Masalah kepemimpinan merupakan topik yang sangat menarik untuk terus dibicarakan, didiskusikan dan dikaji sepanjang abad ini. Hal ini tidak aneh karena sejak adanya manusia dimuka bumi ini sejak zaman Adam hingga sekarang manusia selalu bersentuhan dengan yang namanya kepemimpinan. Kenapa? Karena manusia, sebagai makhluk sosial, selalu hidup berkelompok, saling berinteraksi dan mempunyai tujuan bersama yang akan dicapai. Tujuan antara manusia satu dan lainnya tentu saja berbeda, tetapi ada satu atau beberapa tujuan bersama yang menyatukan kelompok manusia tersebut sehingga mereka bersatu dan bersama-sama bekerja untuk mencapai tujuan bersama tersebut. Terus, dimana dong urgensinya mengenai kepemimpinan? Nah, untuk mencapai tujuan bersama tersebut diperlukan seorang pemimpin yang bisa memimpin, mengkoordinir dan memandu kelompok manusia tersebut agar bekerja lebih efektif dan efisien. Makanya tidak aneh kalau setiap kelompok manusia selalu mempunyai pemimpinnya sendiri-sendiri, baik dari pemimpin sekelas pemimpin RT, pemimpin kampung, pemimpin desa maupun pemimpin negara, bahkan pemimpin dunia sekalipun. Seperti Pak Karmin ketua RT saya, Pak Sri Sultan gubernur kita, Pak SBY presiden kita hingga Raja Iskandar Agung (the Great Alexander) pemimpin dunia pada masanya, bahkan saya sendiri adalah juga seorang pemimpin buat istri dan anak-anak saya (kecuali yang belum nikah lho…contohnya Mas Farhan + Mas Wahju di kelas kita yang belum juga laku-laku).Jadi jelas bahwa tiap-tiap kelompok manusia dari level keluarga hingga level dunia sekalipun pasti membutuhkan seorang pemimpin. Yang menjadi pertanyaan sekarang, kenapa ada pemimpin yang sukses dalam memimpin kelompoknya, sebagai contoh adalah Fatahillah (Falatehan) yang sukses memimpin pasukan perangnya menyerbu Batavia dan mendirikan kota Jayakarta atau dalam lingkup yang kecil adalah keberhasilan Pak Karmin dalam memimpin warga RT-nya sehingga RT tersebut bersih, aman, makmur dan penuh keakraban. Disisi lain kenapa ada pemimpin yang gagal dan buruk hasilnya dalam memimpin kelompoknya, sebagai contoh adalah Gamal Abdul Nasser presiden Mesir yang membawa Negara Mesir ke kancah perpecahan diantara rakyatnya dan menjadikan ekonomi Mesir makin parah, atau dalam lingkup lebih kecil lagi adalah si Situmorang (maaf…bukan sara lho ya..) yang menjadikan keluarganya seperti hidup dalam neraka karena ulah Situmorang yang tidak bertanggung jawab, pemabuk, penjudi, suka memukul istri, menghajar anaknya dan tidak pernah memberikan nafkah buat keluarga yang dipimpinnya.Jawaban atas persoalan diatas dapat ditemukan dalam bahasan mengenai masalah kepemimpinan. Gaya memimpin dan perilaku pemimpin merupakan dua hal yang sangat menentukan keberhasilan dalam memimpin kelompoknya.Menurut teori ciri kepemimpinan, ciri kepribadian, sosial, fisik dan intelektual yang menentukan keberhasilan seorang pemimpin. Berdasarkan riset yang telah dilakukan para ahli, terdapat 6 (enam) ciri pemimpin yang menentukan keberhasilan dalam memimpin, yaitu adanya ambisi dan energi, hasrat untuk memimpin, kejujuran dan integritas, percaya diri, kecerdasan dan pengetahuan yang relevan dengan pekerjaan. Kesimpulan yang dapat diambil, menurut teori ciri ini, bahwa kepemimpinan cenderung merupakan bakat yang diturunkan melalui gen. Jika anda berasal dari keluarga pemimpin atau ada garis keturunan dari pemimpin sukses maka berbahagialah!! Anda punya kemungkinan untuk jadi seorang pemimpin juga! Tapi jangan harap anda dapat menjadi pemimpin yang sukses jika bukan berasal dari keturunan orang-orang yang punya bakat jadi seorang

