate the emergence of an authoritarian leadership.

The rise of autocratic leaders in both political and business organizations is not something peculiar to Islamic culture. All cultures and civilizations have experienced authoritarian rule in their history. In Muslim societies, however, authoritarian rulers in recent history have been more commonly in power despite Islam disapproval of oppression and authoritarian tendencies. The Quran, for example, condemns oppression (2:217): Tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter and (3:159):
Wert thou severe or harsh-hearted, they would have broken away from about thee: so pass over (their faults) and ask for (Gods) forgiveness for them; and consult them in affairs. Then, when thou hast taken a decision, put the trust in God.

Leaders in Muslim countries, like those in other cultures, display various styles of leadership. In the business world consultative, paternalistic and autocratic are more common than other styles. Muna (1980) conducted a study on managerial practice in the Arab World and found that most managers espouse a consultative style. Ali (1989) found that most managers preferred consultative and pseudo-consultative styles. The latter is a mixture of consultative and autocratic styles. It is an attempt by individuals in a position of authority to give the impression of a commitment to a sanctioned tradition. That is, some leaders display a pseudo-consultative style to reduce the tension between authoritative and consultative trends and create a supportive and cohesive environment around themselves. Its existence can be traced to the authoritarian element in most Muslim societies an element springing from several factors that have shaped the norms and practices in contemporary Muslim states. These factors include the primacy of coercive force and instability in the succession

process of the Islamic polity (Hudson, 1977), the centralized political system that have evolved since the end of colonization of some Muslim countries, foreign occupation and cultural discontinuity (Ali, 1995), the domination of the Jabria (predestination) School of thought in many Muslim states which legitimizes authoritarian action and the oppressive quality of leadership (Watt, 1961). The persistent presence of authoritarian leadership in both politics and business is an intriguing subject. In Figure 2, the focus was on the societal and cultural factors, which under certain conditions either produce great Leaders (visionary) or ordinary Leaders (authoritarian). There are various personal factors, too, that facilitate the presence of the latter. In this part, the most important personal attributes are identied. These attributes are shaped to a large extent by internal (societal) and external (foreign) forces. Indeed, the interplay of all these qualities and factors, in the absence of openness and strong culture, creates a hospitable environment for authoritarian tendencies. In societies that are infatuated with ideals, attributes that facilitate the emergence of authoritarianism nd fertile ground. These attributes encompass a high sense of belonging, a high need for approval, a high dissatisfaction with the current affairs, a high need for recognition and a sense of being destined to lead. Observers of Islamic culture note that these attributes are not only common but in the absence of openness may lead to unpredictable consequences (Al-Wardi, 1951; Baali and Al-Wardi, 1981; Barakat, 1976; Berque, 1978; Jasim, 1987). The following is a description of each. High sense of belonging An individual in an Islamic culture feels, due to Islamic teaching and socialization, that he/she is part of a wider social organization called Umma or community. The self exists as the sum of its interactions with others (Raban, 2003). The sense of self as an autonomous unit separated from other members of the society is seldom appreciated in Muslim societies. It is considered neither a virtue nor is it sought after. Those who show a high sense of belonging to this Umma normally display a higher involvement in the affairs of the society and are inclined, more than others, to champion what they perceive as societal causes.
Individual attributes High sense of belonging High need of recognition High need for approval/ appreciation High dissatisfaction with the present affair A sense of being destined to lead Collision of ideal and reality Infatuation with self Authoritarian tendencies Failure to acknowledge shortcomings Benevolent authoritarian

