ecpr paper the psychological profile and leadership style...
Post on 06-Jul-2018
226 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
1
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILE AND LEADERSHIP STYLE
OF ANGELA MERKEL, THE WORLD’S MOST POWERFUL
WOMAN
Christ’l De Landtsheer, Jurriaan Middelhoff, Petronella Schijvenaars
(Political Communication Research Unit, University of Antwerp, Belgium).
Paper for the 24th World Congress of Political Science, July 23-28, 2016,
International Political Science Association, Poznań, Poland. LOC 04.06
Panel ‘Still Gender Inequality in the Contemporary Politics? - Part 2’.
Contact information:
Prof. Dr. Christ’l De Landtsheer
Department of Communication
Political Communication Research Unit
Sint-Jacobstraat 2 (M.473) - 2000 Antwerp, Belgium.
https://www.uantwerpen.be/en/staff/christl-delandtsheer/
T +32 (0)3 265 5586 F +32 (0)3 265 5789 M +32 (0)494 436224
3
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILE AND LEADERSHIP STYLE OF
ANGELA MERKEL, THE WORLD’S MOST POWERFUL WOMAN1
Jurriaan Middelhoff, Petronella Schijvenaars, Christ’l De Landtsheer
(Political Communication Research Unit, University of Antwerp, Belgium).
Abstract- This paper presents a political personality and leadership style
analysis of Angela Merkel, ²Germany’s successful Christian democratic federal
chancellor and one of EU’s most powerful leaders. How does her personality
and leadership style contribute to her success, what can we still expect from
Merkel? Political psychology has generated several studies into the personality
of political leaders (Winter, 2013; Post, 2013). We follow this research tradition
as we draw a psychological profile of Angela Merkel and analyze her leadership
style. The elaborated MIDC profiling method we employ (Immelman, 2004) and
the leadership style analysis that is derived from it (Steinberg and Immelman,
2008) are based on the Millon’s (1990) personality approach. The case study
explains how Angela Merkel’s personality and leadership characteristics,
besides of her personal history, affect her performance and policies at the EU
level.
Keywords- Profiling, Leadership, Personality, EU politics, Germany, Merkel,
Immelman method.
The German Chancellor Angela Merkel has repeatedly been nominated at the
European and global level on the lists of ‘The World’s Most Powerful People’
which makes her according to Forbes (2015) the world’s most powerful woman.
Seeing the complexity of decision making Merkel has to face every day, and her
ability to cope with it, it is interesting to examine her personality and leadership
style.
1. Introduction to political personality studies
Personality is of importance in every aspect and at every level of politics. It was
found that both the person who takes part, and the interaction between
personalities, can affect the outcome of diplomatic international negotiations and
even political events (e.g., Greenstein, 1969). The president of the United States
Woodrow Wilson lost the World War I peace in 1919, because he negotiated
1 The final version of this paper will be published as a book chapter entitled ‘Political personality and complex
decision-making: The psychological profile and leadership style of Angela Merkel, the world’s most powerful
woman. In Bursens, P., De Landtsheer, C., Braeckman, L., Segaert, B, Complex Political Decision-making:
Leadership, Legitimacy, Communication. Routledge, Forthcoming.
4
ineptly, confused rhetoric with substance, and refused to compromise (Winter,
2013). Even though the leader’s personality and style is not the only factor in
political processes, we can conclude from literature that circumstances related to
political and social structures, among which complexity and transition, and
events, such as crisis, or to the contents of communication, such as highly
symbolic issues, may promote leaders’ personalities to a higher and more
prominent level of importance for political outcomes (Greenstein, 1969; Byman
& Pollack, 2001; Winter, 2013).
The major part of political personality research has been conducted
throughout the previous decades in the United States. It focuses especially on
the assessment at a distance of individual political (world) leaders and
presidential and political candidates. The research is based on profiling
techniques conceived and used by Secret Services worldwide since World War
II (De Sutter, 2007; De Landtsheer and De Sutter, 2011). Since then, prominent
political psychologists have set up, studied, and analyzed personality profiles of
several American presidents and candidates to anticipate on their leadership and
policies. Within political psychology, political personalities were investigated
“at a distance” by way of psycho biographies (e.g., Herrman, 1987; Renshon,
2005; Post, 2013), content analysis (e.g. Suedfeld, 2000; Winter, 2003), or
psycho-diagnostic meta-analysis (Immelman, 2004). Since the nineties some
research began to focus on specific candidate traits that bring home the victory
during elections such as competence and leadership (e.g., Caprara, Barbaranelli
& Zimbardo, 2002). Much of the literature in the field of political psychology in
international relations has focused on war and peace studies, but limited
researches demonstrate that in fact also more complex matters, such as
individual psychology and negotiation strategies are of interest to the very
interesting cross roads of international relations theory and political psychology.
Furthermore, according to the cognitive approach to (foreign) policy-making,
personal reality experiences offer more powerful explanatory grounds for
political decision making then traditional approaches that focus on rational
assumptions. We can conclude from this literature that social, demographic, and
personality factors of the individual decision-makers are at the heart of
international decision-making. These factors are seen to affect the political
leaders’ attitudes and foreign- policy aims (Larson, 1985), their judgment of
various alternatives (Levy, 2003), their perceptions and misperceptions (Jervis,
1976).
In Europe, both the psychological approaches to politics (e.g., Billig,
2003) and the interest in decision-making processes at the level of the European
Union where negotiating is the core business (Allison, 1971; Jordan & Schout,
2006) did not gain ground until the early nineties. It is clear that the complex
decision making at the EU level requires particular personal qualities. In order to
5
reach their complex decisions, political leaders at the EU level should, at all
times, testify of their negotiation skills and their insights in complex matters.