pemimpin.Sedangkan menurut teori perilaku, kepemimpinan merupakan suatu hal yang dapat dipelajari. Jika anda bukan berasal dari keluarga pemimpin atau keturunan dari para pemimpin sukses maka jangan berkecil hati! Anda masih punya harapan untuk menjadi seorang pemimpin yang sukses, asalkan anda mau mempelajari segala sesuatu yang diperlukan untuk menjadi seorang pemimpin yang sukses. Jadi menurut teori perilaku ini, kita dapat mencetak para pemimpin handal melalui metode pelatihan tertentu, sebanyak jumlah yang dibutuhkan.Ada satu hal lagi yang menurut penulis sangat menentukan keberhasilan seorang pemimpin, yaitu karisma. Karisma adalah suatu pesona seorang pemimpin dimata konstituennya yang menjadikan mereka mau dan dengan senang hati dipimpin oleh pemimpin tersebut.Karisma yang sebenarnya (asli)Yang dimaksud dengan karisma yang sebenarnya adalah kondisi riil tentang pesona pribadi seorang pemimpin. Pesona pribadi ini dikaitkan dengan kepribadian yang mengesankan, penampilan fisik yang menarik, daya empati kepada konstituennya, kedekatan dan keakraban dengan rakyatnya, pengorbanan nya dan memperjuangkan aspirasi pengikutnya.Contoh riil karisma yang sebenarnya melekat pada pemimpin ini adalah kisah Nabi Musa. Bagaimana Nabi Musa sangat dicintai oleh Bani Israil, pengikutnya, karena pengorbanan dan perjuangan beliau dalam membela rakyat yang dipimpinnya. Contoh lain adalah kisah Panglima Besar Jenderal Soedirman, sang panglima perang bangsa Indonesia dalam melawan penjajahan Belanda era tahun 40-an, yang sangat dekat dengan rakyat dan dicintai oleh rakyatnya. Kenapa beliau sangat dicintai oleh rakyat? Karismanya memancar karena pribadi beliau yang menarik, penuh empati dengan rakyat, dan perjuangan beliau demi rakyat yang dipimpinnya dalam melepaskan diri dari penjajahan Belanda. Atau contoh lain lagi adalah cerita tentang tetangga saya yang bernama Pak Yusuf, penjaga masjid kampung saya. Walaupun beliau bukan orang terkenal tetapi beliau orang yang sangat baik. Wajahnya tampan dan berseri-seri, selalu murah senyum, ringan tangan, gaya bicaranya mempesona, empati dengan tetangga, bertanggung jawab dan mempunyai talenta kuat untuk memimpin. Sehingga semua orang kampung hormat, cinta dan menyayanginya.Karisma imitasiYang dimaksud dengan karisma imitasi adalah karisma yang berusaha dilekatkan pada seseorang dengan berbagai macam cara walaupun sebenarnya orang tersebut tidak mempunyai kekuatan kepribadian yang memancarkan karisma yang sesungguhnya. Jadi sebenarnya orang tersebut tidak mempunyai sifat-sifat pribadi yang memunculkan karisma, tetapi dengan bantuan orang lain dan dengan cara-cara tertentu berusaha dipublikasikan kepada pengikut atau rakyatnya tentang karisma tokoh tersebut. Untuk kondisi sekarang, cara yang paling efektif adalah dengan memanfaatkan jaringan media massa secara intens.Contoh untuk kondisi ini adalah kisah Megawati Soekarno Putri. Secara jujur kita mengetahui bahwa secara riil sebenarnya Megawati tidak memiliki karisma yang sebenarnya. Beliau tidak mempunyai kekuatan pribadi yang memancarkan pesona karisma sebagai seorang pemimpin. Namun dalam kondisi nyata beliau dianggap sebagai seorang pemimpin yang mempunyai karisma sangat besar di mata rakyatnya. Mengapa

