Popular in Professional

Culture and Society

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

New York University Harvey Moltoch

Education

The Role of Education in Reducing Racial Inequality

University of Southern California Pedro A. Noguera

Law

Diversity and Social Mobility in the UK legal profession

Law Society I. Stephanie Boyce

Internet Law

The Law of AI for Good

University of San Diego Orly Lobel

Pharmacy

Cytotoxic Activity and Anti-Migratory Effect of Berberine-Phytantriol Liquid Crystalline on Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

University of Technology Sydney Kamal Dua

Human Rights Law

Transforming Restorative Justice for Transitional Settings

University of Nottingham Kerry Clamp

Education

The Effects of Charismatic Leadership on Interpersonal Synchrony and Task Performance

View more insights in Professional - Business - Leadership

View more figures from McMaster University

View the page of Yair Berson

Read the Study

Yair Berson discusses how neural and physiological forms of synchrony capture deep-seated, instantaneous dynamics in work teams.

Image courtesy of interviewee. March 27, 2024

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

This video video discusses the concept of interpersonal synchrony, which refers to the coordinated actions among individuals, often studied in small groups. Various forms of synchrony are explored, including behavioral synchrony (e.g., simultaneous micro-behaviors like movements), physiological synchrony (e.g., matching heart rates and galvanic skin responses), and neuro synchrony (e.g., synchronization of brain activity amplified through technologies like EEG and fMRI).

The discussion shifts towards charismatic leadership, detailing how charisma, stemming from political science, is linked to unifying group activities and signaling values that connect individuals to a leader and their ideas. Charismatic leaders can inspire group cohesion and enhance performance; however, charisma can also lead to dangerous groupthink and blindly following potentially harmful leaders.

Challenges in defining charisma arise, especially regarding whether it's a leader's behavior or a follower's attribution. The speaker notes the importance of distinguishing between positive and negative charismatic leaders and suggests that physical and psychological synchrony plays a crucial role in this relationship. Ongoing research aims to further explore these dynamics and their implications for leadership in organizations.

Finally, the text examines the psychological characteristics that predict leadership efficacy beyond demographics, emphasizing the need to focus on leaders' values and their impact on organizational culture and performance. Effective leadership could arise from a balance between power and benevolence, indicating that leaders should care for both their followers and themselves for optimal results.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.065 --> 00:03.035
Interpersonal synchrony, can occur

00:03.695 --> 00:05.355
is basically a coordination

00:05.455 --> 00:08.755
or a coordinated action among individuals.

00:08.975 --> 00:11.955
So it could be, multiple individuals, obviously.

00:12.135 --> 00:14.595
Uh, typically we look at two or three,

00:14.895 --> 00:18.195
but you know, you can theoretically extend this

00:18.195 --> 00:19.195
to larger numbers.

00:20.175 --> 00:23.755
Uh, interpersonal synchrony can be in multiple formats,

00:23.975 --> 00:27.035
can be, behavioral, for example.

00:27.735 --> 00:31.115
Uh, people exhibiting the same behavior at the same time.

00:31.465 --> 00:34.355
Okay? Typically, these are micro behaviors.

00:35.045 --> 00:38.715
Micro behaviors could be, you know, movement of your head,

00:39.205 --> 00:41.395
could be even scratching your head.

00:41.975 --> 00:43.955
And again, the synchrony is the fact

00:43.955 --> 00:47.115
that all group members do this at the same time.

00:47.615 --> 00:51.195
In addition to behavioral synchrony, we have,

00:51.265 --> 00:53.795
physiological synchrony there.

00:53.855 --> 00:56.875
We look, typically, we look at heart rate synchrony

00:57.375 --> 00:58.835
or intermittent intervals.

00:59.215 --> 01:02.595
So the extent to which your heart rate is in line

01:02.595 --> 01:05.435
with my heart rate is a sign that we're synchronized.

01:06.255 --> 01:07.515
Uh, and another aspect

01:07.515 --> 01:10.595
of physiological synchrony is galvanic skin response.

01:11.335 --> 01:14.075
So I can actually assess your skin,

01:14.625 --> 01:16.315
your galvanic skin response,

01:16.335 --> 01:17.995
or the extent to which was your,

01:18.865 --> 01:22.075
your skin co conductivity, electric conductivity.

01:22.655 --> 01:25.275
And I can look at the extent to which there it matches

01:25.385 --> 01:28.955
between you and me or other multiple people, other people.

01:29.935 --> 01:33.315
Uh, another aspect of of syn personal synchrony

01:33.315 --> 01:35.795
that we look at is neuro synchrony.

01:36.835 --> 01:40.735
Neuro synchrony is synchrony of,

01:41.315 --> 01:42.655
the brain activity.

01:42.925 --> 01:46.335
That can happen. It can be assessed in multiple ways too.

01:47.075 --> 01:51.455
One aspect of neuro synchrony is, when we look at the,

01:51.515 --> 01:55.975
range of activities that the, the frequencies

01:56.235 --> 01:58.815
of the brain activity for each individual,

01:59.435 --> 02:02.055
and we look at the extent to which they match.