Within the complex setting of EU negotiations, and without clear precedents,
politicians easily fall back on behavioral patterns dictated by their personality.
The personalities of politicians are therefore, especially at the European level, of
political significance. This also holds for the personal history of the EU leaders
and their belief system, the accumulated series of subjective values and
experiences held by individuals (Holsti, 1962). In the case of European
negotiations the personal characteristics of the persons involved and their life
history might in fact play a larger role than just a marginal one. We conclude
from the psychological profiles of the former EU leaders EU President Herman
van Rompuy, EU Commission President José Manuel Barroso and High EU
Representative for Foreign Affairs Catherine Ashton that their shared
psychological characteristics (being Accommodating and somehow Daunting in
combination with a lack of Dominance and Contentiousness) may have
advanced their fruitful co-operation at the EU top (Middelhoff, 2010;
Middelhoff & De Landtsheer, 2013; De Landtsheer & De Vries, 2015).
As a following of the insights from international relations and political
psychology it became clear that the capacity to negotiate and to form coalitions
may require slightly other qualities from political leaders than successful
campaigning does, and dealing with crisis or going to war. The majority of EU
negotiations deals with very technical and law issues and it is performed by
diplomats and civil servants. From these cases it can be concluded that the
successful negotiator in international relations should be soft on the outside but
hard on the issues (Mastenbroek, 1992). But political psychology learns that the
reversed may be true for the political candidate who wins the elections and who
in the first place should express leadership capacities (e.g., De Vries and De
Landtsheer, 2011).
This paper aims at throwing light on some of the factors that besides of her
personal history, may have contributed to Angela Merkel’s political success,
especially within the European Union’s complex decision-making. After having
pointed in this introduction to the relevance of the study of personality for
political studies, we detail in the first section the Millon Inventory of Diagnostic
Criteria (MIDC) profiling method that we use in the second section to establish
Angla Merkel’s personality profile and leadership style (Immelman, 2004;
Steinberg and Immelman, 2008), after having briefly overviewed Merkel’s life
history and beliefs. The third section discusses the MIDC results in relation to
the political context and Merkel’s handling of recent crises in EU.
2. Psychological Profiling by way of MIDC
6
The method forming the backbone of this article is the ‘Millon Inventory of
Diagnostic Criteria’ (MIDC) method. The method is most often named after
Aubrey Immelman (1999, 2002, 2003, 2004) who converged Theodore Millons’
personality research into a personality scaling model and approach that enables
researchers to determine the personality of political leaders at a distance. The
‘Immelman’ method focuses on stable personality characteristics and
temperament of politicians and on how we learn to know them through the
public sphere. The method starts from the assumption that the role of
personalities in relationships is crucial to politics. We want to express here
clearly that many factors play a role when it comes to cooperation between
political personalities. The psychological aspect is only one of these aspects. But
the MIDC method provides a good basis for identifying and classifying the
political personality. The relevance to politics of the method is that it allows to
forecast the joint functioning or dysfunctional cooperation of political
personalities and to predict political behaviour.
Political leaders tend to exhibit a combination of three predominant
personality patterns. The MIDC method distinguishes Scales and gradations of
twelve personality types (e.g., the Dominant pattern, the Ambitious pattern, the
Outgoing pattern). Table 1 of the Appendix displays the full taxonomy of
personality types. The evidence for these patterns is sought within five attribute
domains (Expressive behavior, Interpersonal conduct, Cognitive style,
Mood/temperament and Self-image) are measured. Table 2 of the Appendix
offers an overview and explanation of the attribute domains. The twelve MIDC
scales correspond to the major personality patterns by Millon (1994). These
patterns are congruent with the syndromes described on Axis II of the fourth
edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM–IV)
of the American Psychiatric Association (APA; 1994). The twelve personality
types cover the normal personality styles in which these disorders are rooted. In
his MIDC Manual, Immelman (revised edition, 2004) elaborates these styles in
great detail, with reference to the ideas of a range of scholars that include Millon
(1994), Millon and Everly (1985), Oldham and Morris (1995), and Strack
(1997). Scales 1 through 8 (comprising 10 scales and subscales) have three
gradations (a, b, c) yielding 30 personality variants, whereas Scales 9 and 0 have
two gradations (d, e), yielding four variants, for a total of 34 personality
designations, or types. For Scales 1–8, scores of 5 through 9 signify the presence
at level I (gradation a) of the personality pattern in question; scores of 10
through 23 indicate a prominent presence at level II (gradation b); and scores of
24 to 30 signify an exaggerated, mildly dysfunctional presence at level III
(gradation c). For Scales 9 and 0, scores of 20 through 35 indicate a syndrome or
moderately disturbed presence at level IV (gradation d) and scores of 36 through
45 a markedly disturbed syndrome or presence at level V (gradation e). In
essence, the MIDC model is interpreting personality disorders as essentially
7
exaggerated and pathologically distorted deviations emanating from a normal
and healthy distribution of traits (Millon & Everly, 1985). It is important to note
that high benchmarks are set for establishing the presence of a certain pattern.
Presence of a personality pattern is only significant above a score of 5 for the
Scales 1-8 and 20 for the Scales 9 and 0.
The data are collected in three steps, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation,
by way of a (semi-quantitative) content analysis. Every aspect of the entire
procedure is extensively described in the MIDC Manual (Revised edition,
Immelman, 2004). First, there are collected source materials (many, varied, long
period, different points of view) that are screened for diagnostically relevant
material (analysis). Second, this diagnostic material is coded using the 170
descriptors of the MIDC inventory (second edition revised, Immelman 2002).
