INSTITUTION: THE UNIVERSITY OF ZAMBIA

PROGRAM: DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN BUSINBESS AND MANAGEMENT

NAMES: RAPAHEL MUPETA

LECTURER: DR. SHELLY BAKER

COURSE: MANAGERIAL EFFECTIVENESS

DUE DATE :18TH JUNE 2023

 INTRODUCTION:

LEADERSHIP AND CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP CONCEPTS

Leadership is the process of influencing group of people so that they understand the

requirements and the methods of achieving the goal ,Yukl, G. (2006). Peter Northouse (2010)

defines leadership as a process whereby an individual influences a group of people to achieve a

common objective or the intentions of the entire group. Leadership is the process of influencing

and directing people to achieve a shared goal in each situation. Leadership ensures that the

communication process is optimized to maximize the potential in particular people or being

oriented to achieve a shared goal. Charismatic management stands on the grounds of good

communication, skills ,persuasiveness , charm when maximizing potential in the human capital.

It employs both verbal and nonverbal communication to charm influence and persuade to

achieve the goal. Charismatic leadership is based on the exemplary qualities and the authority of

the normative forms a leader reveals. Charismatic leaders are known to hold a sound vision and

a sense of mission which shows determination for what they want to achieve, Waldman et al.

(2001). They hold so much inspiration to achieve the extraordinary by comprehending the

minute details of the organization’s goals, Arthur (1993). In addition to the provision of support

they provide mentorship training and coaching which is key to their follower’s self-esteem.

Charismatic leaders are change agents who are very good at communicating persuasion to

achieve there goes and influence their followers for their expectation. They offer support to the

followers by providing what they need, as capital inputs which make followers to invest time and

energy and hence achieve the visions and missions easier and sometimes personal sacrifice,

(Conger 1989).
 DO I CONSIDER PIM FORTUYN AS A CHARISMATIC LEADER?
I consider Pim to be a charismatic leader because he made a gigantic move which

inspired several nationals to become the second largest political party without taking so much

time like others do. This involved persuasion large groups of people to join him by smoothly

communicating his vision and mission as well as the process of achieving these goals which was

convincing.

Pim’s ability to influence others as a charismatic leader showcased that he was able to

motivate ,persuade and influence so as to produce an excellent superior performance without the

use of power, Shamir et al., (1993). Pim showed skills of clear communication which involve

both verbal and nonverbal such as the use of nonverbal ques ,charm during interaction as

observed in their case.

He managed to showcase the skills by convincing a large group of people to bring about a

social change, Fiol et al., (1999). His promises about social change improving the lives of people

were communicated to many people with assurance which were very influential to his

demographic target.
 Pim did not achieve his goals alone but involved others or followers who helped him to

campaign. As a charismatic leader he was able to help these followers and to communicate his

goals effectively and manage their needs as motivation and to bring out the best in them. His

followers were known to have showcased trust, loyalty , and satisfaction towards the leader, Pim.

According to conga 1998 the following are the key features which Pam showcased and

match those of a charismatic leader.

Strategic vision and articulation; Pim showcased strategic leadership by inspiring the

nation with his promises for campaign goals. He was inspirational and was able to motivate

himself by effectively articulating the importance of what his vision meant and stood for

especially the ideas about the future possibilities.

Personal risk: he started from scratch to build a political party that was so influential and

became the second largest. He influenced several investors, social workers another key

stakeholder who came together to support him. Considering the point at which he studied from

one would describe his mission as a personal risk. Most of the other leaders who've been defined

to be charismatic such as Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi , all been

involved in personal risks to pursue and reach their ultimate firm.

Unconventional behavior: One of the personalities known for charismatic leadership is

that of an extrovert. Pim’s behavior was described as unique social and inspiring and was able to

surprise other politicians

 COMPARISONS AND CONTRACTIONS OF THE LPF WITH OTHER ONE PERSON
ORGANIZATION SUCH AS VIRGIN MICROSOFT BODY SHOP REGARDING
ORGANIZATIONS VISION
My answer is yes. Visions are very influential. The following are my assumptions and

point of view. Firstly, a vision is a hey clear distinctive and specific view of the future.One of the

features of the effective leader is there a ability to express a vision and usage to inspire others.