02:02.195 --> 02:05.815
So alpha waves, better waves, gamma waves, for example.

02:06.435 --> 02:10.495
Or we can average all brain activity of from e, EG,

02:11.205 --> 02:14.455
like that electroencephalogram and,

02:14.595 --> 02:17.255
and then compare across multiple individuals.

02:17.885 --> 02:21.815
Another way is through other devices like MRI,

02:22.735 --> 02:25.335
functional, MRI or functional ears.

02:25.345 --> 02:29.295
These are different devices that capture the extent

02:29.295 --> 02:33.095
to which each of brain cells uses oxygen

02:33.475 --> 02:35.175
or hemoglobin same.

02:35.875 --> 02:39.495
So based on a, on on this, the brain,

02:39.985 --> 02:44.055
these devices can tell whether there is activity in c in a

02:44.055 --> 02:45.295
certain areas of the brain.

02:46.235 --> 02:50.255
And if there is activity in the same areas of the brain

02:50.475 --> 02:53.575
for multiple people, we talk about neuro synchrony.

02:53.795 --> 02:56.095
So it goes away from interpersonal synchrony

02:56.095 --> 02:58.895
and the biology, biology that I was just

02:58.965 --> 03:01.845
Talking now into classic research in business

03:02.665 --> 03:04.925
on the effects of charismatic leaders.

03:06.135 --> 03:09.475
Uh, okay, very different. I'm happy to talk about that.

03:10.055 --> 03:13.995
Uh, that's more my traditional research and others research.

03:14.655 --> 03:16.355
Uh, what does it say?

03:16.945 --> 03:20.395
Basically, charisma,

03:20.485 --> 03:25.115
comes from political science, from old Greek literature

03:25.115 --> 03:28.235
and then applied to political science,

03:28.375 --> 03:33.115
by Weber talking about, a mechanisms

03:33.115 --> 03:34.595
through which you achieve meaning,

03:34.975 --> 03:39.155
and through which you un unify the activities of the people.

03:39.695 --> 03:44.435
In the seventies, it was imported to business by

03:45.365 --> 03:46.425
Robert J. House,

03:46.925 --> 03:49.225
and in his classic work on

03:49.945 --> 03:52.705
charismatic leadership in organizations, he basically said

03:52.705 --> 03:56.865
that CEOs leaders in organizations

03:56.965 --> 03:59.945
or just like leaders of countries, you know, they can be

04:00.745 --> 04:02.225
charismatic and what does that mean?

04:02.565 --> 04:05.385
And in that world, in the business world, you asked

04:05.925 --> 04:08.225
the answer is it means that you provide

04:08.405 --> 04:11.945
or signal to people a message about values,

04:12.695 --> 04:14.945
what we call a value related message.

04:15.375 --> 04:17.025
Okay? For example, it's really important

04:17.085 --> 04:18.625
to be all, to all work together.

04:19.255 --> 04:22.185
It's really important to be innovative. So these are values.

04:22.965 --> 04:24.945
So, and when you signal

04:25.095 --> 04:27.305
that connects people really, really well.

04:27.605 --> 04:30.145
So it's not just conveying a message,

04:30.365 --> 04:32.345
but signaling to people a message

04:32.415 --> 04:33.985
that they can identify with.

04:34.565 --> 04:37.705
And when they identify with the message,

04:38.255 --> 04:39.305
they will follow you.

04:39.615 --> 04:43.305
They will feel, they will identify with you as a leader.

04:43.775 --> 04:46.065
They will also identify with a group more.

04:46.565 --> 04:48.385
So it basically creates a group

04:48.485 --> 04:52.265
or a collecting of individuals who operate together.

04:53.165 --> 04:57.105
That's what's behind the charismatic influence. Okay?

04:57.685 --> 04:59.945
Um, the research

05:00.685 --> 05:04.345
is problematic only in the sense that it's hard

05:04.345 --> 05:07.705
to capture charismatic leadership without,

05:08.615 --> 05:10.185
looking at its impact.

05:10.575 --> 05:13.705
Okay? So for example, when I'm exciting individuals,

05:14.365 --> 05:15.785
that's an action of a leader.

05:16.645 --> 05:19.625
But then if the individuals don't perceive me

05:19.625 --> 05:21.705
to be charismatic, I'm not charismatic.

05:22.675 --> 05:24.735
So is this an outcome of my behavior

05:24.835 --> 05:27.655
or is it the actual behavior that we're assessing

05:27.675 --> 05:31.615
and it is captured by how other people see?

05:32.565 --> 05:36.825
In other words, is charisma a behavior, an act,

05:37.285 --> 05:41.425
or action, or is it an attribution by followers?

05:42.285 --> 05:43.385
So it's important

05:43.385 --> 05:46.065
because then if it is an attribution by followers,

05:47.135 --> 05:49.145
it's less clear what the leader needs

05:49.165 --> 05:50.865
to do in order to achieve it.