hal ini dapat terjadi? Jawabannya jelas, bahwa karisma ini merupakan karisma imitasi yang secara sengaja berusaha dilekatkan pada figur Megawati dengan bantuan media massa sebagaimana yang telah penulis paparkan diatas. Begitu juga dengan kasus kekarismaan Gus Dur yang juga berusaha dilekatkan pada tokoh tersebut dengan diembel-embeli cerita tentang ke”wali”an Gus Dur.Dari penjelasan diatas yang membedakan antara karisma yang sebenarnya dan karisma imitasi tersebut, dapat dijelaskan pertanyaan diatas mengenai karisma Hitler, Napoleon Bonaparte, dan tokoh-tokoh lainnya. Kesimpulannya tokoh-tokoh tersebut dianggap mempunyai karisma tinggi di mata pengikutnya, padahal itu hanyalah karisma imitasi yang berusaha dilekatkan dengan berbagai macam cara.Setelah pembahasan mengenai karisma tersebut, sekarang muncul lagi beberapa pertanyaan terkait dengan karisma dan kepemimpinan. Pertanyaannya adalah, apakah seorang pemimpin yang sukses itu harus mempunyai karisma yang tinggi? Dan apakah seseorang yang mempunyai karisma yang tinggi itu bisa menjadi seorang pemimpin yang terkenal?Seorang pemimpin tidak harus mempunyai karisma yang tinggi. Karisma hanyalah salah satu dari syarat untuk menjadi pemimpin. Bisa jadi seseorang menjadi pemimpin hanya karena faktor keturunan yang mewarisi kepemimpinannya dari orangtuanya, misalnya kasus tentang para raja zaman dahulu yang umumnya mewariskan tahtanya kepada anaknya. Atau bisa juga seseorang menjadi pemimpin karena secara kebetulan saja.Belum tentu juga seseorang yang mempunyai karisma yang tinggi dapat menjadi pemimpin yang sukses. Karena kepemimpinan bukan hanya ditentukan oleh karisma saja. Sebagai contoh adalah kisah Pak Yusuf diatas. Secara pribadi beliau mempunyai karisma yang tinggi, tetapi beliau bukan seorang tokoh atau pemimpin, dia hanyalah seorang penjaga masjid.Jika seseorang mempunyai karisma tinggi dan memegang jabatan sebagai seorang pemimpin, dia mempunyai peluang yang besar untuk menjadi seorang pemimpin yang sukses. Namun diatas pemimpin yang sukses masih ada level yang lebih tinggi lagi buat pemimpin yang sukses, yaitu menjadi seorang pahlawan. Seorang pahlawan mempunyai jasa yang sangat besar terhadap rakyatnya dan akan terus diingat oleh rakyat yang dipimpinnya hingga beberapa generasi bahkan akan terus hidup dihati generasi sesudahnya. Untuk menjadi seorang pahlawan tidak cukup dengan syarat-syarat menjadi pemimpin diatas, namun diperlukan kondisi khusus yang akan dapat menjadikan seorang pemimpin itu pahlawan. Sejarah hanya menyediakan sedikit peluang dan kesempatan buat para pemimpin untuk menjadi seorang pahlawanAndakah Sang Pahlawan itu ????Catatan : tulisan ini dibuat secara obyektif dan murni untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa bermaksud untuk menyudutkan atau memberikan stigma kepada seseorang atau sekelompok masyarakat tertentu.

Charismatic leaders lead with 'concern for people' and don't 'concern over production'. They are concerned with the needs of their subordinates and accept inputs from them. They are determined to create a comfortable, friendly organization and believe such environment will lead to efficient work and results.

For charismatic leadership are not always needed to achieve high work performance from employees. They are mainly required when launching a new product, bringing company through a crisis. As they may bring the company better employee esteem but not improve company profits permanently.

Charismatic Leader is not always desirable. Firstly, such leader might not always be needed to achieve high levels of employee performance. They are most appropriate when the followers. Charismatic leader may not handle the entire production process for production industrial company. It may only handle the major crisis issued.

Pros of Charismatic Leaders

Charismatic leaders have the ability to sense the gap that exists between what an organization is delivering to its followers and what the followers need from an organization.  This allows the leader to create a vision of a future state that everyone believes will be better than today's environment.

The charismatic leader often articulates this vision using metaphors and stories in ways that everyone can understand the vision.  The followers see the leader as one that possesses the ability to visualize the future with clarity.  The followers are also able to see how they fit into this future state and believe it will be better than today.

