Sarah Coronado

June 19, 2011

From Corporations to Utopia: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Successful Leadership

As we read Utopian literature and investigate the real-life experimental communities that have been started up across the nation, we naturally become interested in studying the individuals who make up these societies and their motivations for doing so. There is a drive in human nature, often times “spurred by high hope or deep despair,” to seek a better way of living and a better society (Bach 181). Experimental communities seem to be “projects of people who [insist] that in the greater world, the world of governments and power politics, secularism, materialism, and competition, there [is] too great a gap between the rich and the poor, the talented and the talentless, the seemingly wise and the seemingly foolish. They [feel] that the good Lord wanted it differently and that man, somehow, had failed His purpose” (179). These alternative societies crop up again and again in American society and though they most often fail, “they reflect something in the life of each of us ... when we draw a mental blueprint for our own utopia and wonder why in the world it cannot quite come true” (181). This human desire for something utopian--something better than what we have now--led me to speculate as to the characteristics of those individuals who actually set out to construct their blueprint. What are the characteristics of such leaders? For surely they are leaders; they are instigators of change and the society they envision garners response, support, and a following, albeit in most cases, a short lived one. What they offer is an idea that, in the earliest stages is one that is often intangible, still activates our desire for a better life. Here, I investigate how it is that these leaders are successful.

My research into communal leadership was a rocky one in the beginning. I wanted to understand how communal societies (be it utopian or experimental/cult groups) gather followers and believers by studying leadership through an interdisciplinary lens. Cult leaders are often seen merely as negative influences and it is easy to approach experimental community leaders in a similar fashion. By studying human leadership within a different frame, we can remove some of the preconceptions and move closer towards understanding how these cult or utopian leaders are actually successful in establishing alternative societies. I sought to take a psychological approach to leadership (and to be honest, with some of my own biases already in mind), but as I repeatedly hit a brick wall and had to widen my search area (as fate often times seems to respond to our biases), I stumbled down an interesting avenue, one that I could not believe took me so long to seek out: corporate organizations. Take a leap of faith with me, as I know some have prejudices towards corporations (and the capitalism they immediately want to envision surging out of them like a cankerous sore), and view it as contrary to utopian society.  However, corporations often go through reorganizations that mirror the restructuring of society by utopia-seeking leaders. In the midst of this reorganization, corporations elicit the help of certain types of leaders. It is through the study of corporation reorganizations and successful “change” leaders, that I hoped would help me to understand utopian leadership.

            There are two types of corporate reorganizations that often take place in response to “great uncertainty and difficulty” within the company or market or “after a significant decline in performance” (Conger 8).  These are re-creations and re-orientations. In terms of our course, we can connect this idea of reorganization to the desire for a utopic change in society, perhaps in response to a millennial event. Beginning with re-creations, I found that research suggests this type of reorganization to be the most risky due to the fact that it is “initiated under crisis conditions and under sharp time constraints”. Furthermore, they “almost always involve a change in core values” and as core values “are most resistant to change, re-creations always trigger substantial individual resistance to change and heightened political behavior”. We can understand the re-creation of a business’ organizational model as the establishing of a utopia, especially when we view utopias as a reaction to a millennial event that has necessitated an immediate and quick response. On the other hand, re-orientations are more reflective of the establishment of a communal or cult society. Re-orientations are more successful endeavors because they have the “luxury of time to shape the change, build coalitions, and empower individuals to be effective in the new organization” (Nadler 105). Similarly, the leader of a communal or cult society has the luxury of crystalizing (and selling) unorthodox ideals. We can also understand the success rate of communal societies over utopias (what they call: re-orientations over re-creations) as the former being something that is at least attempted, where the latter, utopia, is (so far) only a work of fiction. Just as important as understanding the different approaches to reorganizing, scholars have necessitated the role of leaders to carry out these changes. Research “is quite consistent on at least one aspect of effective system-wide change - namely, executive leadership matters” (103). In the midst of a failing business or a failing society, it is necessary that someone (of even a small group of “someones”) steers the organization toward the path of recovery.

            Interestingly, several types of leaders are found to be successful in navigating organizational or social change. The first, and one we most readily recognize, is the charismatic leader. These leaders “are by vocation change agents ... they see the shortcomings of any situation” and their “dissatisfaction with the status quo is a restless energy” within them (Conger 4). In regards to their subordinates, they “seem to create love/hate feelings ... they are tough and demanding, yet the reward of their praise is so confirming that subordinates describe it as an ‘emotional high’ and, therefore, work hard for their leader’s commendation” (7). Charismatic leaders are best applied “in times of great uncertainty and difficulty” because they have the ability to persuade their subordinates “to take actions outside the bounds of anything they have done before ... to invest inordinate effort in projects advocated by the leader” (Conger 8, Mumford 6). Their success at attaining this level of devotion is widely attributed to their use of strategically-developed and widely-disseminated visions, “positive image[s] of the future” (Mumford 6). The vision “becomes a beacon for subordinates and indeed for an organization searching to adapt to an uncertain world” (Conger 5). The charismatic leader becomes a preacher of sorts, preaching the gospel of his vision and converting the masses. The vision persuades followers in a number of ways. First, it gives “a sense of personal meaning that both explains events and helps establish a sense of identity”. Second, visioning articulates “emotionally evocative images” that “motivates followers” as well as creates “a shared experience and a shared future” (note that the identity established in the first task is established as a communal identity). Third, visions suggest “a path that will allow resolution of current social problems and tensions,” offering hope. And finally, “as followers apply a vision they will begin to make decisions in a manner consistent with the vision” (Mumford 6). The vision of a charismatic leader seems utopian because it covers all the bases. It accounts for and relieves the stress and strain of either a business or social tragedy, while giving hope of a strong and protective future. The power of a transmittable and transferrable vision seems to ensure, to a tremendous degree, the success of charismatic leadership.

            Additionally, there are two other types of leadership that are equally noteworthy. The instrumental leader can be seen as the right-hand to the charismatic leader. Where the charismatic leader “excites individuals, shapes their aspirations, and directs their energy,” the instrumental leader sustains these patterns of desired behavior through the use of structuring teams, controlling behavior and results, and administering rewards and punishments. The instrumental leader plays a tremendous role in the day-to-day mundane activities such as “allocation of time, shaping of physical settings, use of events such as lunches or meetings, creating heros”. When controlled, these activities serve as a “powerful determinant of behavior” (Mumford 109-10). Where the charismatic leader constructs ideals, the instrumental leader aids in institutionalizing their fulfillment. Such leaders and institutionalizations have not been missing in our literary utopias and work towards the secure the same goal. The other significant leadership model is the ideological leader. This leader also presents his subordinates or followers with a vision, but it is one “that appeals to the virtues of the past rather than the future” (8). We can similarly define this as nostalgia for the past and as such, see ideological leadership as a powerful influence in breaking free from a dystopia.

            I am amazed at the similarities found between the leaders of corporation organizations and those of literary utopias and real-life experimental societies. The tactics of corporate leadership grants a tremendous amount of insight into the initial success of populating communal societies. What is not accounted for, however; is the ultimate disintegration of these communal societies that seems absolutely inevitable in most cases. I believe the answer to this could be found in a study of the personalities and characteristics of the followers being recruited. More to the point, while corporations encourage a communal identity within the workplace, a separate individual identity remains waiting for the employee outside of the office. In Utopian and experimental societies, the room for individuality seems to be far more encumbered. Perhaps it is here that the idealized fabrics of experimental societies, though carefully woven by its leaders, begin to unravel.

Works Cited

Bach, Marcus. Strange Sects and Curious Cults. New York: Dodd, Meed & Company, 1962. Print.

Conger, Jay A. The Charismatic Leader: Behind the Mystique of Exceptional Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1989. Print.

Mumford, Michael D. Pathways to Outstanding Leadership: A Comparative Analysis of Charismatic, Ideological, and Pragmatic Leaders. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, 2006. Print.

Nadler, David A., and Michael L. Tushman. “Beyond the Charismatic Leader: Leadership and Organizational Change.” The Human Side of Managing Technological Innovation: A Collection of Readings. 2nd ed. Ed. Ralph Katz. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. 103-17. Print.