05:52.235 --> 05:56.325
And in the business world, you want to provide leaders,

05:57.205 --> 06:00.405
managers, executives with

06:01.505 --> 06:03.845
rec recommended recipe of action, right?

06:03.955 --> 06:06.125
What do you need to do in order to be a good manager?

06:07.295 --> 06:10.675
And, so charisma in that sense is less practical

06:11.245 --> 06:12.575
than other pro factors.

06:13.435 --> 06:17.135
On the other side of it, the, the good side

06:18.095 --> 06:21.295
charisma is, has shown that it's a strong, one

06:21.295 --> 06:24.815
of the strongest predictors of performance,

06:24.815 --> 06:27.495
performance at the individual level, at the team level,

06:27.915 --> 06:30.615
and the organizational level, even financial performance,

06:31.855 --> 06:34.975
charismatic leadership, as a,

06:35.215 --> 06:37.735
a strong effect on synchronizing other people.

06:38.955 --> 06:43.495
And because lead followers rally around leaders, they want

06:43.495 --> 06:44.615
to emulate leaders.

06:45.875 --> 06:48.015
And when they emulate leaders

06:48.355 --> 06:52.875
or connect to the leaders really well, they,

06:53.255 --> 06:54.675
become one.

06:56.035 --> 07:00.105
And this is a major statement by classics.

07:00.425 --> 07:01.905
Researchers like Max Weber

07:02.125 --> 07:04.785
and, you know, scholars, not researchers like Max Weber

07:04.845 --> 07:06.505
and also Bob House and others,

07:07.285 --> 07:09.025
but it's never been shown really.

07:09.365 --> 07:12.225
Um, it's really hard to test it, right?

07:12.895 --> 07:17.745
Because, it happens almost instantaneously.

07:19.385 --> 07:23.455
Think about, a crowd in, in a

07:25.185 --> 07:28.295
place where leaders are talking to the crowd

07:28.435 --> 07:31.215
or trying to convince the crowd to do something,

07:31.595 --> 07:35.175
or think about the leader who comes into a room,

07:35.555 --> 07:36.655
try to impact the people.

07:37.475 --> 07:41.615
All of these things, happen,

07:43.615 --> 07:44.725
relatively fast

07:45.875 --> 07:47.695
and sometimes without the

07:47.695 --> 07:49.735
followers knowing the leader, even. So this

07:49.735 --> 07:52.815
Is typical of charismatic leaders, they can be so exciting

07:52.885 --> 07:56.495
that people would follow them to a very bad

07:56.915 --> 07:59.575
or unfortunate situation.

08:00.395 --> 08:02.775
So the question is, why do they follow?

08:02.895 --> 08:05.935
I mean, what's the process in which they follow jve? Okay?

08:06.315 --> 08:10.975
So if you look back at the, at some TV or, or,

08:11.115 --> 08:16.015
or, you know, records of his activities of speeches in front

08:16.015 --> 08:18.695
of people and all that, he excited people.

08:19.135 --> 08:20.815
I remember if you're seeing some of his,

08:21.235 --> 08:22.335
so he excited people.

08:22.445 --> 08:25.015
This excitement makes you, that's

08:25.015 --> 08:26.175
what we argue in our research,

08:26.645 --> 08:30.415
this excitement make you lose yourself as an individual

08:30.915 --> 08:34.375
and become part of, of the group, part of the collective.

08:35.675 --> 08:37.975
And the question is, how does it happen?

08:38.235 --> 08:42.775
We think it happens not just in our attitudes

08:42.775 --> 08:44.735
and behaviors to which we are aware of,

08:45.475 --> 08:48.875
but it also happens subconsciously automatically

08:49.265 --> 08:50.275
without our awareness.

08:51.015 --> 08:53.475
Um, so people who are exposed to this kind

08:53.475 --> 08:55.845
of charismatically, they're synchronize,

08:56.885 --> 09:00.085
synchronize in their, in their brain activity,

09:00.605 --> 09:03.805
synchronize in their heart activity, synchronize,

09:03.905 --> 09:05.925
in all those aspects of synchrony.

09:05.965 --> 09:08.125
I mentioned in the beginning with your first question.

09:08.705 --> 09:11.845
And we don't know if for sure we have big studies

09:12.365 --> 09:14.245
research, one study we conducted

09:15.065 --> 09:18.485
and another study that is related to that, that shows

09:18.485 --> 09:21.165
that we are correct at least about heart rate synchrony.

09:21.745 --> 09:24.085
So if you are exposed to a charismatic leader,

09:24.355 --> 09:27.325
imagine all these people listening to Jve talking about

09:28.125 --> 09:29.805
Venezuela and how great it will be.

09:30.785 --> 09:33.485
And if you had to assess their heart rate,

09:34.725 --> 09:38.125
I would hypothesize it would be relatively similar.

09:39.655 --> 09:44.075
So without even knowing their heart rate,

09:45.185 --> 09:48.105
E has an impact on making everyone the same

09:49.975 --> 09:53.675
and making everyone the same, which was has been an argument

09:53.675 --> 09:56.395
of charismatic leaders, like all the way, going back to

09:57.135 --> 10:00.555
Gandhi and Hitler and all those charismatic leaders.