The clearly defined MIDC descriptors classify the twelve personality types
according to the five attribute domainsi.Third, the final coding takes place. The
coding is holistic and it takes place upon one standardized coding sheet (Table
3) (synthesis). Scores on this sheet can only be awarded when two independent
sources confirm presence. For the purpose of reproducibility, resources are
documented. Fourth, data from the coding sheet are graphically represented in a
standardized psychograph. Fifth, the psychograph is interpreted according to the
MIDC Manual (evaluation).
Immelman and Steinberg (2008) drew theoretical links between the above
described personality patterns and their concomitant leadership styles. For each
personality pattern they distinguished a series of ten relevant leadership
dimensions which they elaborated in detail. These dimensions read as follows:
1. Motivation for leading 2. Task orientation 3. Investment in job performance 4.
Staff management strategy 5. Information management strategy – degree of
involvement and source of information 6. Personnel relations – degree and type
of involvement 7. Party-political relations – own party 8. Party-political
relations – opposition party 9. Media relations 10. Public relations. Once there is
constructed an MIDC profile it is possible to equally construct a leadership style
profile.
The Millon personality- prototypes adapted by Immelman for use in the
political sphere could be connected to Mastenbroek’s (1989) axes and
characterization of (successful) negotiators in international relations. Besides of
being hard on the inside and on the issues, and moderately dominant, (s)he
should be soft on the outside and personally warm, and extremely exploring at
the personal level. There is a great amount of resemblance between
Mastenbroek's successful negotiator features (1989) and some of the scales
Immelman (2004) uses to profile politicians. By “profiling” politicians active at
the top level of EU, we can establish their effectiveness as negotiators in EU’s
8
complex decision making. Ideally, a negotiator at the European level, would
score moderately high on the MIDC scale of the dominant (Scale 1A) and/or the
ambitious personality, in order to protect the stands on the issues. This
negotiator should furthermore be somehow outgoing (Scale 3) and/or
accommodating (Scale 4) to create a more friendly environment and/or the
possibility to explore other options and solutions. The presence, finally, of some
traits of the Dauntless personality (Scale 1B) will provide for even more
flexibility. We expect that the personality profile of an effective (EU) negotiator
draws on the above combination of personality scales.
3. Profiling Angela Merkel
In the following paragraphs we present the results of the application of the
MIDC personality and leadership style assessment of Angela Merkel. Her
personal history is of vital importance and may be a key to her success as a
negotiator in the complex decision-making of EU and as a World leader.
Merkel’s personality was largely formed during her younger years in the GDR:
“Merkel’s upbringing in a Communist state was as normal as she could make it. “I
never felt that the German Democratic Republic (G.D.R.) was my home country,” she
told the German photographer Herlinde Koelbl, in 1991. “I have a relatively sunny
spirit, and I always had the expectation that my path through life would be relatively
sunny, no matter what happened. I have never allowed myself to be bitter. I always
used the free room that the G.D.R. allowed me. . . . There was no shadow over my
childhood. And later I acted in such a way that I would not have to live in constant
conflict with the state” (Packer, 2014, D2a).
Merkel’s East-German background puts her in a position to understand better
the concerns of leaders and citizens from former communist Eastern and Central
European Countries, of the Baltic states of Belarus, and of Russia; she can
fluently communicate with Putin in Russian and in German:
“Her ambition, on the other hand, is written off as a desire to please her dad. To cover
up her embarrassment at being a pastor's daughter in an avowedly atheistic state,
Merkel embraced the system. She was top of the class, winning a trip to Moscow
because of her excellent Russian (Boyes, 2005, D2a).
Merkel’s official biography reads as follows (The Press And Information Office
of the Federal Government, 2015; Haus der Geschichte der Bundesrepublik
Deutschland, 2014). She was born on July 17th 1954 in the West-German town
Hamburg as the daughter of Herlind and Horst Kasner, her mother being a
teacher of Latin and English, her father a pastor in the German Protestant
Church. At the age of three Merkel’s family moved to Templin, a little town in
the German Democratic Republic (GDR). From 1961 to 1978 Merkel lives her
9
life in a field of tension between the demands of the socialist state and the
protestant church, where her father worked:
“The true legacy of her communist youth is that the neglected, rather damaged pastor's
daughter became both rootless and ruthless. Communism taught her how to stitch up
rivals”. Boyes, R. (2005, A2c).
Merkel was a member of the youth organization Frei Deutsche Jugend since
1968. In 1973 Merkel was studying physics at the University of Leipzig where
she met Ulrich Merkel, whom she married in 1977 and separated from in 1982.
Her political career started late but it went very fast: one year after Merkel
became a member of the Demokratischer Aufbruch (DA) she was appointed in
1990 as a spokesperson of the DA which was incorporated in the Christlich
Demokratische Union Deutschlands (CDU) and eventually merged with the
West German CDU. It took her only another year to be nominated as a Federal
Minister of Women and Youth in 1991, followed by her appointment as a
Federal Minister of Environment in 1994. When the CDU ended up in the
opposition in 1998 and 1999, Merkel was elected as secretary general of the
party and in 2000 as a party chairman and winning a seat in parliament. Angela
Merkel was elected chancellor of Germany in November 2005, a position she
holds to this day:
“In a gesture that mixed Protestant righteousness with ruthlessness, Kohl’s Mädchen
was cutting herself off from her political father and gambling her career in a naked bid
to supplant him. She succeeded. Within a few months, Merkel had been elected Party
chairman. Kohl receded into history. “She put the knife in his back—and turned it
twice,” Feldmeyer said. That was the moment when many Germans first became
aware of Angela Merkel” (Packer, 2014, A2c).
