What Is Leadership Presence (Part 2)?

In part 2, James Scouller, author of the book The Three Levels of Leadership, continues his look at this elusive characteristic of great leaders, leadership presence.  This time he compares presence to charisma.  He argues that the difference between them matters because it shows in the leader’s behaviour under pressure.

Recap on Part 1

As I said in part 1, the root of presence is inner wholeness.  I explained that wholeness stems from – and indeed is – a positive inner alignment of one’s sense of identity, purpose and feelings about life and oneself.  It frees us from limiting beliefs, releases us from fear and expresses itself as an unusual combination of inner peace and vitality.

I also pointed out that for some people, the word “charisma” includes the quality of presence, but that’s not how I use it here.  I use it to mean a combination of outer charm, power and persuasiveness.

Thus, a leader with presence may or may not have charisma and it’s also true that a charismatic leader won’t always have presence.  That’s because presence is not the same as charisma. I see presence is an inner psychospiritual state with an outer reflection whereas charisma by itself is an outer image lacking a deeper core.

Admittedly, charismatic people do have something about them that magnifies their impact on others, at least in some settings, so charisma can imitate presence for a while.  But I repeat, presence and charisma are not the same.  So what is the difference?

Difference Between Presence and Charisma

Let’s deal with charisma first:

• A person can have leadership charisma without inner wholeness, at least for a time, by relying on a high social status – be it fame, reputation, wealth, an impressive title or a large office – to give them an aura of authority and superiority in the eyes of those they meet.
• Note the words, “in the eyes of those they meet.” We often regard people with high social status as impressive simply because we project an image of superiority and authority on to them.  The image can stem from our hopes, fears and insecurities or our wish to avoid taking responsibility for ourselves.  It can lead us to put the person on a pedestal, rely on him to point the way forward and solve our problems… and to give our power to him.  In other words, for social status-based charisma to work, the followers have to collude with the leader in propping up his position.
• Another way to gain leadership charisma is to project an impressive image through skilful acting and presentation.  For example, by learning to speak well in public, having voice training, talking in memorable sound bites, practising the right body language, wearing the right clothes and learning to evade tough questions.
• It is, of course, possible to combine both means.

Presence is different:

• Presence comes only from being who you are, the genuine you, comfortable in your own skin, letting your natural character qualities flow from your inner sense of wholeness.
• Presence is not an act.  It doesn’t demand social status and doesn’t need others to project an image of superiority and power on to us.  In fact, presence doesn’t need status at all.  We can sense presence – that is, something exceptional about a person – on meeting them, even if we know nothing about them, for presence is, quite simply, being who you are.
• Presence is therefore deeper, more powerful and more durable than charisma.

Now I’ve mentioned that public speaking skill can help a leader appear charismatic.  To be clear, I’m not suggesting there’s anything wrong with learning to speak well in public, as oratory skill can be a helpful accompaniment to presence.

But what I am suggesting is that there’s a hollowness to charisma.

The Hollowness of Charisma

The power of the leader who has charisma – but lacks presence – rests on their acting skills, status and the power their followers give them, not their true, inner qualities.

Deep down, such a leader knows they are living with the constant risk of exposure or abandonment by their followers, so their self-esteem is always under threat.

To deal with this, charismatic leaders often create a belief in their innate superiority and use this to feel better about themselves and to reinforce their act, despite the continuing presence of powerful limiting beliefs in their psyche.  The trouble is, this is like placing a golden crust on a pie with infected meat.  It’s a psychological cover-up that merely increases their risk of exposure, especially when events don’t go the way they want.  It’s for this reason that the charismatic leadership style can be unstable and short-lived.

Presence, unlike charisma, doesn’t depend on a self-image founded on a fragile sense of superiority offering only leaky self-esteem – a superiority relying on constant success, acclaim or others’ relative underperformance to support it.

Presence comes from uniting the divisions and letting go of the limiting beliefs in one’s psyche to create a durable core that’s more robust than a hollow self-image.  Founded on a base of positive, healthy self-esteem, it needs little or no outer reassurance and no comparisons with others.  Thus, the leader with presence doesn’t feel the same degree of psychological threat when the going gets tough.

Difference in Behaviour Under Pressure

This contrast between presence and charisma underlies a key difference in leaders’ behaviour and decisions under pressure.

If a firm’s progress is disappointing or results are poor, the leader who depends on charisma can fear humiliation from what they see as impending failure.  Their fear can become self-serving behaviour that hurts the organisation.  They may avoid decisions or actions they find difficult or look for, blame and fire scapegoats, even if they have crucial skills or contacts.  Alternatively, they may fill their board of directors with cronies; or indulge in ill-conceived initiatives that misdirect the organisation’s attention and money, like ego-driven takeovers.

However, the leader with presence can endure rough conditions and navigate with a wiser, cooler head because of their strong self-esteem.  You see, some of the common hazards of leadership roles like arrogance, overestimating one’s ability or judgement, oversensitivity to criticism and the fear of failure all stem from an unconscious limiting self-image.  And a limiting self-image (“I have this limitation or that flaw”) reduces self-esteem.  But presence – founded on the rock of robust self-esteem, unlike the sand that charisma stands on – is a natural antidote to these dangers.