10:00.735 --> 10:03.035
You see the masses standing in the same way,

10:03.505 --> 10:05.755
talking in the same way, moving in the same way.

10:05.755 --> 10:08.755
Martin Luther King in the us, all of those leaders

10:08.935 --> 10:10.475
who are very charismatic.

10:12.085 --> 10:13.825
How does that happen? We don't know.

10:14.645 --> 10:17.585
My work is among the first to understand

10:18.135 --> 10:20.265
what happens, what happens there.

10:20.605 --> 10:23.985
And we show that it's subconscious, it's automatic, it's,

10:24.045 --> 10:25.385
it happens instantaneously.

10:26.245 --> 10:27.865
Um, and it is,

10:28.785 --> 10:30.885
and you almost like under a drug, the influence

10:30.885 --> 10:32.205
of a drug, right?

10:32.285 --> 10:35.605
I mean, to give you an ex, the best example is you are one

10:35.605 --> 10:37.245
person and when you take drugs,

10:37.265 --> 10:38.365
you become a different person.

10:39.655 --> 10:42.835
And that's a little bit, what's the influence of a leader?

10:43.375 --> 10:46.795
So a country like Venezuela, your country

10:47.695 --> 10:51.275
was under a drug, under the influence of a drug, so

10:51.275 --> 10:53.355
that he didn't really notice what's happening.

10:53.815 --> 10:55.595
And it got into huge trouble.

10:56.375 --> 10:57.595
And, and, and,

10:57.735 --> 10:59.315
and that, that process is,

10:59.775 --> 11:01.875
that's very general statement, of course.

11:01.975 --> 11:03.315
But that process is

11:03.315 --> 11:05.555
what happens when you're under the influence of a leader,

11:06.315 --> 11:07.515
a good charismatic leader.

11:07.695 --> 11:11.195
Not every leader, a charismatic leader, that's what they do.

11:11.195 --> 11:13.555
They basically combine all of our behaviors.

11:13.555 --> 11:17.475
They make us feel the same, act the same, and,

11:17.615 --> 11:18.675
and think the same.

11:19.895 --> 11:22.355
And that could be very dangerous

11:22.655 --> 11:23.755
or could also be really good,

11:24.185 --> 11:26.595
because if you take people on the same page,

11:26.625 --> 11:28.155
they also work much better.

11:28.185 --> 11:31.115
They're more effective, there is better performance.

11:31.665 --> 11:33.995
Same time. It could be really, really dangerous.

11:34.815 --> 11:38.355
And in my research, my future research, a study

11:38.355 --> 11:42.155
that we're running in the next fall, we're going to try

11:42.155 --> 11:46.155
to look into the difference between the bad charismatics

11:47.075 --> 11:48.845
like Chavez or Trump,

11:49.545 --> 11:51.205
and the good charismatics that

11:51.835 --> 11:54.005
have a more interest in the collective,

11:54.065 --> 11:55.125
not just in themselves.

11:55.765 --> 11:58.415
They wanna care about the country, the collective,

11:58.555 --> 12:00.975
the group, the company, whatever they manage.

12:01.715 --> 12:05.415
And, and this is, the difference

12:05.415 --> 12:06.975
between the bad charismatic and the good.

12:07.215 --> 12:09.375
Charismatic is not obvious. They all look the same,

12:10.675 --> 12:12.655
but one leads to trouble and,

12:12.655 --> 12:15.535
and disasters like happened in Venezuela or in Germany.

12:15.885 --> 12:18.775
Nazi Germany and others lead to success.

12:18.955 --> 12:20.255
You know, like other countries

12:20.395 --> 12:22.815
or examples of success that there are,

12:23.145 --> 12:24.255
there are so many too.

12:24.755 --> 12:27.575
So identifying the difference between the good

12:27.575 --> 12:31.975
and the bad charisma in advance, not after the fire, not

12:31.975 --> 12:33.255
after everything is on fire

12:33.315 --> 12:36.935
and everything is destroyed in advance, is a challenge.

12:37.155 --> 12:40.295
And that's what my, we believe you can do it

12:40.315 --> 12:42.575
or learn about it through biological methods.

12:43.285 --> 12:46.135
What I have been doing is looking at executives, not

12:46.815 --> 12:50.535
employees, and looking at the extent to which executives

12:51.045 --> 12:54.095
psychological characteristics go beyond demographic

12:54.195 --> 12:56.095
to predict aspects of performance

12:56.235 --> 13:00.375
or aspects of, culture of the company.

13:00.635 --> 13:03.015
So for example, there's a lot of work that says that,

13:03.355 --> 13:06.775
if you are highly tenured, like you would be many years

13:06.775 --> 13:08.815
with the company, your impact

13:08.875 --> 13:13.655
as a leader on the company is different than if you are new.

13:13.835 --> 13:17.935
If you just move or you just changed, or you if you're old

13:17.935 --> 13:22.015
or young, if you are, educated or uneducated.

