Table of Contents

Malcolm X – Nationalization and Internationalization:.............................................................7

Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr.:...................................................................................8
Malcolm X – Framing:.............................................................................................................13

2
Life of the character
Leadership as person
Malcom Little – early life

Leadership as results/process
Malcom X – symbol of black man

Leadership as position
Malik Al-Shahbaz – a true Muslim
Role of followers
Constructive dissent VS. destructive dissent

Assessment of Malcom X
Distributed or dispersed leadership

Critical review about Malcom X

Leadership – Environment

Leadership – Ethics

Charismatic: born or made?

Influence followers by vision
Depend on situation
Transformational leader
Idealized influence
Inspirational motivation
Intellectual stimulation
Individualized consideration
Authentic leadership

OB book by Robin

Autocratic
Democratic
Transformational
Situational

3
Leadership – General Concept:
Leadership is a topic—or rather a label for a variety of more or less related issues—
that has received attention in thousands of empirical studies, theoretical work, and
popular writings offering more or less well-grounded recipes for successful
managerial work.

The great disappearing act: difficulties in doing ‘‘leadership’’

Mats Alvesson*, Stefan Sveningsson
Department of Business Administration, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
The Leadership Quarterly 14 (2003) 359–381

A leader is one or more people who selects, equips, trains, and influences one or
more follower(s) who have diverse gifts, abilities, and skills and focuses the
follower(s) to the organization’s mission and objectives causing the follower(s) to
willingly and enthusiastically expend spiritual, emotional, and physical energy in a
concerted coordinated effort to achieve the organizational mission and objectives.

An Integrative Definition of Leadership

Bruce E. Winston
Kathleen Patterson
Regent University
International Journal of Leadership Studies, Vol. 1 Iss. 2, 2006, pp. 6-66
© 2006 School of Leadership Studies, Regent University
ISSN 1554-3145

The American Negro is a unique creation; he has no counterpart anywhere

and no predecessors.
James Baldwin
Introduction:
Movie Malcolm X by Spike Lee is similar to the historical life of Malcolm X. One can
easily tell how alike they are by watching the movie and knowing who Malcolm X
was and his beliefs. Spike Lee tried to bring the life of African-American leader

4
Malcolm X to the big screen in this sprawling, epic biographical drama. Born Malcolm
Little, son of a Nebraska preacher, on May 19, 1925, he became one of the most
militant leaders and charismatic spokesmen of the black liberation movement before
his assassination at the Audubon Ballroom in New York City on February 21, 1965.
The film sweeps through his early life as a small-time hustler and thief with his friend
Shorty, his conversion to Islam in jail, and his subsequent life as a controversial
spiritual leader and husband of Betty Shabazz. Malcolm's tragic assassination is
presented as a conspiracy of Nation of Islam leaders; the film shows how his
philosophy has been realized in the lives of others who have been moved by his
words. Filmed with great visual flair by Lee, the film is a work historical artefact.

The Movie:
Race and ethnicity is definitely identified in this film. During Malcolm's early years he
found himself trying to impersonate the lifestyle of a white man. He perm his hair in
order for it to be straight; he then date white women and wear fancy clothing to
impress the people around him. He was facing an identity problem by rejecting the
way that he was naturally.

Malcolm X:
In contemporary western societies leadership issues are frequently understood in
binary terms. For example, leaders are often viewed either as ‘heroes’ or ‘villains’,
elevated or blamed, seen as the solution or the barrier to organizational success.
Dialectics of leadership
David Collinson
Human Relations, 2005, Volume 58(11): 1419–1442, New Delhi

Pinkley (19xx) said one of the most articulate and perspective leaders to address
himself to the millions of poor blacks in the slums was Malcolm X. He was a product
of slum life and had experienced virtually all aspects of destitution so common to
poor black people in the America. Because of his abilities, Malcolm X achieved an
international reputation as a spokesman for the aspirations of poor black people. He
urged black people to consolidate their efforts and to link their struggle with that of
their African brothers as a means of achieving political, economic, and social
equality. He did not feel that integration into the larger society was either likely or

5
necessary in the near future. Therefore he advocated a policy of group solidarity. As
a means of achieving this solidarity, he constantly advocated positive identification
(i.e., pride in blackness). Malcolm X urged white Americans who sympathized with
the aspirations of black people to organize themselves and work within the white
community in an effort to rid it of its racist practices. He did not advocate the initiation
of violence, but he was a strong proponent of armed self-defence as a means of
meeting violent attacks by racists. Few leaders have been so misunderstood as
Malcolm X. As a social critic, Prinkley (19xx) conclude that Malcolm X’s
exegesis of American society was severe but meticulous. In many ways he
was inaugurator of the Black Power movement.

