Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 3, Nos. 2 &3, 2004, Page 94
group some transcendent purpose, mission or messianic goal. Bass (1998), like Hogg
(2001), recognizes that members of the group may exaggerate the positive features of such
leaders by amplifying their perceived charisma. Effective transformational leaders,
however, will, in fact, manifest the three charismatic elements listed above.
From a transactional (or exchange) perspective, totalist groups provide members with a
sense of mission, purpose, belonging, and the benefit of not having to agonize over various
life decisions (which are dictated by the group‘s norms). The group in turn imbues the
leader with exaggerated positive attributes, extreme power, as well as privilege, gladly
tolerating the leader‘s violation of particular aspects of group doctrine. Thus, a surprising
number of totalist leaders have had erotic and material perks that were strictly forbidden to
others (e.g., Davis, 1984 Kelley, 1995). Moreover, in accordance with this theoretical
perspective, leaders in such groups invariably offer members a messianic purpose that most
frequently requires members to override their immediate self-interest in lieu of some self-
actualizing and transcendent common group goal (Baron, 2000 Hoffer, 1951).
From a charismatic perspective, leaders in totalist groups, typically are confident decision
makers, accomplished speakers and imaginative at generating messianic group goals. As
such, they generally qualify as ―stimulating and inspiring‖ (e.g., Weightman, 1983 Ofshe,
1980). However, in several key respects, leaders in totalist groups deviate from the
charismatic pattern that Bass considers to be defining features for transformational
leadership. Bass assumes such leaders encourage group member innovation, do not
prematurely criticize ideas that contradict group policy, act in an unselfish and morally
correct fashion and use a contingent reward system that justly rewards individuals based on
their efforts and investments. Such leaders also depict an optimistic future. In contrast,
Bass describes pseudo-transformational leaders who while having many of the trappings of
the transformational leader, cater to their own self-interest, rely on manipulation, fear,
threat, and punishment to maintain control and seem to be governed by warped moral
principles (Bass, 1998). It appears that leadership in totalist groups nicely illustrates this
pattern of pseudo-transformational leadership. Thus, in such groups, leaders do not
consistently use ―contingent‖ rewards to compensate followers on a basis that is
commensurate with their contributions, tend to punish transgressions more than they
reward correct behavior, and do not rise above self-interest. The case studies we consider
below explore these themes.
The Effects of Intense Indoctrination on Leadership in Totalist Groups
Several key factors elevate the power of leaders in such ―high demand‖ groups. One such
factor is that the identity-related benefits provided by group membership (Hogg, in press)
are particularly gratifying for group members. As a result, members find themselves
unusually dependent upon the group (i.e., the leader), for guidance, self-esteem and a
sense of purpose, etc. A second factor involves the impact that totalist groups have on the
attentional capacity of group members and how this in turn causes and maintains attitude
change in such groups (Baron, 2000).
Numerous writers have noted that several social psychological processes appear crucial in
triggering the attitude and value change that occurs in totalist groups. These include such
processes as conformity dynamics, stereotyping of non-group members, group polarization,
biased and incomplete message processing, and cognitive dissonance mechanisms that
stem from inducing escalating commitments from group members (Pratkanis &Aronson,
2000, Schein, Schneier &Barker, 1961, Singer, 1995). Various writers have also
commented on the stress and capacity-draining activity associated with group indoctrination
and membership (e.g., Baron, 2000 Sargant, 1957). Sleep deprivation is extremely
common in totalist groups with long work days and heavily regimented activity being an
almost universal feature (Pratkanis &Aronson, 2000). Emotional arousal is frequently
group some transcendent purpose, mission or messianic goal. Bass (1998), like Hogg
(2001), recognizes that members of the group may exaggerate the positive features of such
leaders by amplifying their perceived charisma. Effective transformational leaders,
however, will, in fact, manifest the three charismatic elements listed above.
From a transactional (or exchange) perspective, totalist groups provide members with a
sense of mission, purpose, belonging, and the benefit of not having to agonize over various
life decisions (which are dictated by the group‘s norms). The group in turn imbues the
leader with exaggerated positive attributes, extreme power, as well as privilege, gladly
tolerating the leader‘s violation of particular aspects of group doctrine. Thus, a surprising
number of totalist leaders have had erotic and material perks that were strictly forbidden to
others (e.g., Davis, 1984 Kelley, 1995). Moreover, in accordance with this theoretical
perspective, leaders in such groups invariably offer members a messianic purpose that most
frequently requires members to override their immediate self-interest in lieu of some self-
actualizing and transcendent common group goal (Baron, 2000 Hoffer, 1951).
From a charismatic perspective, leaders in totalist groups, typically are confident decision
makers, accomplished speakers and imaginative at generating messianic group goals. As
such, they generally qualify as ―stimulating and inspiring‖ (e.g., Weightman, 1983 Ofshe,
1980). However, in several key respects, leaders in totalist groups deviate from the
charismatic pattern that Bass considers to be defining features for transformational
leadership. Bass assumes such leaders encourage group member innovation, do not
prematurely criticize ideas that contradict group policy, act in an unselfish and morally
correct fashion and use a contingent reward system that justly rewards individuals based on
their efforts and investments. Such leaders also depict an optimistic future. In contrast,
Bass describes pseudo-transformational leaders who while having many of the trappings of
the transformational leader, cater to their own self-interest, rely on manipulation, fear,
threat, and punishment to maintain control and seem to be governed by warped moral
principles (Bass, 1998). It appears that leadership in totalist groups nicely illustrates this
pattern of pseudo-transformational leadership. Thus, in such groups, leaders do not
consistently use ―contingent‖ rewards to compensate followers on a basis that is
commensurate with their contributions, tend to punish transgressions more than they
reward correct behavior, and do not rise above self-interest. The case studies we consider
below explore these themes.
The Effects of Intense Indoctrination on Leadership in Totalist Groups
Several key factors elevate the power of leaders in such ―high demand‖ groups. One such
factor is that the identity-related benefits provided by group membership (Hogg, in press)
are particularly gratifying for group members. As a result, members find themselves
unusually dependent upon the group (i.e., the leader), for guidance, self-esteem and a
sense of purpose, etc. A second factor involves the impact that totalist groups have on the
attentional capacity of group members and how this in turn causes and maintains attitude
change in such groups (Baron, 2000).
Numerous writers have noted that several social psychological processes appear crucial in
triggering the attitude and value change that occurs in totalist groups. These include such
processes as conformity dynamics, stereotyping of non-group members, group polarization,
biased and incomplete message processing, and cognitive dissonance mechanisms that
stem from inducing escalating commitments from group members (Pratkanis &Aronson,
2000, Schein, Schneier &Barker, 1961, Singer, 1995). Various writers have also
commented on the stress and capacity-draining activity associated with group indoctrination
and membership (e.g., Baron, 2000 Sargant, 1957). Sleep deprivation is extremely
common in totalist groups with long work days and heavily regimented activity being an
almost universal feature (Pratkanis &Aronson, 2000). Emotional arousal is frequently