13:22.195 --> 13:25.095
All of those are demographics that people have looked at

13:26.155 --> 13:29.535
and try to predict with these leader demographics,

13:29.845 --> 13:31.975
some aspects of the company, for example,

13:32.395 --> 13:34.095
how much the company is taking risk,

13:34.755 --> 13:38.415
how much the company is, financially stable,

13:38.875 --> 13:42.935
how much is the company innovative, so on, and whatever.

13:43.085 --> 13:46.575
What I have argued together with colleagues of course is,

13:46.835 --> 13:48.455
that,

13:50.955 --> 13:52.655
it is not enough to look at demographics.

13:52.755 --> 13:54.015
You need to look at psychographics

13:54.475 --> 13:57.135
or psychological characteristics that go

13:57.135 --> 13:59.375
beyond demographics, and you learn much more.

13:59.435 --> 14:02.095
For example, you're still thinking about your age

14:02.955 --> 14:06.135
or your, experience in the company

14:06.235 --> 14:07.815
or the years you spent in the company,

14:07.815 --> 14:08.855
your tenure in the company.

14:09.525 --> 14:13.815
Look at values if you are conservative, okay?

14:14.525 --> 14:16.215
That may explain why.

14:16.955 --> 14:21.805
Um, you take a course of action that's less innovative

14:22.385 --> 14:23.925
for the company or less risk taking,

14:24.595 --> 14:26.445
more than if you're old or young.

14:27.875 --> 14:29.985
There is, it's true that there is a correlation

14:29.985 --> 14:32.305
between being old and being conservative,

14:33.155 --> 14:34.895
but it's not a perfect correlation.

14:35.525 --> 14:38.375
Some people are old and not conservative,

14:38.395 --> 14:40.455
and some people are young and very conservative.

14:40.915 --> 14:44.695
And therefore it's better to look at the real value of

14:44.695 --> 14:47.735
what matters to you and not on your demographics.

14:48.275 --> 14:50.375
And yes, this is something I've been argued

14:50.375 --> 14:53.565
and published on, but not on employees and feet,

14:53.945 --> 14:55.845
but on CEOs

14:55.945 --> 14:58.645
and their impact on company, on on organizations.

14:59.945 --> 15:01.165
And we have a study

15:01.165 --> 15:03.965
where we looked at personal values of CEOs.

15:04.275 --> 15:07.725
Okay? So for example, you as a CEO, you report that

15:07.875 --> 15:11.285
what you care about is security stability.

15:12.345 --> 15:15.355
Then we ask people in the company to report, this is a,

15:15.355 --> 15:16.595
these are large companies.

15:16.695 --> 15:17.835
We ask people in the company

15:17.935 --> 15:20.315
to report about the culture of the company.

15:20.745 --> 15:22.595
What type of culture is it?

15:22.935 --> 15:27.865
Is it very stable bureaucratic culture?

15:28.365 --> 15:30.065
Is it more innovative? And so on.

15:30.525 --> 15:33.785
And then we look at the financial performance of the firm,

15:34.695 --> 15:39.475
and we show that if you are a CEO, who cares for security

15:39.655 --> 15:42.275
or different than a CEO, who cares about benevolence

15:42.415 --> 15:46.195
or CEO cares about, maybe the word care is not correct.

15:46.375 --> 15:51.035
The CEO is who values similar values.

15:51.635 --> 15:54.635
Security is different than CEO values, benevolence

15:54.655 --> 15:57.955
and CEO values, risk taking or, or,

15:58.095 --> 16:01.805
or, making an impact, personal impact,

16:01.815 --> 16:03.285
which we call self-direction.

16:03.995 --> 16:08.445
Okay? So these CEOs have different impact on the culture

16:08.465 --> 16:10.365
of the company, the way people see it,

16:10.465 --> 16:11.725
the way other people see it.

16:12.225 --> 16:15.205
And, and then in turn, that has an impact.

16:15.205 --> 16:17.325
The culture has an impact on the

16:17.325 --> 16:18.725
financial performance of the firm.

16:19.145 --> 16:21.645
So it's not that if you are A CEO cares for security

16:21.825 --> 16:24.715
or less good as compared

16:24.715 --> 16:27.915
to A CEO cares about risk taking.

16:28.495 --> 16:31.965
Now he just emphasize different things,

16:32.905 --> 16:36.125
and this is related to a major argument in my research

16:36.195 --> 16:37.965
with others, which is

16:37.965 --> 16:41.405
that organizations really reflect their psycho the

16:41.405 --> 16:43.525
psychological characteristics of the leaders.

16:44.145 --> 16:46.765
And it's an extension of working strategic leadership

16:46.785 --> 16:51.605
by Don Hambrick and others who argue that,

16:52.115 --> 16:54.205
organizations are reflections of the leaders,

16:54.825 --> 16:57.445
but of the demographic characteristics of the leaders.

16:57.895 --> 16:58.965
We're saying, no, no, no.

16:59.095 --> 17:03.045
Let's look at what psychologically characterizes

17:03.625 --> 17:06.845
top leaders and how that changes organizations

17:07.665 --> 17:09.205
and their performance.