After having triumphed again during the 2013 German Bundestag elections
Merkel started her third term as a Chancellor. She was confronted with the Euro
crisis persisted and as a result of that events took place like the Greek debt crisis
since April 2015. Also the situation in Ukraine worsened and Merkel had a
prominent position in the negotiations with Putin. The 2015 refugee crisis which
has a high priority on the political and public agenda confronted the world with
a ‘new’ Angela Merkel: “This crisis really shows a new Merkel,” her biographer
says. “You’ve never seen the soft side of Merkel until now” (Vick & Shuster,
2015, D4a).
3.1. MIDC- Profiling Results
First, the diagnostic material for Angela Merkel has been obtained from news
sites, opinion articles, magazine articles, profiles and interviews from different
writers from different perspectives and relevant periods. Quotes that document
Merkel’s personality, examples of which are given in this chapter, are collected
10
in various languages from various countries (Germany, The Netherlands, UK,
US). Next, the diagnostic material was quantitatively encoded from these sources.
The results were entered into the MIDC score sheet (Appendix. Table 3) and
displayed in a graph (Figure 1).
In the analysis Angela Merkel scores 47 out of 170 possible entries. The
primary conclusion of the MIDC personality analysis for Merkel is that the
possibility of antisocial tendencies is out of the orderii. Furthermore, the Extravert
or Jovial Personality aspect (Scale 3) that is crucial to charisma, and the winning
of elections, is absent in Merkel’s case. Based on the MIDC scores Angela
Merkel’s personality fits primarily in the Conscientious-Accommodating pattern
(Scales 6 and 4), with secondary features of the Retiring pattern (Scale 8) and the
Ambitious pattern (Scale 2). In addition to these patterns also the Dominant
pattern (Scale 1A), the Reticent pattern (Scale 7) and the Aggrieved pattern (Scale
5A) are significantly present. The prominent patterns and patterns with a score of
8 and higher will be described in more detail than the patterns available at level I
with a score of 5 to 7.
3.1.1. Prominent personality patterns
As for most politicians (and people), Merkel’s personality profile shows a
combination of three of the twelve MIDC personality types. These patterns are
prominently present at level II: the Conscientious (Scale 6, 14 points), the
Accommodating (Scale 4, 11 points) and the Retiring pattern (Scale 8, 10 points).
The Ambitious pattern (Scale 2, 8 points), which, in contrast to the Retiring
pattern, is commonly found among politicians, shows minimal evidence of
presence at level II. In the past five years, the Ambitious personality type of
Merkel strongly emerged to the forefront, a trend we expect to continue.
Angela Merkel scores 14 points on the Conscientious pattern (Scale 6) that
are distributed across all behavioral domains. The main feature of the
Conscientious Expressive behavior (A) is the sense of duty. Merkel does her best
to play by the rules and to be responsible, reliable, punctual, intelligent,
disciplined, and well organized These personality traits are a result of Angela
Merkel’s childhood in East Germany. She is careful in performing obligations and
has a high degree of integrity. Angela Merkel is often described in the media as a
pragmatic person: someone who is real and goes by the facts. Because of her
background in physics Merkel is someone who proceeds very methodologically
and takes final decisions very cautiously. Her emotions are limited by a regulated,
highly structured and organized lifestyle. Merkel is a person who shows little
emotion, which is also reflected in her lack of charisma:
“Merkel used to fidget at the podium, never sure what to do with her hands. When she
finally found a comfortable position, fingertips pressed to each other like Spock, it
11
became a signature. The “Merkel rhombus,” or “raute,” inspired an emoticon, -<>-, flash
mobs and a 2013 CDU campaign ad with 2,150 supporters holding the pose to pledge
“Germany’s future in good hands” (Vick and Shuster, 2015. A6b).
Her clothing is formal, neat and modest in color and style, her well-known blazers
are a very clear example of this, even though these became more colorful through
the years. Merkel is a politician who is not afraid to work hard and her archival
knowledge is big. She will, therefore, not easily been thrown off in debates.
Merkel shows, in her Interpersonal conduct (B), a polite attitude toward others.
She adheres to social conventions and shows a preference for polite, formal and
correct personal relationships, because she does not want to disappoint people:
“Sometimes politics is hard,” she informed the girl. “You’re a very nice person, but you
know that there are thousands and thousands of people in Palestinian refugee camps in
Lebanon, and if we say, ‘You can all come,’ and, ‘You can all come from Africa,’ and
‘You can all come,’ we just can’t manage that”. Merkel broke off a moment later
because the girl was weeping. “Oh Gott,” she muttered, moving across the room. “I want
to comfort her” (Vick and Schuster, 2015. B6b).
Merkel also shows a lack of charisma in the fulfillment of her political function
and she is often perceived as boring. Merkel is in her Conscientious Cognitive
style (C), cautious, deliberate, and systematic, she pays attention to details. She
he is wary of new or untested ideas because she wants to avoid risks. Because of
her background in physics Angela Merkel is a politician who tackles issues in a
consistent, systematic and methodological way. She is afraid of a rapid solution
and therefore tries to solve problems step by step. This approach is not only
reflected in Merkel’s German domestic policy, but also at the European level. For
example, Merkel takes informed decisions, with patience, when it comes to
solutions for the Euro crisis and the Greek debt crisis. Due to slow decision-
making Merkel can avoid risks. Merkel is concerned with decency and efficiency,
she despises frivolity and public displays of emotion, but she also tends to have a
rigid attitude toward rules and procedures:
“Angela Merkel may be the most powerful politician in Europe, but she has rarely
shown much inclination for bold leadership. Both in domestic politics and, especially,
during the Euro crisis, the German chancellor’s style has been one of cautious
incrementalism. She has eschewed sweeping visions, put off decisions whenever
possible and usually reflected, rather than shaped, public opinion (The Economist, 05-
09-2015. C6a).