Since follower can see themselves in this future vision, they support the goals of the organization and the leaders more readily.  Rather than resorting to coercion, the charismatic leader builds trust among the followers.

Cons of Charismatic Leaders

Charismatic leaders achieve their vision through persistence and personal sacrifice.  These leaders become role models for their organizations. And, since followers share in the vision, they are empowered to make decisions that move the organization more quickly towards the goal.

Some followers may find this transformation uncomfortable and disruptive to the workplace or to them personally.  Others may have difficultly relating to the leader's vision of the future.  Charismatic leaders also rely heavily on their personal charm and perceptions - which could be significantly influenced by rumors or "negative press."

Examples of Charismatic Leaders

History has painted a picture of former Presidents that have been both charming and charismatic. However, there have also been charismatic leaders with less honorable intentions - even outlaws.

  Additional Resources

Affiliative Leaders Autocratic Leadership Authoritative Leaders Charismatic Leaders  

Coaching Leadership

John F. Kennedy

Arguably the most charismatic President of the United States, John F. Kennedy came from a powerful family and was blessed with good looks in addition to his personal charisma.

Due to the charismatic and stylish couple - John and Jackie - the Kennedy White House became known as Camelot.  Alan Jay Lerner, Kennedy's Harvard classmate, even wrote a hit song "Camelot" for the Broadway musical, which was a personal favorite of President Kennedy.

Charles Manson

When we mentioned earlier that charismatic leaders could also use their influence for less-than-honorable purposes, the classic example of this abuse is Charles Manson.

Some people believe it was a combination of the drug LSD coupled with Manson's charismatic personality that allowed him to manipulate others.  In the end Susan Atkins along with other members of the Manson family were found guilty of the murder of the 26-year-old movie actress Sharon Tate and four others.

Charismatic Leaders in the Workplace

Charismatic leaders in the workplace can sometimes make a difference for a company.  Other companies will do just find without such a leader.  As has been mentioned in previous articles, the situational leadership abilities of the leader are the important factor in determining success.  When place in certain conditions, charismatic leaders can help to transform a company.

In fact, charismatic qualities are very similar to those found in transformational leadership roles.  Charismatic leaders can lead organizations into new areas, inspire followers and sometimes even obtain extraordinary performance results from an organization.  First described by Max Weber in 1947 as one of three leadership styles - Bureaucratic, Traditional and Charismatic - the study of this style later evolved with the thoughts of Burns into a transformational leader.

Whether you think Weber or Burns is correct in their model of leadership styles is not important, what is important is to understand what characteristics charismatic leaders practice or possess. There appear to be at least four stages in the evolution of a charismatic leader and they achieve these results by appealing to the followers in very simple ways.  When the charismatic leader finally achieves the status of "hero" the organization is likely to have been rescued.

The sociologist Max Weber defined charismatic authority as "resting on devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him." Charismatic authority is one of

three forms of authority laid out in Weber's tripartite classification of authority, the other two being traditional authority and rational-legal authority. The concept has acquired wide usage among sociologists.

Contents

[hide] 1 Characteristics

o 1.1 Routinizing charisma 2 Application of Weber's theories 3 See also 4 References

5 External links

[edit] Characteristics

In his writings about charismatic authority, Weber applies the term charisma to "a certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader [...] How the quality in question would be ultimately judged from an ethical, aesthetic, or other such point of view is naturally indifferent for the purpose of definition."[1]

Charismatic authority is 'power legitimized on the basis of a leader's exceptional personal qualities or the demonstration of extraordinary insight and accomplishment, which inspire loyalty and obedience from followers'.[2] As such, it rests almost entirely on the leader; the absence of that leader for any reason can lead to the authority's power dissolving. However, due to its idiosyncratic nature and lack of formal organization, charismatic authority depends much more strongly on the perceived legitimacy of the authority than Weber’s other forms of authority. For instance, a charismatic leader in a religious context might require an unchallenged belief that the leader has been touched by God, in the sense of a guru or prophet.[3] Should the strength of this belief fade, the power of the charismatic leader can fade quickly, which is one of the ways in which this form of authority shows itself to be unstable. In contrast to the current popular use of the term charismatic leader, Weber saw charismatic authority not so much as character traits of the charismatic leader but as a relationship between the leader and his followers — much in the same way that Freud would transform Gustave Le Bon's crowd psychology through the notion of identification and of an Ideal of the Ego. The validity of charism is founded on its "recognition" by the leader's followers (or "adepts" - Anhänger). This recognition "is not (in authentic charism) the grounds of legitimity, but a duty, for those who are chosen, in virtue of this call and of its confirmation, to recognize this quality. "Recognition" which is, psychologically, a completely personal abandon, full of faith,