Islamic perspectives on leadership 175

Inability to make tangible progress

Absolute authoritarian

Figure 2. Factors inuencing authoritarian tendencies at the individual level

IMEFM 2,2

176

High need for approval Those who seek approval for their actions, even for small matters, usually display deep frustration and disappointment when they do not get immediate approbation for their actions. Individuals in this category usually contact others to inform them of what they did or ask for an appreciation for what they embark on. When individuals with a high sense of belonging, however, display simultaneously a high need for appreciation, they tend to engage in several manipulative acts to capture the attention of others and hopefully win their approval. High dissatisfaction with the present affairs When a person perceives that current affairs are unsatisfactory or inconsistent with their perception of the interest of the society or the organization, they may feel a need to change the status quo. The slow change or the failure to make progress to alleviate personal, societal or organizational problems often motivates people in this category to actively advocate change. High need for recognition People with a high need for recognition are always anxious and restless. Their persistent quest for recognition underscores uneasiness and a desire to inuence others. Normally, they are involved in various activities and networking to build support, at any expense, to their cause. Their quest for power and inuence, however, revolves around selsh interest. Societal or organizational matters are useful only as long as they facilitate their goal for recognition and power. A sense of being destined to lead When a person displays a high sense of belonging, believes that the state of the society or organization is not satisfactory and that they have the vision to make a difference, that person perceives that he/she is destined to lead. That is, individuals in this case over estimate their ability to lead and believe that their vision will lead to ideal outcomes. This perception is strengthened when the person believes that the rest of the people are not adequately qualied to either articulate their demands or meet existing challenges. In Muslim societies because of the supremacy of the personal relationship, strength of self-censorship, inclination to be inuence by rhetoric, and a tendency to easily offer initial trust without careful assessment (Ali, 1995, Jasim, 1987) there is a fertile ground for individuals with above quality to emerge as a leader: P7a. Individuals who, in societies that are characterized by the supremacy of personal relationships, idealism, self-censorship, and which experience economic-political stagnation, exhibit a high sense of belonging to the group, a high need for approval, a high need for recognition, and the dissatisfaction with current group conditions, are more likely to believe that that they are destined to lead. The irony is that when individuals with these qualities assume a leadership position and nd themselves incapable of making positive changes, they cling to power. Here, the ideal and reality collide leaving leaders concerned more with their own interest, rather than with the interest of the organization or the society at large. Often, the leaders attribute failure to outside forces and to the inability of followers to appreciate

their vision and efforts. As time passes and problems persists the leaders genuinely begins to believe that they are visionaries or great leaders and that the general public is not yet sophisticated enough to value their contributions: P7b. The emerging leader who fails to deliver the promised positive changes and whose followers show dissatisfaction will gradually display authoritarian tendencies. This combined with the failure to acknowledge their shortcomings, and a general lack of empathy and strong cultural identity among followers sustain authoritarian tendencies. Depending on the leaders sense of belonging to the community and the degree of commitment to general interest, the leader is likely to exhibit either a benevolent or absolute authoritarian style (Figure 2). The rst style incorporates traditional qualities of informality and caring in conduct. The leader, however, behaves as the ultimate protector, caregiver and the one who shoulders all responsibilities. The absolute authoritarian leader spends a great deal of energy to project the image of the most capable and knowledgeable individual, but relies on coercion and brutality in maintaining power: P7c. Whether or not the leader is a benevolent or absolute authoritarian will depend on the degree of the leaders sense of belonging and identication with the group. The infatuation with the ideal and the tendency to project the appearance of greatness, despite an inability to articulate a vision that rallies followers, may be considered the most signicant factors in nurturing authoritarian tendencies. That is, when leaders aspire to be great leaders but lack the necessary qualities, they are probably inclined to limit freedom and liberty in order to conceal their deciencies. This may explain the rise of authoritarian rulers in the Muslim World since the death of the fourth Caliph in 661. Indeed, the conict between the desired ideals and reality is crucial to understanding the current tensions in the Muslim countries. Rulers and managers alike manipulate events to perpetuate the appearance of greatness and moral clarity in order to create a supportive and cohesive environment. As the gulf between the leader and followers is enlarged, the leader shows frustration and contempt to followers. Consequently, failure to stimulate popular support and respect induce leaders to utilize coercive and dictatorial mechanisms. Conclusion In this paper, concept of leadership in Islam was discussed. The paper provided a historical perspective on the evolution and importance of leaders and leadership. It is argued that leadership is a process of shared inuence. It is social and relational in nature and is ultimately shaped by the nature of followers and the prevailing values and beliefs. The paper described and critically analyzed how the concept and understanding of leaders and their roles have evolved over many centuries. This historical survey evidences that contradictory conceptualization and justication for leaders and leadership have existed across the history of the Muslim people. The evolution of leadership concept has departed from the concept that was advocated during the very early years of the Muslim State (622-661). The departure remotely resembles the relatively liberal understanding of that early period.