17:09.925 --> 17:12.725
Interesting study that I am on the third author on the first

17:12.725 --> 17:15.885
author is Nous Verdict and Show the second author.

17:16.385 --> 17:20.445
So, and in that study, what we did is we looked at,

17:20.855 --> 17:23.805
again, the same values that I mentioned earlier,

17:24.405 --> 17:26.125
personal values, what's important.

17:26.525 --> 17:28.165
Personal values is what's important to me,

17:28.625 --> 17:30.525
but what's important to me as a leader.

17:31.065 --> 17:32.965
And now think about it, many leaders,

17:33.145 --> 17:34.325
why do they wanna become leaders?

17:35.585 --> 17:38.825
'cause they seek power right? Now, is it good?

17:39.615 --> 17:42.825
Will they be great leaders if they just want power?

17:44.065 --> 17:46.405
If they want power, they care about themselves.

17:47.805 --> 17:51.605
Power is, is what we call a self enhancing value.

17:52.255 --> 17:55.925
Value that makes you feel better about yourself

17:55.985 --> 17:59.885
or makes you more, makes you focus on yourself.

18:00.795 --> 18:02.045
Also, achievement, right?

18:02.235 --> 18:05.165
Both of them are types of self enhancing values.

18:06.185 --> 18:09.765
So, and what is the role of leaders to take of the care

18:09.765 --> 18:11.885
of themselves or to take care of the other people,

18:12.385 --> 18:13.805
to take care of other people, right?

18:14.145 --> 18:17.605
So in, in reality, we want leaders who

18:18.685 --> 18:22.395
are benevolent, who care about others.

18:23.685 --> 18:25.105
But here's the irony.

18:25.845 --> 18:29.225
People who care about benevolence are not going

18:29.225 --> 18:33.565
to typically seek power position because benevolence

18:33.565 --> 18:36.405
and power are negatively correlated.

18:38.555 --> 18:42.655
So the world needs people who care about other people,

18:43.795 --> 18:46.575
but those people who care about other people are not

18:46.605 --> 18:50.655
necessarily seeking powerful positions.

18:51.815 --> 18:54.675
So they're not going to be leaders. Do you see the problem?

18:55.375 --> 18:57.115
If you look only at benevolence,

18:57.575 --> 18:59.675
you would not find effective leadership.

19:00.615 --> 19:04.275
If you look only at power, you, you might find leadership,

19:04.335 --> 19:05.795
but not necessarily good for the people.

19:06.695 --> 19:09.475
If you look at the combination of power

19:09.495 --> 19:12.715
and benevolence, you will find the best leaders.

19:13.105 --> 19:14.315
This is what we argued,

19:14.655 --> 19:17.515
and we studied it on school,

19:17.515 --> 19:19.475
school samples, teachers, school principles.

19:19.475 --> 19:22.315
We looked at the interactions, statistical interaction

19:22.315 --> 19:23.315
between power

19:24.135 --> 19:27.075
and benevolence as it predicts

19:28.725 --> 19:30.295
processes in the school

19:31.235 --> 19:34.495
and the school outcomes, which were assessed by the extent

19:34.495 --> 19:39.415
to which, teachers took care of students.

19:40.205 --> 19:44.055
Okay? And we show that the best outcomes

19:45.315 --> 19:48.735
are a result of the combination of power and.

00:00 - Interpersonal synchrony, can occur is basically a coordination or a coordinated action among individuals. So it could be, multiple individuals, obviously. typically we look at two or three, but you know, you can theoretically extend this

00:18 - to larger numbers. interpersonal synchrony can be in multiple formats, can be, behavioral, for example. people exhibiting the same behavior at the same time. Okay? Typically, these are micro behaviors. Micro behaviors could be, you know, movement of your head, could be even scratching your head. And again, the synchrony is the fact that all group members do this at the same time. In addition to behavioral synchrony, we have,

00:51 - physiological synchrony there. We look, typically, we look at heart rate synchrony or intermittent intervals. So the extent to which your heart rate is in line with my heart rate is a sign that we're synchronized. and another aspect of physiological synchrony is galvanic skin response. So I can actually assess your skin, your galvanic skin response, or the extent to which was your,

01:18 - your skin co conductivity, electric conductivity. And I can look at the extent to which there it matches between you and me or other multiple people, other people. another aspect of of syn personal synchrony that we look at is neuro synchrony. Neuro synchrony is synchrony of, the brain activity. That can happen. It can be assessed in multiple ways too. One aspect of neuro synchrony is, when we look at the, range of activities that the, the frequencies

01:56 - of the brain activity for each individual, and we look at the extent to which they match. So alpha waves, better waves, gamma waves, for example. Or we can average all brain activity of from e, EG, like that electroencephalogram and, and then compare across multiple individuals. Another way is through other devices like MRI, functional, MRI or functional ears. These are different devices that capture the extent to which each of brain cells uses oxygen

02:33 - or hemoglobin same. So based on a, on on this, the brain, these devices can tell whether there is activity in c in a certain areas of the brain. And if there is activity in the same areas of the brain for multiple people, we talk about neuro synchrony. So it goes away from interpersonal synchrony and the biology, biology that I was just Talking now into classic research in business on the effects of charismatic leaders.

