Response to Edwards Reading

This weeks reading from Edwards shed some light on the correlation between charisma, personality, and effective leadership. The argument made about charisma not being a real measure of failure or success was interesting, but also essentially true, even when the case study is Steve Jobs. Nonetheless, charisma alone cannot determine an effective leader or his popularity standing.

As Edwards noted, personal characteristics, such as charisma are not alone successful in leading the public. In order for a leader to be successful does he have to popular or loved by all? Does he have to be exceptionally appealing and have a wonderful personality? On the one hand, Steve Jobs wasn’t loved for his warm personality and kind demeanor, but for his innovation in the field of technology and his outlandish ideas.  On the other, his charisma and his reality distortion field were what truly pushed his team to do their best, and to try even harder to reach impossible deadlines, especially while working on the Mac.

Isaacson’s biography on Steve Jobs gave a multitude of examples in which Jobs transcended even himself in terms of ambition, progress, innovation, and success. His personality and his charisma inevitably led to his power and control over everything he did, but it also led to his great leadership. So, YES, charisma can actually change the level of mobilization or coordination of a leader and a company, but is it the only factor that determines a leader’s success or popularity – no.