Islamic perspectives on leadership 177

IMEFM 2,2

178

A model of an Islamic leadership based on deeply held cultural elements was presented. Furthermore, the paper presented theoretical reasoning for the rise of authoritarian role in a culture that experiences the living contradiction of idealism and realism. It was argued that these conditions have greatly shaped leaders orientations in governments and in the realm of business. Nevertheless, it was suggested that the Islamic model of leadership offers a better understanding of the situational and cultural factors that exist in Muslim societies. More importantly, the model and its underpinning assumptions may be highly appropriate for managing twenty-rst century organizations. The presented model offers researchers and practitioners an opportunity to understand Islamic culture and the complex environment at economic organization. In fact, the sensitivity and familiarity with the ever rising aspiration for a prophetic leader and the constant clash between ideal and reality may provide a realistic understanding of the developmental and organizational issues in many Muslim countries. The fact that early Muslim thinkers (622-661) had thought that leadership is a reciprocal social phenomenon may offer an insight for understanding not only the signicance of followers in determining the nature of leadership, the evolution of leadership practices but also the differences in cultures and the nature of organizations. The interplay between individual and societal characteristics that gives rise to authoritarian tendencies offers a practical opportunity for understanding the abuse of power in organization and the difculties in meeting performance goals. Indeed, future research may look at the conditions necessary to minimize the probability of the emergence of absolute authoritarian leaders. Furthermore, future research may address whether or not the emergence of the great leader (prophetic) is a practical possibility and the possibilities for eradicating power abuses by cultivating an environment for effectively developing followers without overlooking nurturing conditions for facilitating the rise of the great leader. In terms of Muslim societies there is a need to limit the gap of mistrust between leaders and followers. Organizations operating in these countries suffer from a deep and serious crisis. This crisis can be solved when managers and policymakers in the Muslim World become more pragmatic, reconcile the differences between what is ideal and what is reality, and when they internalize the principles of their faith. This demands an honest and deep reevaluation about the role of followers, the participation in the decision making process, the rights of individuals and the whole issue of accession and succession.

References Ali, A. (1995), Cultural discontinuity and Arab management thought, International Studies of Management & Organization, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 7-30. Ali, A. (2005), Islamic Perspectives on Management and Organization, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. Ali, I. (1989), Nahjul Balagah, (translated and edited by F. Ebeid), Dar Alkitab Al-Lubnani, Beirut. Al-Masudi, A. Al-H. (n.d.) Muroj Al-thahib [Prairies of Gold], Vols 2/3, Dar-Almarifa, Beirut. Al-Wardi, A. (1951), The Personality of Iraqi Individuals, Al-raipta Press, Bhaghdad.