With the appearance of Malcolm X in the 1960s black nationalist ideology again
made its impacts felt in the black community. Malcolm X did not command a broadly
based organization, nor was he a scholar.
Malcolm X – Autocratic:
The leadership literature (Bass, 1990; Lewin, Lippit, & White, 1939; Vroom & Yetton,
1973; Yukl, 1999) generally identifies autocratic leadership as not taking care of the
socio-emotional dimensions of groups such as maintaining group cohesion and
promoting the group as a viable social entity (Bass, 1990; Cartwright & Zander,
1968; Hackman, 1990), although circumstances softening these negative effects
exist (Foels, Driskell, Mullen, & Salas, 2000).1 More precisely, autocratic leaders
score particularly low on the factor of consideration as identified by the Ohio State
studies (Judge, Piccolo, & Ilies, 2004). This factor of consideration is strongly related
to satisfaction, motivation, and effectiveness (see Judge et al., 2004), which is
particularly interesting because it points out the relatively negative effects on the
dependent variables under investigation in the present research: followers’ emotions
and motivation. Empirical evidence indeed shows that autocratic leaders negatively
influence group stability and effectiveness (Van Vugt, Jepson, Hart, & De Cremer,
2004), group climate, and feelings of being content and happy (Bass, 1990).

Affective and motivational consequences of leader self-sacrifice: The moderating

effect of autocratic leadership
David De Cremer *

6
Department of Economic and Social Psychology, Tilburg University, P.O. Box
90153, 5000-LE Tilburg, The Netherlands
The Leadership Quarterly 17 (2006) 79– 93

Malcolm X – Charismatic:

Malcolm X - Effectiveness and ineffectiveness of leadership:

Leadership research is no exception to this rule. Although thousands of empirical
investigations of leaders have been conducted in the last 75 years, no clear and
unequivocal understanding exists as to what distinguishes leaders from non-leaders
and, perhaps more importantly, what distinguishes effective leaders from
ineffective leaders (Jagi, 1982).

Malcolm X – Nationalization and Internationalization:

He attempted to internationalize the black struggle, the essence of his philosophy
can be summarized as pride in blackness, the necessity of knowing black history,
black autonomy, black unity, and self-determination for the black community.
Malcolm X spoke to the needs of black people. He appealed to reason, not to
emotions. Because he felt that integration would not necessarily lead to black
liberation, he opposed a powerful coalition if integrationist leaders. Perhaps more
than any black man in recent history, Malcolm X changed the direction of the black
movement from an emphasis on assimilation through integration to black liberation
through black nationalism.
Malcolm X’s first trip was to prove important in his later efforts to “internationalize”
the black man’s struggle. His trip was also to prove regenerative to him.

Most nationalists claim Malcolm X as their won (Staples, 1976).

“We want freedom by any means necessary. We want justice by any means
necessary. We want equality by any means necessary.”
“The thing that I would like to impress upon every Afro-American leader is that no
kind of action in this country is ever going to bear fruit unless that action is tied in
with the overall international struggle.”

7
Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr.:

He did not command the respect of poor blacks in the rural South and white liberals
throughout the country as did Martin Luther King, Jr. But the depth of his
understanding, his keen intelligence, his leadership abilities, and his integrity were
such that had he lived to develop his ideas and organizational skills, he could very
well have become the most important black man in American history. These qualities
had a special appeal for black youth.

Malcolm X – Transformation:
While Malcolm X’s views on various subjects changed during his brief lifetime, such
themes as black unity, pride, and self-respect remained central to his thinking.

Because Malcolm was continually changing while seeking a deeper understanding of

himself and people, it is difficult to single out any one given moment from his career.
Besides expanding his comprehension of orthodox Islam, he spoke with students,
journalists, members of parliament, ambassadors and government leaders. The
African press greeted him warmly, finding it an extremely important fact that Malcolm
X was the first Afro-American leader of national standing to make an independent
trip to Africa.
Malcolm X had his first religious enlightenment while serving time for various crimes
he had committed when he was young. While Malcolm was in prison, he learned and
adopted the teachings of Nation of Islam, a religious sect of Orthodox Islam which
believes in strict moral codes and radical views about race led by Elijah Mohammed.
By the time he left prison, Malcolm had completely changed himself from a drug
dealing burglar to a religious priest for the Nation of Islam. Malcolm X had completely
submitted himself to the racist teachings of Elijah Mohammed. It is through the
Nation of Islam and Elijah Mohammed's teachings that Malcolm developed his
radical views about race in America.