In her Mood/temperament (D), Merkel shows herself serious and reasonable, and
she seldom shows strong emotions. She is perceived as grim and desolate because
of her dignity, seriousness and solemn attitude, which however, does not stem
from a lack of humor. She considers herself in her Self-image (E) as dependable,
but also as disciplined, responsible, efficient and as a trustworthy person, who acts
on what is best for Germany or EU, in for example the Euro crisis. Angela Merkel
12
can also have doubts about herself or feel guilty about not following a certain
ideal.
Angela Merkel scores 11 points on the Accommodating pattern (Scale 4)
that are distributed across all behavioral domains, except Cognitive style. In her
Expressive behavior (A) Merkel tends to be cooperative and agreeing: “But if her
role in the Kohl saga suggests a ruthless streak, she is known more for her
pragmatism and ability to compromise” (BBC News, 27 September 2009. A4a).
Merkel is generous and attentive, prefers to admit and appease instead of standing
up for herself, she is considerate of others in her policy and looks for consensus
among different parties. This may be related to her East German background,
where her beliefs in social solidarity and cooperation with trade unions was
shaped. Merkel is also convinced that support from others for her policies is
needed. The main diagnostic feature of Merkel’s Interpersonal conduct (B) is
submissiveness instead of showing power. Merkel placed, in her second term,
confidants in prominent positions in order to assure herself and others of
acceptance and support, and to be able to make policy in a coalition. She avoids
tension and interpersonal conflict for what concerns her Mood/temperament (D).
Merkel is perceived as a caring person, hence her nickname Mutti: especially
when things go well, Merkel behaves warm, tender and calm. According to her
Self-image (E) she is always willing to listen and to cooperate, considerate and
modest in her aspirations, someone who is there for all people in society:
“The German leader's consensual style was well suited to the politics of compromise
imposed by co-habitation with the social democrats (The Telegraph, 29/9/2010. E4a).
Angela Merkel scored ten points on the Retiring pattern (Scale 8). She
showed herself, in her Expressive behavior (A), reserved, cool, and colorless. She
has a strong sense of wanting to be alone, and she seems lifeless and lacks motoric
activity and expressivity. She values her privacy, and is sometimes seen as
unsociable and undiplomatic. Angela Merkel lacks spontaneity, emotion, and
expressiveness during her speeches, she is often perceived as boring, with lack of
charisma. It is difficult for Angela Merkel to mobilize the German people because
of her dull and monotonous speeches, she is not a rhetorical masterpiece and her
physical movements are slow in terms of nonverbal communication: Merkel
remains faithful to her rigid posture with the fingertips together:
“Merkel bristled and withdrew to the background she preferred. At the same time, she
craved acknowledgment on her own terms, crying tears of frustration when she felt
slighted on her first trip to Israel—“a weakness that Merkel quite often displayed early
on in her political career,” according to biographer Stefan Kornelius”( Vick, K. &
Shuster, 2015. A8a).
She spends her free time on mental activities, likes to go to the opera with her
husband. According to her Interpersonal conduct (B), Merkel does not long for or
13
enjoys close relationships, she tries to avoid social activities when possible, as she
often disappears in the background or goes unnoticed. The primary motive of
socially reluctant people is to be interpersonally untied, and Angela Merkel may
exhibit these characteristics in her relationships with colleagues. Angela Merkel
is sober, she does not like to show emotion, may seem slightly pleasant, but a bit
boring following her Mood/temperament (D).
Merkel scored eight points on the Ambitious pattern (Scale 2). The main
feature of her Expressive behavior (A) is her self-assurance, evidenced by the fact
that she has risen in German politics despite her East German background. Merkel
is socially powerful, calm and confident, and like all Ambitious persons, she is
self-promoting and exhibits a sense of self-importance:
“I think it's a pretty safe bet to say that after Germany's general election on 27
September, Angela Merkel will still be chancellor. The only question is, will her foreign
minister be the Social Democrat incumbent Frank-Walter Steinmeier or the Free
Democrat challenger Guido Westerwelle? Which doesn't really matter, as Merkel is her
own woman and has forged her own foreign policy” (Guardian, 2009. A2a).
Her way of acting is in a superior, imperious, manner, her behavior is, often
unconscious, characterized as exploiting people and being authorized for certain
actions; competitors are put aside by Merkel in her own favor. Kohl, her political
father, has taken Merkel in German politics in tow and taught her everything, but
she has put him offside:
“Nobody seemed prepared to confront Kohl but Angela Merkel refused to follow the
pack. In a front-page piece in a leading conservative newspaper, she denounced her
former mentor and called upon him to resign. It was a stunning act of political patricide
and set Merkel on a trajectory towards the top of German politics” (Marr, 2013. B2a).
Merkel exhibits, like all ambitious persons, a self-centered personality which does
not care about social reciprocity. Assertiveness is furthermore, the key diagnostic
feature of the Interpersonal conduct (B) of these ambitious individuals, which
again, is evident from the way Merkel deals with competitors such as her political
mentor Helmut Kohl. In German politics Merkel is known as a tough fighter.
