Charisma / Power
paulgraham.com
Charisma / Power
1–10 of 28 posts
Re: Charisma / Power
#2Who embodies both(builder + schmoozer)? Surely they exist right?
Re: Charisma / Power
#3So that's the problem, "we" virtually never recognize that the builder is the right one for the job. The charismatic person always gets the job/money/fame/whatever.
Re: Charisma / Power
#4So lets analyze this for a moment.
We have defined a "Builder Type" CEO who is not charismatic yet is defined by being able to build and ship things. Like Mark Zuckerberg minus his team of PR people.
Then we have a "Charismatic Type" CEO who people like but who can't get anything done.
By this definition, Obama would be the useless yet charismatic CEO. Hillary, who has never built anything (that I can identify), would be a "Builder" type (apparently?). And Donald Trump...who indisputably has built things despite being both charismatic and hated would blend both of these together?
I don't agree with this analysis. It isn't that easy to slice this one.
Re: Charisma / Power
#5I think PG makes a few assumptions in this musing that deserve more though and criticism. Power and charisma together often brew megalomania, and I don't see charisma itself as a powerful person's antidote to being hated. Without diving into politics, I think there are a few good arguments out there for "lack of charisma" being the least of HRC's problems.
I'd be more interested to hear PG explore his own relationship to charisma and power on a personal and professional level than read this oddly deflecting set of statements.
Re: Charisma / Power
#6The builder type focuses on building product. The charismatic type focuses on building social value, to build the product
Naturally they both excel at each, ultimately 2 different means to the same end
Re: Charisma / Power
#7Who embodies both(builder + schmoozer)? Surely they exist right?
Elon Musk has a weird sort of charisma and has built a fair few things.
Re: Charisma / Power
#8Is there any data that 'builder' type presidents are better than charismatic ones? In our hyper-media age you need charisma or you'll fail to effect change. This may or may not be a good thing as the change charismatic leaders want may or may not be ultimately good for the nation but it seems to be a necessary (but not solely sufficient) ingredient for greatness.
Re: Charisma / Power
#9So lets analyze this for a moment. We have defined a "Builder Type" CEO who is not charismatic yet is defined by being able to build and ship things. Like Mark Zuckerberg minus his team of PR people. Then we have a "Charismatic Type" CEO who people like but who can't get anything done. By this definition, Obama would be the useless yet charismatic CEO. Hillary, who has never built anything (that I can identify), woul…
> By this definition, Obama would be the useless yet charismatic CEO.
Useless, no, charismatic, yes. PG isn't saying that you can't be both powerful and charismatic - he's saying if you are to become powerful, you'd better be charismatic as well. His comment about them being the best person for the job is over the "schmoozers", who are charismatic but aren't building things.
> Hillary, who has never built anything (that I can identify)
https://www.congress.gov/member/hillary-clinton/C001041
> It isn't that easy to slice this one.
I agree here. I don't think a clean dichotomy is being discussed. I think PG is just lamenting that charisma is necessary to hold power over other people.
Re: Charisma / Power
#10Who embodies both(builder + schmoozer)? Surely they exist right?
Donald Trump.
He is literally off the charts both. He builds very large, impressive buildings for a living.
He is enough of a charismatic individual that through force of personality won the presidency.