Malcolm X – Revolution:

8
Pervasive findings in the literature suggest that people with strong self-efficacy
beliefs are likely to be more motivated to pursue action, contribute more effort
towards those actions, and persevere to a greater degree in the face of obstacles
(Anderson, Krajewski, Goffin, Jackson, 2008).

Malcolm X – AOOU:
Malcolm X as a real revolutionary and take issue with those who were trying to
assert that brother Malcolm X was moving closer to the mainstream of the civil rights
movement. But his OAAU program was definitely written as a reformist document
(Cruse, 1967).

Malcolm X – Followers:
It is often stated that the essence of leadership is followership (Bjerke, 1999), that
without followers leaders do not exist (Kelley, 2004) and that leadership only exists in
the interaction between leaders and followers (Grint, 2000).

“A person’s judgment that he or she can successfully exert leadership by setting a

direction for the work group, building relationships with followers in order to gain
commitment to change goals, and working with them to overcome obstacles to
change” (Anderson, Krajewski, Goffin, Jackson, 2008 p. 217).

One method of providing more cohesiveness and parsimony to the existing LSE
literature is to create a comprehensive LSE taxonomy that can specifically target
beliefs related to leadership activities. One notable attempt at forming such a
taxonomy was undertaken by Paglis & Green (2002). In their study, Paglis and
Green began by conceptually defining LSE as:

1. A leader is a leader under any circumstances.

2. The performance is a function of leaders’ style and some key features of
the context (leader-follower relations, task structure, position power).
3. Vroom and Yetton (1973) identify fine leader decision-making styles, and
Hersey and Blanchard (1988) suggest leaders adapt styles to suit the

9
 readiness of their followers to perform. In both models, the context determines
which style is appropriate. Situational approaches, like contingency
approaches, acknowledge the importance of context and thus offer
advantages over trail accounts.
A model of political leadership
Kevin Morrell; Jean Hartley
Human Relations; April 2006; Volume 59 (4), pp. 483-504

Follower developmental level is one of the effects of transformational leadership

(Dvir, Eden, Avolio, & Shamir, 2002).

Certain of Malcolm X’s former followers could charge him with “selling out” by
seeking an alliance with the direct-action-integrationist forces (Cruse, 1967).

Many studies have simply assumed that leaders are powerful and in control while
followers are largely powerless, passive and predictable. Little research attends to
followers and their interactions with leaders. For example, situational leadership
holds that ‘effective leaders’ deploy a mix of directive and supportive behaviours
compatible with followers’ ‘developmental levels’ (Hersey & Blanchard, 1996). This
approach tends to reduce followers to static and objectified categories.3 Pathgoal
theory suggests that leaders must choose leadership styles best suited to followers’
experience, needs and skills (House, 1971). It thereby treats leadership as ‘a one
way event – the leader affects the subordinate’ (Northhouse, 2004: 113).

Transformational studies argue that charismatic leaders can inspire followers to

greater commitment by satisfying their needs, validating their identities (Shamir et
al., 1993; Lord & Brown, 2003) and effectively managing ‘proximity’ and ‘distance’
(Antonakis & Atwater, 2002). Yet, transformational studies typically draw on highly
gendered, heroic images of the ‘great man’, viewing leaders as dynamic agents of
change and followers as passive and compliant (Fulop et al., 2004). They leave
unquestioned the view that leaders are able to manipulate followers’ needs and
identities in order to exercise control.

10
Leader–member exchange theory (LMX) more explicitly addresses relationships
between leaders and followers. It emphasizes that both followers and leaders
mutually determine the quality of their relationship. LMX observes that leaders tend
to be open and trusting with ‘in-group’ followers, but distant with ‘out-group’ members
(Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). Yet, in concentrating on the dyadic leader–follower
relationship, LMX says little about followers per se, about the ways they may
influence the leader–member relationship or about the group and organizational
dimensions of these relationships (Howell & Shamir, 2005).

By and large, ‘followers’ have been viewed as unproblematic and predictable cogs
in the (leadership) machine.