born either from enthusiasm or from necessity and hope. No prophet has seen his quality as depending from the crowd's opinion towards himself", although his charisma risks disappearing if he is "abandoned by God" or if "his government doesn't provide any prosperity to those whom he dominates".

Note that a Weber-style charismatic leader need not be a positive force;[4]Furthermore, sociology is axiologically neutral (Wertfreie Soziologie) towards various forms of charismatic domination: it does not differentiate between the charisma of a Berserker, of a shaman or of that displayed by Kurt Eisner. For Weber, sociology considers these types of charismatic domination in "an identical manner to the charisma of heroes, prophets, the "greatest saviours according to common appreciation".

Other terms used are "charismatic domination"[5] and "charismatic leadership".[6]

[edit] Routinizing charisma

Charismatic authority almost always evolves in the context of boundaries set by traditional or rational (legal) authority, but by its nature tends to challenge this authority and is thus often seen as revolutionary.[7][8] However, the constant challenge that charismatic authority presents to a particular society will eventually subside as it is incorporated into that society. The way in which this happens is called routinization.

Routinization is the process by which ‘charismatic authority is succeeded by a bureaucracy controlled by a rationally established authority or by a combination of traditional and bureaucratic authority’ (Turner, Beeghley, and Powers, 1995 cited in Kendal et al. 2000). For example, Muhammad, who had charismatic authority as "The Prophet" among his followers, was succeeded by the traditional authority and structure of Islam, a clear example of routinization.

Some leaders may employ various tools to create and extend their charismatic authority; for example utilizing the science of public relations.

As in the example of Christianity, a religion which evolves its own priesthood and establishes a set of laws and rules is likely to lose its charismatic character and move towards another type of authority upon the removal of that leader.

In politics, charismatic rule is often found in various authoritarian states, autocracies, dictatorships and theocracies. In order to help to maintain their charismatic authority, such regimes will often establish a vast personality cult, which can be seen as an attempt to gain legitimacy by an appeal to other forms of authority. When the leader of such a state dies or leaves office and a new charismatic leader does not appear, such a regime is likely to fall shortly thereafter unless it has become fully routinized.

[edit] Application of Weber's theories

Weber’s model of charismatic leadership giving way to institutionalization is endorsed by several academic sociologists, such as Eileen Barker. In a book written for the general public Barker discusses the tendency for new religious movements to have founders or leaders who wield considerable charismatic authority and are believed to have special powers or knowledge. Charismatic leaders are unpredictable, Barker says, for they are not bound by tradition or rules and they may be accorded by their followers the right to pronounce on all aspects of their lives. Barker warns that in these cases the leader may lack any accountability, require unquestioning obedience, and encourage a dependency upon the movement for material, spiritual and social resources.[9] George D. Chryssides asserts that not all new religious movements have charismatic leaders, and that there are differences in the hegemonic styles among those movements that do.[10]

Len Oakes, an Australian psychologist who wrote a dissertation about charisma, had eleven charismatic leaders fill in a psychometric test, which he called the adjective checklist, and found them as a group quite ordinary. Following the psychoanalyst Heinz Kohut, Oakes argues that charismatic leaders exhibit traits of narcissism and also argues that they display an extraordinary amount of energy, accompanied by an inner clarity unhindered by the anxieties and guilt that afflict more ordinary people. He did however not fully follow Weber's framework of charismatic authority.[11]

he charismatic leader is perhaps the most exciting as his leadership abilities are often attributed to strong character, feats of great strength and heroism or divine guidance.

The Charismatic Leader

Most charismatic leaders posses similar traits and behavioral characteristics.  Many are seen to have almost supernatural powers and are worshipped by their followers.  We see this in many of the better-known evangelical leaders such as the Reverend Billy Graham or Joel Osteen.  In addition these leaders tend to generate almost instantaneous trust amongst their followers such as Ghandi or Martin Luther King.  Finally they earn their leadership not because they hold an important position in a company or government but because of their ability to attract followers naturally.