03:06 - okay, very different. I'm happy to talk about that. that's more my traditional research and others research. what does it say? Basically, charisma, comes from political science, from old Greek literature and then applied to political science, by Weber talking about, a mechanisms through which you achieve meaning, and through which you un unify the activities of the people. In the seventies, it was imported to business by

03:45 - Robert J. House, and in his classic work on charismatic leadership in organizations, he basically said that CEOs leaders in organizations or just like leaders of countries, you know, they can be charismatic and what does that mean? And in that world, in the business world, you asked the answer is it means that you provide or signal to people a message about values, what we call a value related message.

04:15 - Okay? For example, it's really important to be all, to all work together. It's really important to be innovative. So these are values. So, and when you signal that connects people really, really well. So it's not just conveying a message, but signaling to people a message that they can identify with. And when they identify with the message, they will follow you.

04:39 - They will feel, they will identify with you as a leader. They will also identify with a group more. So it basically creates a group or a collecting of individuals who operate together. That's what's behind the charismatic influence. Okay? the research is problematic only in the sense that it's hard to capture charismatic leadership without, looking at its impact. Okay? So for example, when I'm exciting individuals,

05:14 - that's an action of a leader. But then if the individuals don't perceive me to be charismatic, I'm not charismatic. So is this an outcome of my behavior or is it the actual behavior that we're assessing and it is captured by how other people see? In other words, is charisma a behavior, an act, or action, or is it an attribution by followers? So it's important because then if it is an attribution by followers,

05:47 - it's less clear what the leader needs to do in order to achieve it. And in the business world, you want to provide leaders, managers, executives with rec recommended recipe of action, right? What do you need to do in order to be a good manager? And, so charisma in that sense is less practical than other pro factors. On the other side of it, the, the good side charisma is, has shown that it's a strong, one

06:21 - of the strongest predictors of performance, performance at the individual level, at the team level, and the organizational level, even financial performance, charismatic leadership, as a, a strong effect on synchronizing other people. And because lead followers rally around leaders, they want to emulate leaders. And when they emulate leaders or connect to the leaders really well, they, become one.

06:56 - And this is a major statement by classics. Researchers like Max Weber and, you know, scholars, not researchers like Max Weber and also Bob House and others, but it's never been shown really. it's really hard to test it, right? Because, it happens almost instantaneously. Think about, a crowd in, in a place where leaders are talking to the crowd or trying to convince the crowd to do something,

07:31 - or think about the leader who comes into a room, try to impact the people. All of these things, happen, relatively fast and sometimes without the followers knowing the leader, even. So this Is typical of charismatic leaders, they can be so exciting that people would follow them to a very bad or unfortunate situation. So the question is, why do they follow?

08:02 - I mean, what's the process in which they follow jve? Okay? So if you look back at the, at some TV or, or, or, you know, records of his activities of speeches in front of people and all that, he excited people. I remember if you're seeing some of his, so he excited people. This excitement makes you, that's what we argue in our research, this excitement make you lose yourself as an individual and become part of, of the group, part of the collective.

08:35 - And the question is, how does it happen? We think it happens not just in our attitudes and behaviors to which we are aware of, but it also happens subconsciously automatically without our awareness. so people who are exposed to this kind of charismatically, they're synchronize, synchronize in their, in their brain activity, synchronize in their heart activity, synchronize, in all those aspects of synchrony.

09:05 - I mentioned in the beginning with your first question. And we don't know if for sure we have big studies research, one study we conducted and another study that is related to that, that shows that we are correct at least about heart rate synchrony. So if you are exposed to a charismatic leader, imagine all these people listening to Jve talking about Venezuela and how great it will be. And if you had to assess their heart rate, I would hypothesize it would be relatively similar.

09:39 - So without even knowing their heart rate, E has an impact on making everyone the same and making everyone the same, which was has been an argument of charismatic leaders, like all the way, going back to Gandhi and Hitler and all those charismatic leaders. You see the masses standing in the same way, talking in the same way, moving in the same way. Martin Luther King in the us, all of those leaders who are very charismatic. How does that happen? We don't know.

10:14 - My work is among the first to understand what happens, what happens there. And we show that it's subconscious, it's automatic, it's, it happens instantaneously. and it is, and you almost like under a drug, the influence of a drug, right? I mean, to give you an ex, the best example is you are one person and when you take drugs, you become a different person.

10:39 - And that's a little bit, what's the influence of a leader? So a country like Venezuela, your country was under a drug, under the influence of a drug, so that he didn't really notice what's happening. And it got into huge trouble. And, and, and, and that, that process is, that's very general statement, of course. But that process is what happens when you're under the influence of a leader,

11:06 - a good charismatic leader. Not every leader, a charismatic leader, that's what they do. They basically combine all of our behaviors. They make us feel the same, act the same, and, and think the same. And that could be very dangerous or could also be really good, because if you take people on the same page, they also work much better. They're more effective, there is better performance.