Merkel managed to help sustain the coalition in her second term as chancellor,
despite expectations that it would break, because of excessive political differences
with coalition partner the Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SPD).
Angela Merkel is also calm, serene and optimistic, according to her
Mood/temperament (D) she is typically unflappable, cool and down to earth under
pressure:
“Merkel knows Putin’s bullying at a visceral level. In 2007, on a visit to his Black Sea
residence, the Russian strongman opened the door during a photo opportunity and let in
his massive Labrador, named Koni. Merkel, whose fear of dogs is well known, eyed the
canine with visible distress as it sniffed around her. Cameras whirred, and from the next
chair Putin watched with a broad smile and legs spread wide. But she refused to be
drawn (Vick and Shuster, 2015. D2a).
14
Figure 1. The MIDC Profile (Immelman, 2004) of Angela Merkel
3.1.2. Other significant personality patterns
Angela Merkel further achieves, besides of at the earlier discussed Ambitious
pattern (Scale 2, 8 points) significant level I. scores, on the presence of the
Dominant pattern (Scale 1A, 7 points), the Reticent pattern (Scale 7, 6 points) and
the Aggrieved pattern (Scale 5A, 5 points). The Dauntless pattern (Scale 1B, 4
points) and the Contentious pattern (Scale 5B, 4 points) do show minimal
15
evidence of presence at level I. The Outgoing pattern (Scale 3, 2 points), the
Distrusting pattern (Scale 9, 4 points), and the Erratic pattern (Scale 10, 0 points)
are not present in the political personality of Angela Merkel. The diagnostic
material supports the view that Merkel acts too powerful according to critics and
that this leads to resistance, as for example in Greece. As can be deducted from
their spread across attitude domains, the two personality types that are striking at
level I., the Dominant pattern (Scale 1A, 7 points) and the Ambitious pattern
(Scale 2, 8 points) have the potential to increase.
Merkel gains seven points on the Dominant pattern (Scale 1A). She is
tough, strong, competitive, strong-willed and not sentimental. Despite her many
opponents, Angela Merkel has perseverance, and she is continuing her policy in
Germany and Europe. Her perseverance does not always advance her position in
public opinion: in Greece, she was portrayed as Hitler or a Nazi, because of her
very dominant position and strict rules regarding the Greek national debt. That
accusation suits the extreme variant of the Dominant pattern, since these people
are dominant, intimidating and perceived as cold and insensitive to the feelings of
others. Dominant individuals are powerful, authoritative and convincing. That
Angela Merkel is authoritative is reflected in the respect that she receives from
colleagues. Merkel herself recognizes that she must convince others to implement
her policy, both in Europe and Germany, and she can therefore be seen as a
politician with power of persuasion:
“Her analytical, cerebral approach to governance has brought Merkel closer to U.S.
President Barack Obama than either of them would have thought after she denied him
permission to make a 2008 campaign speech at Brandenburg Gate, a historic Berlin
venue reserved for leaders who have already been elected” (Vick and Shuster, 2015.
A1Aa).
3.2. The Leadership style by Angela Merkel
How to catch hold of Merkel’s leadership style in the complex decision-making
environment of EU? A leadership style is defined by the two or three dominant
personality types that emerge from the personality analysis (Steinberg &
Immelman, 2008). In the case of Angela Merkel these dominant personality types
are the Conscientious pattern (Scale 6, 14 points), the Accommodating pattern
(Scale 4, 11 points), and the Retiring pattern (Scale 8, 10 points). We mainly build
up Merkel’s style with her two most pounding patterns; Steinberg and Immelman
(2008) unfortunately did not provide descriptions of all possible style
combinations. With the inclusion of elements from other notable scales (e.q.,
Dominant, 1A, 7 points) for Angela Merkel we were able to sound out her
leadership profile in three domains with nine variables (below). It seems that
16
“Mrs Merkel has gone from strength to strength since being elected Chancellor by a
wafer thin majority in 2005. Her unpretentious, straightforward style has won her a
reputation as a powerful and effective negotiator” (Paterson, 2008, A1Ab).
3.2.1.Motivation, task orientation, and job performance
Merkel’s motivation to lead is mainly pragmatism. From the diagnostically
relevant material appears that Merkel approaches political problems in a
pragmatic way by proceeding carefully and methodologically. She does not take
risks and tests solutions before contributing them. Power is equally a factor of
motivation for Merkel. As a Conscientious leader she is overly controlling, strict
and perfectionist, she wants to keep herself in power. By tackling a problem step
by step and work very hard Merkel keeps a large proportion of the power for
herself. Merkel is somehow also an Ambitious leader:
“Even when she was awkward and shy, you could feel her energy, you could feel her
power, from the beginning,” says Herlinde Koelbl, a prominent German photographer
who in 1991 began taking portraits of 15 up-and-coming politicians, including Merkel”
(Vick and Shuster, 2015. A1Aa).
Angela Merkel attaches importance to personal validation as evidenced by her
policy of compromise and consensus. She wants in other words being accepted
and fun to be around. Due to her Accommodating personality, “Mutti” hungers
for everyone to agree with her policy and she finds the opinion of the voter very
important. But Merkel is able to go against the grain, to confront and to show
leadership:
““She has demonstrated particularly bold moral and practical leadership on the refugee
crisis, welcoming vulnerable migrants despite the political costs,” says Obama’s
national security adviser Susan Rice” (Vick and Shuster, 2015. A5Ba).