The Positive Traits of the Charismatic Leader

Most charismatic leaders are able to get others to understand their vision or goals through the use of simple stories that everyone can comprehend.  And more importantly, charismatic leadership allows the followers to clearly see their glorious place within this vision so they are more likely to vigorously defend their leader.  The charismatic leader uses his charm, imagination, and inspiration to build a utopian future.

The Negative Traits of a Charismatic Leader

Charismatic leadership can also have its bad side.  Many of these leaders can only achieve their goals through extreme personal sacrifice.  Oftentimes family members suffer so that the leader may succeed.  In addition a charismatic leader will usually try to

move quickly to her goal.  This can cause discomfort amongst some of her followers who feel she is moving to fast.  This could lead to disgruntled “ex-follower” who can promote bad press that places the leader in a bad light.

Two Extremes

One of the most positive charismatic leaders in history is Mahatma Ghandi.  By maintaining his humility and setting an example of integrity, honesty and peaceful civil disobedience he was able to achieve India’s independence.  

A very negative example of a charismatic leader is Adolph Hitler.  His ability to sway followers to his way of thinking was exemplified in his speeches regarding his vision of a master race.  He could talk to thousands of people at once at you could hear a pin drop the audience was so mesmerized by his words.

Business and Charisma

Charismatic leadership in business can have its pros and cons.  A charismatic leader is an excellent choice for a business that is forced to dramatically change its vision.  Perhaps its primary product is no longer as popular as it once was and the company is forced to look for another product to keep it profitable.  A charismatic leader is able to inspire and motivate its employees to readily accept this change.

A major problem with charismatic leaders is finding a successor to carry on the same vision with as much fervor and desire.  In addition a charismatic leader motivates by force of personality.  He might not possess other traits that are needed to be an effective leader once the vision is achieved. Weber, Maximillan. Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Chapter: "The Nature of Charismatic Authority and its Routinization" translated by A. R. Anderson and Talcott Parsons, 1947. Originally published in 1922 in German under the title Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft chapter III, § 10 (available online)Original German: "»Charisma« soll eine als außeralltäglich (ursprünglich, sowohl bei Propheten wie bei therapeutischen wie bei Rechts-Weisen wie bei Jagdführern wie bei Kriegshelden: als magisch bedingt) geltende Qualität einer Persönlichkeit heißen, um derentwillen sie als mit übernatürlichen oder übermenschlichen oder mindestens spezifisch außeralltäglichen, nicht jedem andern zugänglichen Kräften oder Eigenschaften oder als gottgesandt oder als vorbildlich und deshalb als »Führer« gewertet wird." ^ Kendall, Diana, Jane Lothian Murray, and Rick Linden. Sociology in our time (2nd ed.), 2000. Scarborough, On: Nelson, 438-439. ^ Charismatic Authority: Emotional Bonds Between Leaders and Followers ^ International Encyclopedia of Economic Sociology By Jens Beckert, Milan Zafirovski, Published by Routledge, 2006, ISBN 0415286735, 9780415286732, pag. 53 ^ Power, Domination, Legitimation, and Authority Sociology 250 Retrieved October 2006

^ Adair-Toteff, Christopher, Max Weber’s Charisma, Journal of Classical Sociology, Vol. 5, No. 2, 189-204 (2005) ^ WEBER LINKS page http ^ Kunin, Seth D. "Religion; the modern theories" University of Edinburgh 2003 ISBN 0748615229 page 40 ^ Barker, E. New Religious Movements: A Practical Introduction (1990), Bernan Press, ISBN 0-11-340927-3 ^ Chryssides, George D. Unrecognized charisma? A study and comparison of four charismatic leaders: Charles Taze Russell, Joseph Smith, L Ron Hubbard, Swami Prabhupada. Paper presented at the 2001 International Conference The Spiritual Supermarket: Religious Pluralism in the 21st Century, organised by INFORM and CESNUR (London, April 19-22, 2001). Available online ^ Oakes, Len: Prophetic Charisma: The Psychology of Revolutionary Religious Personalities, 1997, ISBN 0-8156-0398-3