With an organization like Microsoft were Bill Gates is known to be the forehead, the

impact would be a possible risk of losing a vision if it is not effectively shared . When apple lost

Steve Jobs, the impact has been seen with the slight loss in market share and popularity . In the

USA today American politics are still able to quote Martin Luther King's stance on the definition

of democracy. What South Africa is today comes from the strongest vision which Nelson

Mandela shared which is still living up to today.

Nelson Mandela shared the vision for South Africa which is also essential in an

organization as it provides a general guide on what the organization stands for and its values. As

such losing your forehead does not ultimately spell that organizations values are lost but mainly

depend on the depth and quality of the shared vision. Some visions are sustainable, the vision of

Martin Luther King is still very important in the USA .The visions and dreams of Nelson

Mandela still very meaningful and important in South Africa today however the impact would

have been different if Nelson Mandela and Luther King we're still alive. Hence losing your

forehead does have an impact.

The value of the shared vision is that it helps to set a broad outline for the strategy and

development of the organization and leaves specific details to emerge in future. A strong shared

vision gives an organization a sense of purpose and direction. It creates a common sense of unity

within the organization and provides coherence. According to Baker and Sinkula (1999) “the
critical aspect of a shared vision is that when it is universally known and understood it gives the

organization a sense of purpose and direction”. A shared vision helps to create a sense of unity,

direction , purpose within the organization and provide coherence to varied activities. People

who truly share a vision are connected and bound together by a common aspiration. One person

organizations can evolve around a shared vision since it is grounded on the concept of influence

commitment to the vision and achievement of the ideals though it is still rooted in both the goes

behavioral and emotional characteristics as per its vision.

With regards to the LPF; Considering his political dynasty, the common factors that

brought them together where significant to make them achieve most of what defined them or

what are known for. In other ways when organizations lose their foreheads, they no longer

become the same especially when the forehead was charismatic and highly influential.

Body Shop, virgin and Microsoft would be able to continue after losing their forehead

because they have shared the vision for their organizations such that even if they lose their

foreheads their vision would still sustain them.

In conclusions, visions have the power to influence and move people's strongly from a

monotonous state to a challenging and dynamic work. The visions of strong leaders are rational ,

innovative ,credible ,clear challenging ,motivating and concrete. The key thing that I've learned

is that when the vision is shared it cuts across the organization well. It lives on but when it's not

shared as much as it should die when the forehead dies. Hence for it to live generations like that

of the Luther king, it needs to be shared. I live in Zambia, but I can recite Martin’s famous

dream,” I have dream”.

 REFERENCES

Baker, W.E. and Sinkula, J.M. (1999), ‘‘The synergistic effect of market orientation and learning
orientation on organizational performance’ ’Academy of Marketing Science Journal, Vol.
27 No. 4, pp. 411-27.

Calantone, R.J., Cavusgil, S.T. and Zhao, Y. (2002), ‘‘Learning orientation, firm innovation
capability, andfirm performance’ ’Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 31 No. 6, pp.
515-24.

Conger, J.A. 1989. The charismatic leader: Behind the mystique of exceptional leadership. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass Publishers.

Fiol, C. M., Harris, D., & House, R. (1999). Charismatic leadership: Strategies for effecting

House, R., W.D. Spangler, and J. Woycke. 1991. Personality and charisma in the US presidency:
A psychological theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly 36, no.
3: 364 96.

Leadership: A Self-Concept Based Theory. Organization Science,4(4), 577–594

Lo, K. B., Kroeck, K. G. and Sivasubramanian, N. (1996), “Effectiveness correlates of

transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic review of the MLQ
literature”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 385-425.

Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995),The Knowledge-creating Company, Oxford University Press,

NewYork,

Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The Motivational Effects of Charismatic

social change. Leadership Quarterly Journal of Management

Waldman, D.A., G.G. Ramirez, R.J. House, and P. Puranam. 2001. Does leadership matter? CEO
leadership attributes and profitability under conditions of perceived environmental
uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal 44, no. 1: 134 43.

Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson-Prentice
Hall.
APPENDIX