11:31 - Same time. It could be really, really dangerous. And in my research, my future research, a study that we're running in the next fall, we're going to try to look into the difference between the bad charismatics like Chavez or Trump, and the good charismatics that have a more interest in the collective, not just in themselves. They wanna care about the country, the collective, the group, the company, whatever they manage.

12:01 - And, and this is, the difference between the bad charismatic and the good. Charismatic is not obvious. They all look the same, but one leads to trouble and, and disasters like happened in Venezuela or in Germany. Nazi Germany and others lead to success. You know, like other countries or examples of success that there are, there are so many too. So identifying the difference between the good

12:27 - and the bad charisma in advance, not after the fire, not after everything is on fire and everything is destroyed in advance, is a challenge. And that's what my, we believe you can do it or learn about it through biological methods. What I have been doing is looking at executives, not employees, and looking at the extent to which executives psychological characteristics go beyond demographic to predict aspects of performance or aspects of, culture of the company.

13:00 - So for example, there's a lot of work that says that, if you are highly tenured, like you would be many years with the company, your impact as a leader on the company is different than if you are new. If you just move or you just changed, or you if you're old or young, if you are, educated or uneducated. All of those are demographics that people have looked at and try to predict with these leader demographics, some aspects of the company, for example, how much the company is taking risk,

13:34 - how much the company is, financially stable, how much is the company innovative, so on, and whatever. What I have argued together with colleagues of course is, that, it is not enough to look at demographics. You need to look at psychographics or psychological characteristics that go beyond demographics, and you learn much more. For example, you're still thinking about your age or your, experience in the company

14:06 - or the years you spent in the company, your tenure in the company. Look at values if you are conservative, okay? That may explain why. you take a course of action that's less innovative for the company or less risk taking, more than if you're old or young. There is, it's true that there is a correlation between being old and being conservative, but it's not a perfect correlation.

14:35 - Some people are old and not conservative, and some people are young and very conservative. And therefore it's better to look at the real value of what matters to you and not on your demographics. And yes, this is something I've been argued and published on, but not on employees and feet, but on CEOs and their impact on company, on on organizations. And we have a study where we looked at personal values of CEOs.

15:04 - Okay? So for example, you as a CEO, you report that what you care about is security stability. Then we ask people in the company to report, this is a, these are large companies. We ask people in the company to report about the culture of the company. What type of culture is it? Is it very stable bureaucratic culture? Is it more innovative? And so on. And then we look at the financial performance of the firm,

15:34 - and we show that if you are a CEO, who cares for security or different than a CEO, who cares about benevolence or CEO cares about, maybe the word care is not correct. The CEO is who values similar values. Security is different than CEO values, benevolence and CEO values, risk taking or, or, or, making an impact, personal impact, which we call self-direction. Okay? So these CEOs have different impact on the culture of the company, the way people see it,

16:10 - the way other people see it. And, and then in turn, that has an impact. The culture has an impact on the financial performance of the firm. So it's not that if you are A CEO cares for security or less good as compared to A CEO cares about risk taking. Now he just emphasize different things, and this is related to a major argument in my research with others, which is

16:37 - that organizations really reflect their psycho the psychological characteristics of the leaders. And it's an extension of working strategic leadership by Don Hambrick and others who argue that, organizations are reflections of the leaders, but of the demographic characteristics of the leaders. We're saying, no, no, no. Let's look at what psychologically characterizes top leaders and how that changes organizations and their performance.

17:09 - Interesting study that I am on the third author on the first author is Nous Verdict and Show the second author. So, and in that study, what we did is we looked at, again, the same values that I mentioned earlier, personal values, what's important. Personal values is what's important to me, but what's important to me as a leader. And now think about it, many leaders, why do they wanna become leaders? 'cause they seek power right? Now, is it good?

17:39 - Will they be great leaders if they just want power? If they want power, they care about themselves. Power is, is what we call a self enhancing value. Value that makes you feel better about yourself or makes you more, makes you focus on yourself. Also, achievement, right? Both of them are types of self enhancing values. So, and what is the role of leaders to take of the care of themselves or to take care of the other people, to take care of other people, right?

18:14 - So in, in reality, we want leaders who are benevolent, who care about others. But here's the irony. People who care about benevolence are not going to typically seek power position because benevolence and power are negatively correlated. So the world needs people who care about other people, but those people who care about other people are not necessarily seeking powerful positions. So they're not going to be leaders. Do you see the problem?

18:55 - If you look only at benevolence, you would not find effective leadership. If you look only at power, you, you might find leadership, but not necessarily good for the people. If you look at the combination of power and benevolence, you will find the best leaders. This is what we argued, and we studied it on school, school samples, teachers, school principles. We looked at the interactions, statistical interaction

19:22 - between power and benevolence as it predicts processes in the school and the school outcomes, which were assessed by the extent to which, teachers took care of students. Okay? And we show that the best outcomes are a result of the combination of power and.

Faculti AI can make mistakes