Task-orientation: The leadership style of Angela Merkel is both process oriented
and purposeful. The Accommodating Merkel focuses on the process and considers
organizational survival more important than a goal. She is especially interested in
good relationships with colleagues. Because of her background in physics, Merkel
works very process driven and methodologically by coming step to step to a
solution like during the Euro crisis. It is important for Merkel to get enough people
behind her during the process and therefor she focuses on that, although it may
slow the process down. The Conscientious Merkel however cares for both the
process and the goals. With her hard work ethic, she wants to demonstrate that
the government is working like a well-oiled machine.
17
Investment in job performance: As a predominantly Conscientious and
Accommodating leader, Merkel is keen on relations, and she invests in the right
relationships with colleagues:
“By the accounts of colleagues and visitors, Merkel is as entertaining in private as she is stolid
in public. In the right mood, she will caricature other public figures to devastating effect, and
finds an edge in conversation to make pointed jokes, both at her own expense and that of others.
Bombastic males are a specialty (Vick and Shuster, 2015. A3a).
3.2.2.Management strategy of cabinet and of information
Merkel is in her management strategy for the cabinet rather an Accommodating
than a – rigid- Conscientious leader. She finds it important that people support her
policy and does not warn compromises or consensus. The Conscientious Merkel
would, for the implementation of her morally correct and most efficient policy,
rather act as an advocate within her administration than as seeking consensus and
being an arbiter. She lacks imagination and is often somewhat rigid, making
policy choices often of monochrome quality.
Also in management strategy concerning information, there is a difference
in the level of engagement between the leadership styles. Accommodating leaders
have a low involvement, while Conscientious leaders have a high commitment to
information to protect themselves from errors. However, the agreement is that
they both focus on the in-house information instead of information from
independent sources. The Accommodating Merkel does so from a willingness to
cooperate and trust in others, the Conscientious Merkel from a perspective of
order and hierarchy:
“But she enforces extremely strict controls on information, emphasizing the necessity of
absolute confidentiality in all matters. “When you violate that, you never get another chance,”
says Steinbrück. Merkel’s Chancellery is an extraordinarily tight ship, as buttoned down as she
is”(Vick and Shuster, 2015, B6c).
3.2.3.Relationship with own party and opposition parties, with personnel, with
media, with the public
Conscientious-Accommodating leaders are in the relationship with their own
party and with opposition parties both dutiful and cooperative and harmonious.
The Accommodating Merkel is cooperative and harmonious and has an aversion
to conflict. For that reason she tries to stand aloof from heated and divided
debates. The Conscientious Merkel can behave competitively and rebellious
18
(sometimes imperious) against subordinates. But she is dutiful and harmoniously
and cooperatively if she considers her political allies and staff as equals:
“Indeed, some outsiders have argued that Mrs Merkel's unwieldy grand coalition
government of conservatives and Social Democrats has forced her to make a string of
compromises which have effectively rolled back economic reform” (Paterson, 2008.
A4b).
Merkel is very interactive in her relationship with personnel. Due to her
aversion of conflict, Merkel has a preference for employees who express and
defend the policies of their administration. The Accommodating Merkel treats
her subordinates in a collegial and caring way. The Conscientious Merkel is
highly interactive with staff fearing that something important escapes to her
attention. The bottom layer of her subordinates are often treated polite and
courteous, while the top layer can count on uncompromising, demanding and
domineering behavior.
Merkel's relationship between the media can be described as an open one,
from cordial and cooperative to polite and formal:
“I think most of the time I’ve spent with her she is smiling,” says Robert Kimmitt, a
former ambassador who has known her since 1991. Select reporters can see the playful
and barbed side of Merkel when, on trips abroad, she calls them into the salon on her
Airbus A319 or in occasional small-group briefings at the Chancellery” (Vick and
Shuster, 2015. A3a).
The relationship with the public of Angela Merkel relies on a mixed behavior,
more active than passive, from her side. Critics believe that Merkel listens too
much to the majority of voters and adjusts her policy on that. Merkel handles this
relation because of sense of duty and responsibility, but she does not like this
aspect of governing and would rather let senior officials express and defend the
policies of the administration:
“In these circumstances, it would take courage to argue for European community spirit.
But having the courage to oppose public opinion isn't one of Merkel's traditional
strengths (Spiegel, 29/03/2010. A4c).
4.Conclusion and discussion
The case study explains how personality and leadership characteristics of Angela
Merkel positively affect her performance at the complex decision-making level of
EU. With her prominent score on Conscientiousness (Scale 6, 14 points) Merkel
shows herself a hard-working person that is truly concerned about the interests
and issues that are under discussion. She is also Ambitious (Scale 2, 8 points) and
somewhat Dominant (Scale 1A, 7 points). She is not lenient and tries to influence
19
the balance in her favor. But Merkel does not behave overly bossy or domineering.
Merkel therefore meets the criteria put forward by Mastenbroek (1989) for being
a successful negotiator. Merkel will not allow her being pushed around, but unlike
most politicians, she is modest (Scale 5A, 5 points), prudent (Scale 7, 6 points),
and reserved (Scale 8, 10 points):
“The most powerful woman in the world does her own grocery shopping, dragging a
small security contingent to the German equivalent of Kroger’s “ (Vick and Shuster,
2015. A3a).
It seems that the personality and leadership style of Angela Merkel relies on a
paradox that fits like a glove the complex decision-making of EU and world
politics.
Merkel’s leadership style is mainly a combination of the Conscientious and
the Accommodating leadership style. She exhibits characteristics of both styles of
leadership, despite the fact that these styles sometimes contradict each other.
