So Nye's reading was all about the different uses of hard power and soft power and when each is appropriate, combining to form a brilliant combination called smart power. Since we were also just studying charismatic leadership, I was thinking which form of power would make the most use out of charisma?
Personally, I believe that soft power would be used for the best if the leader already had the advantage of his followers loving him. In this case, the leader would have no need to threaten or bribe them as he would already be respected and they would willingly obey. However, would he be exploiting his charisma by doing this? Would it be considered manipulation and cause his followers to turn on him at some point if they realize they are being taken for granted?
On the other hand, the use of hard power doesn't look as great either. If he already has people who will follow his commands, why would he waste the time and money to reward or punish them? He would be rewarding them for something they came to terms with on their own when they made the decision to support his charismatic style of leading.
That's the question I'm throwing out.
Side note from the reading: I thought it was very interesting that Nye referred to soft power as the feminine style of leadership and he said that is what we are drifting toward to. To counter that, I would like to remind others that there are exceptions to every rule because I would definitely say Margaret Thatcher utilized more hard power techniques than soft power techniques.
I agree with your second paragraph regarding soft power and its effectiveness. I think the followers may feel manipulated however once they have been constantly persuaded or feel "used" by their leader. I agree with Nyes point of view; there needs to be a perfect combination so that the good people don't leave and the other people don't feel used.
ReplyDeleteThe theoretical situational you created assumes the leader already has followers. In this model, I agree that soft power is the best tool. Also, unless the leader was attempting something underhanded, I do not believe the followers would feel exploited. I would advise against the use of hard power after a leader has gained followers. Hard power is better suited for accumulating followers. People want to know their leader can protect them and that they will benefit from joining with him. Regarding your side note, I don't think Nye's intentions were as sexist as you think. Nye's quote could also be interpreted as drawing a distinction between soft and hard in that when comparing the two soft power appears more feminine. I don't believe he was referring to the gender of the leader most likely to use it; if Nye was, Margret Thatcher would most certainly prove him wrong.
ReplyDelete