Dr. Gleb Tsipursky – The Office Whisperer
Nirit Cohen – WorkFutures
Angela Howard – Culture Expert
Drew Jones – Design & Innovation
Jonathan Price – CRE & Flex Expert
In the world of corporate leadership, charisma captivates us. From boardrooms to IPO offerings, we are drawn to leaders who speak with confidence, radiate charm, and promise a better tomorrow. Their magnetism often makes them frontrunners for top leadership roles, especially in high-stakes corporate environments. But this magnetic quality can become a dangerous illusion—one that clouds our judgment, masks deficiencies, and puts companies at risk.
To protect organizations from leadership catastrophe, we need to recognize the seductive power of charisma, understand its limitations, and change how we evaluate those at the top.
Why We Love Charisma
Psychologically speaking, our attraction to charisma isn’t surprising. Charisma is linked to being seen as ambitious, sociable, visionary, and skilled at networking. Charismatic leaders inspire hope and instill confidence. They’re natural storytellers and visionaries who paint vivid pictures of the future. In uncertain times, these qualities are especially appealing. Investors, employees, and even journalists are quick to rally around someone who offers clarity and optimism.
This instinct is hardwired. Psychologically, we’re more likely to follow those who speak with conviction, even if there is little substance behind the words. Charisma feels like leadership, even when it isn’t.
When Charisma Becomes a Liability
The problem is that charisma often hides deeper flaws and shortcomings. Boards and executive recruiters routinely over-index on a leader’s presence and underweight the traits associated with leadership effectiveness—like integrity, judgment, and domain knowledge. This results in getting leaders who look the part but lack the foundation to lead responsibly.
These CEOs tend to overestimate their abilities and underestimate their limitations. They make grand promises, pursue risky strategies, and fail to deliver. Worse, they may cut ethical corners or create toxic cultures. When this happens, the fallout isn’t just financial; it damages trust, morale, and reputation.
Consider some of the high-profile CEO failures of the last 25 years, from Kenneth Lay to Elizabeth Holmes to Adam Neumann. In almost every case, these downfalls were not due to a lack of vision, but due to lapses in ethics, inability to execute, or refusal to course-correct a poor decision. These are not failures of charisma, they are failures of character and competence.
A Smarter Way to Choose Leaders
The solution is not to simply reject charisma outright. It is to balance it with a better, evidence-based and scientifically valid assessment. Companies need a better vetting process, one that goes beyond gut instinct and polished interviews. Psychometric assessments can evaluate how a candidate is likely to behave under pressure, how they make decisions and how they treat others. These tools help bring blind spots to the surface that charisma tends to obscure.
By incorporating structured data into CEO selection, boards can stay grounded. Instead of being swept up by charm, they can ask: Does this person have the necessary temperament, ethics and insight to lead wisely?
Objective assessment won’t eliminate risk, but it can greatly reduce the odds of putting the wrong person in power.
Leadership That Lasts
Don’t get me wrong, charisma has a place in leadership. It can inspire, motivate, and unite. But when it becomes the dominant—or only—criterion for selection, it sets the stage for disappointment.
To build organizations that thrive, we need leaders who can do more than inspire. We need those who can listen, adapt, deliver results, and uphold ethical standards. That starts with a better selection process, one that values character over charm and substance over style.
When boards and search committees make decisions grounded in data, not just gut instinct, they stand a better chance of choosing CEOs who can lead not just boldly, but wisely.
