Potential Downfalls to Relying on Extroverted, Charismatic Leadership
When we consider charismatic leaders who inspired huge populations to fight for a cause or work for a better future, we tend to remember people such as Martin Luther King, Jr., Nelson Mandela, John F. Kennedy, and Bill Clinton. These leaders had clear, uplifting visions and inspired people largely by virtue of their outgoing personalities and their ability to make emotional connections with their followers, many of whom they never met personally. These people have left such emotional and positive marks on history that it is easy to understand why the ideal of the outgoing, charismatic leader is so persuasive. However, the legend of the fast-talking, charming business executive who leads by the power of his personality has recently left several American corporations scrambling to recuperate their losses after scandals involving fraud, mismanaged resources, and private misdeeds.
One need not look far for examples of high-level management run amok in corporate U.S., such as were the cases of Enron, Tyco, WorldCom, and HealthSouth. For better or worse, our culture values certain traits in business executives that we would not pride in ourselves or cultivate in our children, such as: aggressive competition where "the ends justify the means", extreme risk-taking, greed, and a heightened level of extroversion that emphasizes arrogance and undermines the value of listening. Many have argued that excessive focus on corporate profits and risky behavior on Wall Street led to the collapse of the economy in 2008.
"Extroverts are much more likely to get really excited by the possibility of a reward, but because of that, they won't always pay attention to warning signals," says [Susan] Cain [author of Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking]. "Introverts are much more circumspect."
What happens when people chase rewards--particularly the financial kind--while ignoring the attendant risks of catastrophe and collapse? You get train wrecks like the economic crisis of 2008 and 2009, for which extroverts may deserve a lot of the blame. Camelia Kuhnen of Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management found in a study that a variation of a dopamine-regulating gene associated with thrill seeking is a strong predictor of financial risktaking. People with a gene variant linked to introversion, on the other hand, took 28% less financial risk than others.
-Time Magazine article, The Upside of Being an Introvert (and Why Extroverts are Overrated), by Bryan Walsh
Extroverts by definition function better in situations of high stimulation: they get excited by being around people, particularly people who are working together and churning out ideas, ostensibly better and better ideas as the group gets more and more excited. Because an extrovert can become very excited about a project, he or she can unknowingly take the project into his or her own hands and out of the group's. The extrovert may become so stimulated and focused that he or she becomes one-minded, unable to consider others' ideas, suggestions, or criticisms. Studies prove that extroverts lead by the power of their personalities and do not accept suggestions or initiatives from followers as well as introverted leaders (one study in particular is linked on the next page).
None of this is to say that extroverts cannot be good leaders, or to lead into an argument that introverts inherently make better leaders than extroverts. The point is shed some light on the common misconception that a leader should be extroverted to be successful. This is patently untrue. Extroverts have strengths that they bring to any position of authority: sociability, empathy, excitement, encouragement. They also have weaknesses that they must manage in order to lead successfully, including: one-mindedness, risk-taking, and a propensity to talk when they should listen. The exact same truth can be said for introverts.
One need not look far for examples of high-level management run amok in corporate U.S., such as were the cases of Enron, Tyco, WorldCom, and HealthSouth. For better or worse, our culture values certain traits in business executives that we would not pride in ourselves or cultivate in our children, such as: aggressive competition where "the ends justify the means", extreme risk-taking, greed, and a heightened level of extroversion that emphasizes arrogance and undermines the value of listening. Many have argued that excessive focus on corporate profits and risky behavior on Wall Street led to the collapse of the economy in 2008.
"Extroverts are much more likely to get really excited by the possibility of a reward, but because of that, they won't always pay attention to warning signals," says [Susan] Cain [author of Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking]. "Introverts are much more circumspect."
What happens when people chase rewards--particularly the financial kind--while ignoring the attendant risks of catastrophe and collapse? You get train wrecks like the economic crisis of 2008 and 2009, for which extroverts may deserve a lot of the blame. Camelia Kuhnen of Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management found in a study that a variation of a dopamine-regulating gene associated with thrill seeking is a strong predictor of financial risktaking. People with a gene variant linked to introversion, on the other hand, took 28% less financial risk than others.
-Time Magazine article, The Upside of Being an Introvert (and Why Extroverts are Overrated), by Bryan Walsh
Extroverts by definition function better in situations of high stimulation: they get excited by being around people, particularly people who are working together and churning out ideas, ostensibly better and better ideas as the group gets more and more excited. Because an extrovert can become very excited about a project, he or she can unknowingly take the project into his or her own hands and out of the group's. The extrovert may become so stimulated and focused that he or she becomes one-minded, unable to consider others' ideas, suggestions, or criticisms. Studies prove that extroverts lead by the power of their personalities and do not accept suggestions or initiatives from followers as well as introverted leaders (one study in particular is linked on the next page).
None of this is to say that extroverts cannot be good leaders, or to lead into an argument that introverts inherently make better leaders than extroverts. The point is shed some light on the common misconception that a leader should be extroverted to be successful. This is patently untrue. Extroverts have strengths that they bring to any position of authority: sociability, empathy, excitement, encouragement. They also have weaknesses that they must manage in order to lead successfully, including: one-mindedness, risk-taking, and a propensity to talk when they should listen. The exact same truth can be said for introverts.
To read more about the dangers of relying on the legend of the Extroverted, Charismatic Leader, consider the following:
Explaining Enron: Communication and Responsible Leadership, by Seeger & Ulmer
The Unburdened Mind, by Christopher S. Putnam
(This article has more to do with fallacies inherent in the legend of the charismatic leader rather than the extroverted leader.)