Charisma is one of the more contentious sociological concepts, in part because it has been absorbed into popular, or at least mass media, usage in a considerably adulterated form. The term derives from a theological conception which referred to the divine gift of grace. Max Weber developed its sociological use by extending it to refer to the recognition in individual leaders by their followers of supernatural or super-human powers or qualities of an exemplary kind or of transcendental origin.
Weber’s formulation gave rise to ambiguities. On the one hand, it could be argued that the nature of charisma inhered in the powers or qualities displayed by the individual, and thus was to be explained primarily in terms of the personal psychological attributes of the leader. On the other hand, it could be argued that the character of charisma lay in the recognition extended by the following, and thus was to be explained primarily in terms of the social psychological features of the interpersonal relationship between leader and followers. Common usage bears elements of both approaches, identifying the charismatic figure as one who displays personal attractiveness or force-fulness of a kind which leads to great popularity or popular devotion. However, this is quite antithetical to Weber’s central thrust.
Weber sharply contrasts charisma with forms of authority deriving from tradition and from rationalistic or legal considerations. The charismatic leader is one who breaks with tradition or prevailing legal norms, and demands obedience on specifically irrational grounds of devotion as God’s Prophet, the embodiment of transcendental forces, or as possessor of supernatural powers. Conventionally elected leaders, or heirs of an established tradition, cannot therefore be construed as charismatic because of their attractiveness or popularity or even both.
The following of a charismatic leader offers its obedience and devotion in virtue of the mission upon which it believes the leader to be engaged and the transcendental forces which the leader manifests. But it may require periodically to be reassured of the possession of those powers, demanding signs of the miraculous as the price of commitment.
The charismatic leader operates through a body of disciples or other personally devoted inner circle rather than an established administrative staff. Often—especially in the case of religious charisma—it may consist of members of the leader’s immediate household, living in an intimate and emotionally laden communal relationship with the leader. They receive their appointment not on the basis of technical expertise, but rather because of the intensity of their devotion or willingness to subordinate themselves to the leader’s will. They are commissioned to carry out that will on an ad hoc basis. There is no administrative routine, or any such routine is short-lived, constantly disrupted by the intervention and revelation of the leader. The economic basis of the movement is irregular and founded on booty or free-will offerings. Decision making is erratic and inspirational.
Charisma is inevitably a precarious form of authority. Max Weber maintained that it could exist in its pure form for only a relatively brief period. In the course of time it tends to become transformed into a less spontaneous or less unpredictable form of leadership, towards traditionalism or rational-legal authority. Such a development appears to be an ineluctable consequence of perpetuating the movement’s mission or of spreading it beyond an immediate, local band of disciples. Endurance over time or wider spread is likely to introduce the need for mechanisms of co-ordination, supervision and delegation. In consequence there will arise increasing impersonality and routine and the desire for greater stability and predictability on the part of officials.
The problem of succession often accelerates the process of routinization. The charisma of the founder is vested in another by virtue of hereditary succession or a ritual of consecration. Thus, such forms as ‘hereditary charisma’ or ‘charisma of office’ become an intervening step in the transformation of authority in a traditionalistic or rational-legal direction.
Roy Wallis
Formerly, Queen’s University Belfast
Further reading
Weber, M. (1947 [1922]) The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, London. (Part 1 of Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, Tübingen.)
Willner, A. (1984) The Spellbinders: Charismatic Political Leadership, New Haven, CT.
Wilson, B. (1975) The Noble Savages: The Primitive Origins of Charisma and its Contemporary Survival, Berkeley, CA.
