Dominant leaders: what they are like and how they take power

In some situations, a dominant leader is preferred to an empathetic one. why?

Donald Trump was appointed president of the United States of America on January 20, 2017. This came as a great surprise to many, who expected that his ideology, his controversial and worrying statements and policies and the aggressiveness he displayed during the election campaign, together with his background as a business tycoon (with no experience in politics) would mean a clear victory for the other candidate for the presidency, Hillary Clinton. However, in spite of everything, it was Trump who won the victory. One of the reasons for this was his highly dominant personality.

This is not the only case: multiple domineering leaders have worked their way into power throughout history, sometimes by being elected by the people. Why? In this article we are going to talk about the characteristics of dominant people and the reason why they are sometimes chosen.

Characteristics of dominant leaders

Dominance is not a negative attribute in and of itself.. The ability to dominate has a utility: it serves the subject to achieve his purposes, to focus on them and even to use the available resources to achieve them. To a greater or lesser extent, we all have some degree of it and we are situated at some point on a continuum between dominance and submission.

Someone who is dominant will tend to be very self-confident, stubborn and have a preference for being in control. They tend not to conform to what is offered to them, tend to have little appreciation for convention, and tend to be independent and focused on themselves and their needs.

In cases where dominance is extremely high, people with a higher level of dominance tend to manifest higher levels of arrogance and a sense of superiority. tend to manifest higher levels of arrogance and a sense of superiority.. They also tend to be utilitarian, more irascible and apparently manifest a greater capacity for decision making by not taking into account that other perspectives of reality besides their own may be as or more correct than the one they defend.

They tend to have a more dichotomous way of thinking and seek more fame, prestige and power. In fact, it is common for them to present the so-called dark triad: narcissism, Machiavellianism/manipulation and psychopathy.

Narcissism and psychopathy

As far as narcissism is concerned, these are usually people who are people with a high need for attention, who demand recognition of their merits and who tend to exhibit and who tend to exhibit behavior in which they tend to exaggerate their self-worth in an exaggeratedly positive manner. They consider themselves first, valuing others second.

Psychopathy manifests itself as a high lack of empathy, acting on the basis of achieving one's own goals without taking into account the effects their behavior may have on other people and showing little depth in their emotional reactions. They also tend to show a high seductive charm, which facilitates a positive predisposition towards them when they are treated superficially.

Finally, Machiavellianism refers to Machiavellianism refers to a capacity for manipulationThe Machiavellianism refers to the ability to manipulate: to make others think, believe or do what the person wants by taking advantage of him/her to achieve one's own goals.

They tend to seek to stand out and often marginalize or harm those who have greater abilities than themselves, establishing a strict surveillance of what is done. Generally, dominant leaders are more in demand when it comes to dealing with very specific tasks or when a quick and sure response is required.

Why are they chosen?

Bearing in mind that an excess of dominance often borders on totalitarianism and the search for the submission of the rest to the opinion of the dominant person or entity, it is worth wondering why many people come to approach and elect dominant leaders at any given time. at any given time.

Numerous experiments have been conducted to try to find a clear cause for this tendency, and the most plausible answer is something that we have actually seen time and again throughout history and that we can observe if we analyze how different dominant leaders have come to power (through elections, not dictatorships): intolerance to uncertainty.

And the fact is that many dominant leaders have emerged in periods of great uncertainty and suffering. In these situations, there is a great sense of insecurity in a large part of the population, and in the face of this insecurity many look for a firm point from which to act. They look for someone in whom they can identify strength and a clear vision of things, someone with a high level of security.someone with a high level of self-confidence and a clear vision of things. These are characteristics that someone dominant, although their opinions may not be shared, possesses or gives the appearance of possessing.

Thus, what generates dominant leaders to reach positions of power is usually the perception of lack of power and control over situations by the subject who chooses them, seeking to improve the situation of insecurity and discomfort associated with it through compensation.

Why not other types of leaders?

In the situations mentioned above, it has been observed not only that the preference for dominant leaders increases, but also that the preference for less authoritarian and more prestige-based leaders decreases.

The reason for this is that a leader who achieves power based on prestige tends to manifest a higher level of awareness, empathy and humility (although he or she may also manifest pride), being more agreeable to the majority and more considerate of different points of view. But In crisis situations, some people see these qualities as a difficulty in making difficult decisions and a slow, leisurely way of acting. and a slow and leisurely way of acting.

Many people in crisis situations see these qualities, generally considered as positive, as a sign of weakness: altruism and flexibility are seen as a threat to integrity and an element of insecurity, which does not provide sufficient protection for one's own group.

Evolution over time

However, this style of leadership is only sustainable when rapid action is required in the face of a stressful situation. In other words, it is a type of power that is effective in the short term or as long as the problem or situation remains and has not been resolved previously by other means. In the medium or long term, however, it is no longer valued positively and tends to disappear in favor of other types of leadership. more flexible and considerate of all elements of society.

However, once in power the dominant person tends to secure his position by carrying out different processes and mechanisms. This is one of the reasons why many dominant leaders who initially came to power through elections end up becoming dictators. Even it is likely that the dominant leader can provoke a greater imbalance than the one that led to his rise to power, which on the other hand can make him a dictator.which, on the other hand, may make his dominance more attractive and make it easier for him to remain in power.

Bibliographical references

• Asquith, D., Lyons, M., Watson, H., & Jonason, P. (2014). Birds of feather flock together - Evidence for assortative mating for the Dark Triad traits Personality and Individual Differences.
• Maner, J. K. (2017). Dominance and prestige: A tale of two hierarchies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(6), 526-531.