In systems as politically intricate as the United Nations (UN), formal authority alone rarely moves the needle. What can truly drive action is ‘influence’ – the ability to rally others around a shared purpose, inspire trust across unpredictable terrain and lead with conviction even when legitimacy is not guaranteed.
In this interview by UNSSC’s Bhagyashree Sagar, John Antonakis – Professor of Organizational Behaviour at the University of Lausanne – unpacks what influence and charisma look like, especially for women leaders navigating the often-uphill task of getting buy-in or shaping outcomes in a system molded by gender, culture and complex power dynamics.
John’s decades of empirical research on charisma, predictors of leadership and behavioural influence challenge the long-standing assumptions of how women should lead – showing how charisma operates as a powerful equalizer and why influence is not an innate gift but a learnable, scalable skill to every leader.
What emerges is a compelling argument: in moments of volatility and complexity, the leaders who succeed are those who speak not only to the mind, but also to the heart. Read the full interview to explore what ‘influence’ and ‘charisma’ look like in action.
Bhagyashree: How do you describe ‘influence’ as a core skill or competency for senior leaders in complex systems like the UN?
John: ‘Influence’ is being able to use levers to get your team, stakeholders or others to take action, whether individually or coordinated, to ensure that the vision of the leader happens.
Voluntary engagement is key; it can only occur if the modes of influence speak to the heart. In this way, the charismatic effect occurs. And by ‘charisma’ I mean influence that is used by the leader and invokes values, symbols and emotions that appeal to the audience.
Bhagyashree: Women leaders in global institutions often carry both formal responsibilities and invisible expectations. In politically complex environments like the UN, how does influence become a form of leadership currency, especially for women who may not always be granted immediate authority?
John: Women, as well as individuals who could be considered ‘out of context’ - that is, not expected to be a leader in the given context – have to work harder to get buy-in from others. ‘Soft power’ and not acting like a ‘tough guy’ can help women excel even in situations that are not favourable to them. Research shows that using charismatic leadership signaling – like adopting a value-based rhetoric, using emotions and speaking symbolically (e.g., using metaphors, analogies, stories) – provides for an even playing field insofar as women and men are concerned.
Bhagyashree: Your empirical research explores what makes leaders ‘charismatic’. What does the evidence reveal about how women can cultivate influence that is both impactful and authentic, without being trapped by stereotypes about assertiveness or likability?
John: Yes—my research both in executive, public, informal, as well as other contexts shows that women can assume their roles as they wish, including signaling their femininity if they desire to do so. Unfortunately, there is a persistent belief by some that women must act and dress similar to men to be taken seriously in high stakes settings.
As long as women can signal their influence in a charisma-based way, they will be seen as equally competent and compete on a level playing field. The research shows that they will and reap as many benefits as men who signal charisma do. Charisma is the great equalizer – and, like any skill, it can be learned and practiced! And it goes a long way in removing long-standing gender stereotypes about leadership prototypes.
Bhagyashree: In the UN context, leaders must operate across cultures, missions and political agendas. From your perspective, what could be key ‘influence behaviours’ that enable women to navigate these high-stakes dynamics while still maintaining their own voice?
John: Leaders – whether women or men – need to articulate their values honestly, walk the talk, paint a tangible picture of what the strategic goal is, signal competence and confidence, and be able to reflect the aspirations, feelings and values of the collective they are attempting to influence.
This mechanism is not a cheap trick; it is based on communicating transparently, setting high expectations, having overlap in values as well as thoughts and actions. A leader cannot do one thing and say another. They must live and breathe their values.
Leaders also need to convince with strong arguments, and that is where charismatic signaling can help a lot because it makes the message more understandable and gets buy-in. Interestingly, in a recent large-scale study we published, we show that personality plays no role in signalling charismatically. This is a counterintuitive discovery we show that introverts are equally as likely to signal charisma as extroverts; what is key is one’s intelligence (defined in modern terms as the ability to learn).
Bhagyashree: If you could offer one research-backed insight to senior women leaders who want to deepen their influence in moments of uncertainty or volatility, what would it be and why does it matter now?
John: A leader, like a captain of a boat, must have a steady hand on the rudder. The captain must know where they are going, must acknowledge the hopes, fears and expectations of the crew, and project an image of the future that is appealing to them and with which they identify.
It is in the crew's interest to concretize the vision because, by doing so, they gain clarity on the next steps, develop a heightened sense of agency and ownership, and build a shared understanding of both their individual role and the organization's broader impact. If the vision is something with which they identify, it is in the interest of the crew to help the leader concertize the vision. If the vision happens the followers feel more worthy, more valued.
All this can only happen if the captain speaks not just to the head, but to the heart!