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

Donald Trump was appointed President of the United States of America on January 20, 2017. This fact 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 electoral campaign, together with his origin as a business magnate (with no experience in politics) represented a clear victory for the other candidate for the presidency, Hillary Clinton. Despite everything, however, it was Trump who was victorious. One of the reasons for this was his highly dominant personality.

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

• Related article: "Types of Leadership: The 5 most common types of leaders"

Characteristics of Dominant Leaders

Dominance is not a negative attribute per se

. The ability to dominate has a utility: it helps the subject to achieve its 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 located somewhere on a continuum between dominance and submission.

Someone dominant will tend to be very self-assured, stubborn, and have a preference for being in control. They are not usually satisfied with what is offered to them, they tend to have little appreciation of conventions and to be independent and focused on themselves and their needs.

In cases where dominance is extremely high, individuals with a higher level of dominance tend to manifest higher levels of arrogance and a sense of superiority. They also tend to be utilitarian, more irascible, and apparently show greater decision-making capacity by not having Keep in mind that other perspectives of reality besides your own may be as or more correct than the one you defend.

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

Narcissism and psychopathy

As far as narcissism is concerned, it is usually a question of people in great need of attention, who demand recognition of their merits and that they tend to display behavior in which they tend to value themselves in an exaggeratedly positive way. They consider themselves first, valuing others later.

Psychopathy manifests itself as a high lack of empathy, acting based on the achievement of one's own goals without having to taking into account the effects that their behavior may have on other people and showing little depth in their emotional reactions. In addition, they tend to show a high seduction capacity charm, something that facilitates a positive predisposition towards them when they are treated superficially.

Finally, Machiavellianism refers to the ability to manipulate: make others think, believe or do what the person himself wants, taking advantage of it to achieve his own objectives.

They tend to seek to stand out and it is frequent that they marginalize or harm those subjects who have greater abilities than them, establishing a strict surveillance of what is done. Generally, dominant leaders are more in demand when it comes to tackling specific tasks that are highly defined or when a quick and confident response is required.

• You may be interested in: "Narcissistic people: these are the 9 traits that define them"

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 asking why many people come to approach and choose dominant leaders at one point.

Numerous experiments have been done on this to try to find a clear cause for this trend, and the most plausible answer is something that we've actually been able to see over and over again over the years. throughout history and that we can observe if we analyze how different dominant leaders have come to power (through elections, not dictatorially): intolerance of uncertainty.

And it is that many leaders with dominant characteristics have emerged in periods of great uncertainty and suffering. In these situations, there is a great feeling of insecurity in a large part of the population, and faced with this insecurity, many seek a firm point from which to act. Looking for someone in whom you can identify strength and a clear vision of things, someone with a high level of self-confidence and in his vision of things. These are characteristics that someone dominant, although his opinions may not be shared, possesses or appears to possess.

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

Why not other types of leaders?

In the situations described above, it has been observed not only that the preference for dominant leaders increases, but also decreases that directed at leaders who are less authoritarian and more based on the prestige.

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

Many people in a crisis situation see these qualities, generally considered positive, as a sign of weakness: altruism and flexibility are seen as a threat to integrity and as a source of insecurity, which does not provide sufficient protection for the group itself. belonging.

Evolution over time

However, this style of leadership is only sustainable when quick action is required in a stressful situation. In other words, it is a type of power that is effective in the short term or while the problem or situation remains and has not been previously resolved by other means. In the medium or long term, however, stops being 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 her position by carrying out different processes and mechanisms. It is one of the reasons why many dominant leaders who initially came to power through elections end up becoming dictators. Even the dominant leader is likely to cause a greater imbalance than the one that led to his rise, which on the other hand can make its dominance something more attractive that facilitates its permanence.

Bibliographic 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
• Manner, J. K. (2017). Dominance and prestige: A tale of two hierarchies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(6), 526-531.