Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T05:37:36.915Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Qualities of Leadership: Direction, Communication, and Obfuscation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2008

TORUN DEWAN  and
DAVID P. MYATT
TORUN DEWAN*
Affiliation:
London School of Economics
DAVID P. MYATT*
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
*
Torun Dewan is Lecturer, London School of Economics & Political Science, London WC2A 2AEUnited Kingdom. E-mail: [email protected]
David P. Myatt is Official Fellow, Nuffield College, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 1NFUnited Kingdom. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

What is leadership? What is good leadership? What is successful leadership? Answers emerge from our study of a formal model in which followers face a coordination problem: they wish to choose the best action while conforming as closely as possible to the actions of others. Although they would like to do the right thing and do it together, followers are unsure about the relative merits of their options. They learn about their environment and the likely moves of others by listening to leaders. These leaders bridge differences of opinion and become coordinating focal points. A leader's influence increases with her judgement (her sense of direction) and her ability to convey ideas (her clarity of communication). A leader with perfect clarity enjoys greater influence than one with a perfect sense of direction. When followers choose how much attention to pay to leaders, they listen only to the most coherent communicators. However, power-hungry leaders who need an audience sometimes obfuscate their messages, but less so when their followers place more emphasis on conformity than on doing the right thing.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 102 , Issue 3 , August 2008 , pp. 351 - 368
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allen, Franklin, Morris, Stephen, and Shin, Hyun S.. 2006. “Beauty Contests and Iterated Expectations in Asset Markets.” Review of Financial Studies 19 (3): 719–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, R. Michael, and Franklin, Charles H.. 1994. “Uncertainty and Political Perceptions.” Journal of Politics 56 (3): 671–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amato, Jeffrey D., Morris, Stephen, and Shin, Hyun S.. 2002. “Communication and Monetary Policy.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy 18 (4): 495–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angeletos, George-Marios, and Pavan, Alessandro. 2004. “Transparency of Information and Coordination in Economies with Investment Complementarities.” American Economic Review: AEA Papers and Proceedings 94 (2): 91–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angeletos, George-Marios, and Pavan, Alessandro. 2007. “Efficient Use of Information and Social Value of Information.” Econometrica 75 (4): 1103–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aragonés, Enriqueta, and Neeman, Zvika. 2000. “Strategic Ambiguity in Electoral Competition.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 12 (2): 183–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brands, H. W. 2005. Andrew Jackson: His Life and Times. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, Smith, Alastair, Siverson, Randolph M., and Morrow, James D.. 2003. The Logic of Political Survival. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calvert, Randall L. 1995. “The Rational Choice of Social Institutions: Cooperation, Coordination, and Communication.” In Modern Political Economy: Old Topics, New Directions, ed. Banks, Jeffrey S. and Hanushek, Eric A.. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carwardine, Richard J. 2003. Lincoln. Harlow: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Chwe, Michael Suk-Young. 2001. Rational Ritual: Culture, Coordination, and Common Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Cornwell, Elmer E. Jr. 1957. “Coolidge and Presidential Leadership.” Public Opinion Quarterly 21 (2): 265–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, Vincent P., and Sobel, Joel. 1982. “Strategic Information Transmission.” Econometrica 50 (6): 1431–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewan, Torun, and Myatt, David P.. 2007. “Leading the Party: Coordination, Direction and Communication.” American Political Science Review 101 (4): 825–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewan, Torun, and Myatt, David P.. 2008. “On the Rhetorical Strategies of Leaders: Speaking Clearly, Stepping Back, and Standing Down.” London School of Economics and University of Oxford. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Ellis, Joseph J. 2005. His Excellency: George Washington. London: Faber.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P., and Shepsle, Kenneth A.. 1989. “Formal Theories of Leadership: Agents, Agenda-Setters, and Entrepreneurs.” In Leadership and Politics: New Perspectives in Political Science, ed. Jones, Bryan D.. Lawrence: University Press Kansas, 17–41.Google Scholar
Franklin, Charles H. 1991. “Eschewing Obfuscation? Campaigns and the Perception of US Senate Incumbents.” American Political Science Review 85 (4): 1193–1214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilligan, Thomas W., and Krehbiel, Keith. 1987. “Collective Decisionmaking and Standing Committees: An Informational Rationale for Restrictive Amendment Procedures.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 3 (2): 287–335.Google Scholar
Güth, Werner, Levati, M. Vittoria, Sutter, Matthias, and van der Heijden, Eline. 2004. “Leadership and Cooperation in Public Goods Experiments.” Jena, Germany: Max Planck Institute of Economics.Google Scholar
Hellwig, Christian. 2005. “Heterogeneous Information and the Welfare Effects of Public Information Disclosures.” Working paper, UCLA.Google Scholar
Hellwig, Christian, and Veldkamp, Laura. 2008. “Knowing What Others Know: Coordination Motives in Information Acquisition.” Review of Economic Studies. Forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hermalin, Benjamin E. 1998. “Toward an Economic Theory of Leadership: Leading by Example.” American Economic Review 88 (5): 1188–206.Google Scholar
Humphreys, Macartan, Masters, William, and Sandbu, Martin E.. 2006. “The Role of Leadership in Democratic Deliberations: Results from a Field Experiment in São Tomé and Principe.” World Politics. Forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keynes, John Maynard. 1936. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Levi, Margaret. 2006. “Why We Need a New Theory of Government.” Perspectives on Politics 4 (1): 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Hao, Rosen, Sherwin, and Suen, Wing. 2001. “Conflicts and Common Interests in Committees.” American Economic Review 91 (5): 1478–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mierowitz, Adam. 2005. “Informational Party Primaries and Strategic Ambiguity.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 17 (1): 107–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, Stephen, and Shin, Hyun S.. 2002. “Social Value of Public Information.” American Economic Review 92 (5): 1521–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myerson, Roger B. 2004. “Justice, Institutions, and Multiple Equilibria.” Chicago Journal of International Law 5 (1): 91–107.Google Scholar
Olson, Mancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riker, William. 1996. The Strategy of Rhetoric: Campaigning for the American Constitution. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Shepsle, Kenneth A. 1970. “A Note On Zeckhauser's ‘Majority Rule with Lotteries on Alternatives’: The Case of the Paradox of Voting.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 84 (4): 705–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepsle, Kenneth A. 1972. “The Strategy of Ambiguity: Uncertainty and Electoral Competition.” American Political Science Review 66 (2): 555–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeckhauser, R. 1969. “Majority Rule with Lotteries on Alternatives.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 83 (2): 696–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.