Arkoun, M. (1986), The Historical Base of Arab Islamic Thought, Center for National Growth, Beirut. Armstrong, K. (1992), Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet, Harper Collins Publishers, New York, NY. Asaf, M. (1987), The Islamic Way in Business Administration, Ayen Shamis Library, Cairo. Ashmawy, M. (1992), Islamic Caliphate, Siena Publisher, Cairo. Baali, F. and Wardi, A. (1981), Ibn Khaldun and Islamic Thought Style, Haland, Boston, MA. Barakat, H. (1976), Socioeconomic, cultural and personality forces determining development in Arab society, Social Praxis, Vol. 2 Nos 3/4, pp. 179-204. Berque, J. (1978), Cultural Expression in Arab Society Today, The University of Texas Press, Austin, TX. Blau, P. (1963), Critical remarks on Webers theory of authority, American Political Science Review, Vol. 57, pp. 305-15. Brodbeck, F. (2000), Cultural variation of leadership prototypes across 22 European countries, Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, Vol. 73 No. 1, pp. 1-29. Collier, A. (1971), Business leadership and creative society, Harvard Business Review, Leadership Part II, pp. 15-23. Conger, J.A. and Kanungo, R.N. (1987), Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic leadership in organizational settings, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 637-47. Davies, F. (2003), Many misinformed about Iraq, September 11 attacks, Knight Ridder News service, June 13, available at: www.krtdirect.com Dow, T. (1969), The theory of charisma, Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 10, pp. 306-18. Friedland, W. (1964), For a sociological concept for charisma, Social Forces, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 18-26. Hawi, S. (1982), Fisoul Fi Alamrh Wa Alamer (Lectures on Leadership and Leader), Al-Sharq, Amman, Jordan. Hofstede, G. (1980), Culture Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA. Hofstede, G. (1999), Problems remain, but theories will change: the universal and the specic in 21st century global management, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 34-43. Hourani, A. (1991), A history of the Arab peoples, The Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA. House, R., Javidan, M. and Dorfman, P. (2001), Project globe: an introduction, Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 489-505. Howell, J.M. and Shamir, B. (2005), The role of followers in the charismatic leadership process: relationships and their consequences, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 96-112. Hudson, M. (1977), Arab Politics, Yale University Press, New York, NY. Hughes, R., Ginnett, R. and Gordan, C. (2006), Leadership, McGraw Hill, Boston, MA. Hunt, J.G. and Conger, J.A. (1999), From where we sit: an assessment of transformational and charismatic leadership research, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 335-43. Ibn Khaldun, A.-R. (1989), The Magaddimah, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (trns. By Franz Rosenthal & edited by N.J. Dawood). Jasim, A. (1987), Mhammad: Al-Hagigaha Al-Kubra (Mohammed: the Greatest Truth), Dar al-Andalus, Beirut.

Islamic perspectives on leadership 179

IMEFM 2,2

180

Khadra, B. (1990), The Prophetic-Caliphal model of leadership: an empirical study, International Studies of Management & Organization, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 37-51. Muna, F. (1980), The Arab Executive, St. Martins Press, New York, NY. Patai, R. (1983), The Arab Mind, Charles Scribners Sons, New York, NY. Peterson, M.F. and Hunt, J.G. (1997), International perspectives on international leadership, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 203-27. Raban, J. (2003), The greatest Gulf, The Guardian, available at: www.guardian.co.uk (accessed April 19). Rodinson, M. (1981), Marxism and the Muslim World, Monthly Review Press, New York, NY. Shariati, A. (1979), On the Sociology of Islam, Mizan Press, Berkeley, CA. Shaw, J.B. (1990), A cognitive categorization model for the study of intercultural management, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 626-45. Siddiqui, M. (1987), Organization of Government Under the Prophet, Idarah-i Adabiyat-i Delli, Delhi. Stogdill, R. (1974), Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of the Literature, The Free Press, New York, NY. Watt, W.M. (1961), Islam and Integration of Society, Northwestern University Press, Evanston, IL. Willner, A. (1984), The Spellbinders Charismatic Political Leadership, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. Wolpe, H. (1968), A critical analysis of some aspects of charisma, Sociological Review, Vol. 16, pp. 305-18. Further reading Ali, A. (1989), Decision style and work satisfaction of Arab executives, International Studies of Management & Organization, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 22-37. Holy Bible (1977), King James Version, Thomas Nelson, New York, NY. Holy Quran (1989), English Translation of the Meanings and Commentary, King Fahd Holy Quar-an Printing Complex, Al-Madinah Al-Munawarah. Corresponding author Abbas J. Ali can be contacted at: aaali@iup.edu

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints