Analysis Of The Charismatic Leadership Style Of Adolf Hitler
The key of organizational culture in modern society is to motivate the members of the organization to achieve their goals. There is a need to respond actively to everything and it has become very important to have an upper hand in various situations. But this kind of action is a response not easy. Because there are so many organizations in the world and all members can simultaneously immerse themselves in multiple organizations of different goals, sizes, and personalities.
This means that it is likely that people will be joining different organizations at the same time. The thing to keep in mind here is that all the organizations are have a goal. There is a need for role sharing in any organization to effectively carry out several activities. Such a need naturally for effective coordination of the role requires a leader to lead many organizational members. Sometimes, the organization operates without a leader, but that is only a temporary phenomenon.
The majority of the organization’s leaders have a huge impact on the organization’s operations and on its future as well as on its current prosperity. Therefore, there cannot be an organization that exists continuously without a leader. Briefly summed up leadership, it refers to someone who leads others. In other words, it means a leader. Therefore, leadership is a word that includes the spirit, posture, and qualities that leaders need. Hitler is one of the most famous people in the world. Hitler, one of the worst criminals of the 20th century, was one of the most effective leaders at those times and situation, although he was the one who invaded other countries and massacred many people.
Hitler was one of the key figures in World War II, the president and politician of the Nazis, who was a member of the main Axis Army. Born in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, he served in the German Imperial Army in World War I. After the World war I, he entered the Nazi Party and began his political career. The United States’ Great Depression in October 1929, when Hitler’s Nazi Party was not yet a huge party, greatly increased the number of unemployed people in Germany. Immediately, Germany was thrown into a serious economic panic. The public found someone to relieve their frustration and destitution, and it was Hitler who made good use of it.
Hitler made the Nazi Party the largest political party in Germany by using his speech and propaganda skills to overwhelm the audience against the Germans who were devastated by the defeat of World War I and the Great Depression in the United States. based on this, he became the president of Germany. Hitler, who became Germany’s president, expanded the military and fisheries industry and pushed ahead with his militaristic policies. The passive reaction of the allied forces to avoid war allowed German can absorb neighbouring countries and increase their colonies. But in the wake of Germany’s invasion of Poland, World War II broke out after being declared a war by the Allies. The axis army ended up losing the war, and Hitler committed suicide. Hitler is one of the most famous and worst criminals recorded in history books, and at the same time has shown great leadership.
It is easy to think that Hitler is a leader with transformative leadership. He gave the Germans and his followers a vision of success or achievement and an optimistic outlook. It also raised the overall organizational level and motivated the members to follow the leader’s behaviour. There is the meaning of transformative leadership that ‘Transformational leadership is a leadership style in which leaders encourage, inspire and motivate employees to innovate and create change that will help grow and shape the future success of the company.’ (21, Feb 2018. L1. White, what is transformational leadership?)
If look at the content so far, you can think of Hitler as the owner of transformative leadership. But Hitler is more of a charismatic leader. Meaning of charismatic leadership is that “A charismatic leadership definition is incomplete if it does not focus on the leader personally. More than other popular leadership styles, charismatic leadership depends on the personality and actions of the leader not the process or structure.” (25 Nov 2014. e.g. L22. What is Charismatic Leadership?) There is a reason why Hitler’s leadership is charismatic. Hitler is that there was no personal consideration or intellectual stimulation for the members around him. On the other hand, “He was not a ‘normal’ politician – someone who promises policies like lower taxes and better health care – but a quasi-religious leader who offered almost spiritual goals of redemption and salvation. He was driven forward by a sense of personal destiny he called ‘providence’.” (12 Nov 2012. e.g. L26. Viewpoint: His dark charisma)
So, he did not condone the challenge to the leader’s authority. However, Hitler managed his members with charisma based on his clear goals, vision, and a clear sense of mission, increasing the loyalty and obedience of his members. These actions have strengthened Hitler’s power. Hitler’s leadership had a great influence on bringing the Germans together at the time. Hitler knew how to get people to follow him. He informed the people of their needs through speeches and propaganda, and thus gained popular support.
As a result, Hitler changed Germany and showed the German people and followers a dream of a future united by nationalism. It also means that Hitler has excellent speech and charm. In fact, there is an assessment that Hitler is “He learned how to become a charismatic speaker, and people for whatever reason, became enamoured with him. People were most willing to follow him because he seemed to have the right answers in a time of enormous economic upheaval.’ (14 May 2015. Macias. L11. Why Hitler was such a successful orator) Since Hitler taking power, Hitler has shown many economic and political changes to make Germany a great power in Europe again, and in fact, Germany has become a great power in Europe. That’s why in Germany and the occupied territories, the people cooperated without blame with Hitler, even if the Nazis and Hitler committed genocide such as oppression and exploitation of the immigrants and the Holocaust. That’s because, as a result, Hitler’s leadership has led him to support the Nazi Party and Hitler, no matter what the circumstances would be.
Hitler was clearly the kind of leader Germany needed at the time. However, he ends up losing the war. As a result, he has shown leadership that has failed. Hitler tried to concentrate decision-making on himself and supervise the details, even though he was far from the battlefield. The motive for Hitler to use this method is the leader principle (The Führerprinzip). Leader principle (The Führerprinzip) is that “Ultimate authority rested with him and extended downward. At each level, the superior was to give the orders, the subordinates to follow them to the letter.” (30 Mar 2011. Megargee. L12. History – World Wars: Hitler’s Leadership Style)
The biggest problem that has been shown by the Leader Principle is the Battle of Stalin, one of the decisive causes of Germany’s defeat to the Allies in World War II. Battle of Stalin is that “The Battle of Stalingrad was a brutal military campaign between Russian forces and those of Nazi Germany and the Axis powers during World War II.” (6 June 2019. e.g. L1. Battle of Stalingrad) Also, “Battle of Stalingrad (one of Russia’s important industrial cities) ultimately turned the tide of World War II in favor of the Allied forces.” (6 June 2019. e.g. L13. Battle of Stalingrad) At first, the reason Germany lost to the Allies is that the organization does not work normally in the absence of a leader. Hitler was to have had authority and responsibility for all the battles himself. In World War II, unlike now, was not as fast in the movement of the information of the battlefield or information of battle. Therefore Hitler, in areas far from the battlefield, couldn’t respond quickly to all the information. This means that, during the continuing battle of Stalin, Hitler was in an area far from the battlefield when the Soviet army began to raid the German army and was unable to respond properly to the crisis. This is different point from the Allies army.
The Allies shared their roles thoroughly through the division of responsibilities. In other words, unlike the Germans, who make decisions through Hitler, the Allies were able to operate at the commander’s discretion. This means that they can respond quickly and operate while war. As a result, the fighting power of the army was greatly affected, and this was a big factor in Hitler’s defeat in the war. The second is the conceited leader. A conceited leader evaluates and decides everything with his own thoughts and experiences. As a result, it ignores the opinions of the people around it and requires only of following the leader’s opinion. This is clearly show in Stalin’s battle. Hitler was far from the scene, was not aware of the fear of winter in Russia. If Hitler had been a field commander or one who had listened to the opinions of his staff, he could have created another militant aspect in the battle with the Soviet army and produced different results.
If Hitler had used transformation leadership when he started the war, history might have changed. First, transformation leadership has the advantage of delegating important decision-making authority to members of the organization. This, as explained earlier, is of great help to the improvement of the unit’s combat capability in that it can respond at the commander’s discretion to the situation where it is necessary to respond immediately on the spot. Based on these merits, if Hitler gave all decision-making authority at his discretion to the commander, he might not have fought the Stalin War in winter, and consequently not lost. In other words, history may have changed. Finally, innovative leadership has the effect of improving the potential and skills of the members of the organization. This also means that it can produce higher levels of results.
Hitler’s charismatic leadership has both merits and demerits. But Hitler’s charismatic leadership certainly helped turn Germany, which lost World War I, into a European power again. Hitler’s speech and propaganda skills have strengthened Hitler’s support base, and his charismatic leadership has made Hitler’s. However, think the problem is that charismatic leadership was highly dependent on leaders. As a result, think Hitler’s charismatic leadership in German society has demonstrated both the limitations and possibilities that it has. Also, it shows the possibility of transformative leadership at the same time.
Cite this Essay
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below