In leader–follower relations there is always the potential for conflict and dissent.
Leaders cannot predict or assume followers’ motivations, obedience or loyalty.

Dialectics of leadership
David Collinson
Human Relations, 2005, Volume 58(11): 1419–1442, New Delhi

Malcolm X - Evolution:
In the late 1950’s and early 1960’s Malcolm X, militant young former prisoner and
self-taught leader of the Muslims, grew in the stature from an apparently minor
menace to something of an enigmatic black hero. He haunted the nation’s mind and
dampened the gala mood of the marches and demonstrations as he posed an
increasingly challenge to the seeming certainty of the nation’s perceived path of
racial progress.

Malcolm X – Emergent:
Stogdill (1948) reviewed research on personality and emergent leadership in a
variety of unstructured groups. He concluded that measures of dominance,
extraversion, sociability, ambition or achievement, responsibility, integrity, self-
confidence, mood and emotional control, diplomacy, and cooperativeness were
positively related to emergent leadership.

11
 What We Know About Leadership: Effectiveness and Personality
Robert Hogan, Gordon J. Curphy, and Joyce Hogan
American Psychologist (June 1994)

Malcolm X – Situational:

4 Supporting Delegating

2
Directing Coaching
1

Low Willingness level of the

officer

Low High
1 2 3 4 5

The Situational Leadership Theory suggests that effective leadership requires both
acts of “leadership” and “management.” Depending on the level of each of these acts
necessary, four different styles of leadership can be utilized. These are delegating,
coaching, directing, and supporting. For a leader to be purposeful in their direction,
they must use the correct style by being able to evaluate a follower’s readiness level.
In other words, they must “meet a follower where they are.”

A follower’s readiness level is determined by two factors. The first is the level of
ability to do what is needed. The second is the level of willingness to do what is
needed. The diagram above will aid you in identifying your officer’s readiness level.

12
Once the officer’s readiness level is defined, you will be able to determine what style
of leadership will lend the best results when you are advising. An advisor that is
capable of adjusting his/her style to meet the needs of the officer will be much more
effective.

www.betathetapi.org/dmdocuments/volunteers

Malcolm X – Framing:
White media made Malcolm X a figure; otherwise he would probably be lost in
obscurity.

Leadership is a bodily practice, a physical performance in addition to a triumph of

mental or motivational mastery.

A good deal of research on bodies also shows how people are trapped in bodily
performances by wider relations of power and discourse

Leadership has been constructed as an activity of brains without bodies.

Bodies potentially open up a third set of possibilities for leadership researchers and
teachers. The body is personal and political, a reflection of individual and systemic
characteristics, both ‘active’ and ‘inscribed’ (Pritchard, 2000). Investigating bodies
and bodily responses, including our own, opens different ways of knowing
leadership.

Body Possibilities in Leadership

Amanda Sinclair, Leadership 2005; 1; 387

Framing is a way to use language to manage meanings. It’s a way for leaders to
influence how events are seen and understood. It involves the selection and
highlighting of one or more aspects of a subject while excluding others. Framing is
analogous to what a photographer does. (Robin, 2006 – OB Book)

13
Malcolm X – Conflict:

A typology of problems, power and authority

Problems, problems, problems: The social construction of ‘leadership’

Keith Grint
Human Relations, 2005, Volume 58(11): 1467–1494, London

Malcolm X - Declaring Islam:

I do hereby declare that I am a true Muslim. I bear witness that there is no God but
Allah. And I bear witness that Muhammad [ibn Abdullah] is the Apostle of Allah, and
His Last Prophet.

Malik El-Shabazz

April 8, 1964"

http://www.malcolm-x.org/docs/gen_decl.htm

Malcolm X – Spiritual:

14
 Causal model of spiritual leadership theory

Spiritual leadership and army transformation: Theory,

measurement, and establishing a baseline
Louis W. Fry T, Steve Vitucci, Marie Cedillo
Tarleton State University, Central Texas, 1901 South Clear Creek Rd., Killeen, TX
76549, United States
The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 835–862

Malcolm X – Death:
Malcolm X died early in 1965. He was cut down as his star took on an acknowledged
brilliance and suddenly began to soar to national and international heights.

Conclusion:
“We declare our right on this earth to be a man, to be a human being, to be given the
rights of a human being, to be respected as a human being in this society, on this
earth, in this day, which we intend to bring into an existence by any means
necessary”.

15