While during the Greek debt crisis we saw the Conscientious leader, it was the
Accommodating leader that showed up during the European refugee crisis, where
Merkel revealed for the first time a soft side of her character. Politicians with a
very pronounced type of the mixed personality can be inflexible and indecisive.
Indecision is a characteristic which is attributed to Angela Merkel by critics
because of her cautious attitude in the policies of the European Union and the debt
crisis in Greece. This indecisive attitude can be accompanied by a fear of failure
or error which is exacerbated by persistent doubts about him- or herself. Merkel’s
cautious approach, however, is also seen as patient and careful decision making
that reduces the probability of failure and making mistakes. Conscientious-
Accommodating people fear condemnation and abandonment, thereby they
willingly submit to the wishes, expectations and demands of others. Merkel is
known for compromising with others and therefore to ensure consensus in the
executive policy. In this manner she responds to various interested parties and she
gets support for her policies in both Germany and the European Union. For
personalities like Merkel love and respect are earned through dedication and hard
work. They are careful in their tasks because they anticipate criticism. This is
evident from Merkel’s ‘step-by-step’ approach in solving the Euro crisis
combined with her patient decision making. Conscientious-Accommodating
people show peace of mind and social altruism to prevent critique and deviation.
Merkel reflects this reliable picture of herself to show that she is a Chancellor and
European leader for all.
It would be interesting to complement the political personality profile of
Angela Merkel again in five years from now considering these developments.
Seeing her profile and leadership style, we expect Merkel to behave more
dominant and more ambitious in the future, with an increase in the Dominant
20
pattern (Scale 1A) to level II, and in the Ambitious pattern (Scale 2) for which
there is already minimal evidence at level II:
“Merkel is sometimes referred to as "Madame Non." When one of the other EU
leaders finishes speaking during European summit meetings in Brussels, it is said,
people tend to look first at Merkel to gauge her reaction” (Spiegel, 23-03-2015.
B1Aa).
Merkel is one of the dominant leaders in Europe and pushes her interests
through the European policy. She will likely continue to present herself this way
in the future:
“What all her moves have in common is a relentless determination to resolve Europe's
gravest crisis since World War II by deepening the continent's economic and political
union, not unwinding it” (Foreign Policy, December 2012. A1Aa).
We equally assume that Merkel will position herself very competitive and
defiant during the next elections. She will act rebellious or even imperious to
maintain her position with regard to subordinates that could pose a threat to her
position as a chancellor.
Steinberg en Immelman (2008) unfortunately have no descriptions of all
mixed patterns and sometimes conflicting leadership styles. In addition it is not
always possible to support certain features of the leadership style with the
collected diagnostic material, as in the following case:
“With German money the deciding factor, Merkel has wrested tough concessions from
governments, arguing that European leaders need to overhaul labor regulations and
restructure their public finances by balancing their budgets. While that message has
brought her applause at home -- her approval ratings exceed 60% -- it has not gone down
well elsewhere. On the streets of Athens, some protesters have depicted Merkel as a
Nazi imposing her will on hapless Greeks” (Walt, 2013. AA1c).
Especially relationships with others are missing in the diagnostically relevant
material. It would be interesting to examine in future research in which situations
Merkel acts like a Conscientious leader and in what situations as an
Accommodating leader. This could, for example, be done by a media-analysis in
combination with interviews of staff and co-workers and/or a survey of the
population. By using such an analysis a final and comprehensive leadership
profile could be determined. In this way Merkel’s political behavior or policy
could be predicted even better. Until then, we sum up Angela Merkel’s shining
performance at the EU’ complex decision-making theatre as follows:
“She’s very difficult to know, and that is a reason for her success,” the longtime political
associate said. “It seems she is not from this world. Psychologically, she gives everybody the
feeling of ‘I will take care of you’” ( Packer, 2014. D4a).
21
Bibliography
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (4thd.). Washington, DC: Author.
BBC News, 27 September 2009, Taken 1/5/2010 from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4572387.stm
Boyes, R. (2005). NS Profile - Angela Merkel. Published 25 July 2005. Retrieved 23/4/2010
from http://www.newstatesman.com/200507250025.
Byman, D. & Pollack, K. (2001). Let us now praise great men: Bringing the Statesman back in.
International Security, 25, 107-146.
Billig, M. (2003). Political Rhetoric. In David O. Sears, Leonie Huddy, & Robert
Jervis (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology (pp. -). Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Caprara, G.V., Barbaranilli, C., & Zimbardo, P.G. (2002). When parsimony subdue
distinctiveness: Simplified public perceptions of politicians’ personality. Political Psychology,
23, 77-95.
De Landtsheer, C. , De Sutter, P. (2011). De Clash der Titanen: een psychopolitieke
cartografie van de Belgische politiek. Antwerpen: Antwerp University Press.
De Landtsheer, C., De Vries, P. Branding the Image of a Fox: The Psychological
Profile of EU President Herman Van Rompuy. Journal of Political Marketing,
Vol. 14, 2015: 200-222.
De Landtsheer C., van der Schaaf W., Immelman, A. Hetpersoonlijkheidsprofiel
van de Top van Paars II (Kok, Borst en Jorritsma) door de lens van de
Nederlandse media. Tijdschrift voor communicatiewetenschap, 32:2(2004), p. 162-187.
De Sutter, P. (2007). Ces fous qui nous gouvernent: Comment la psychologie permet de
comprendre les hommes politiques. Bruxelles : Ed. Les Arènes.
De Vries, P., De Landtsheer, C. (2011). The Centrality of Political Personality to Political
Suitability, A matter of Charisma? La centralidad de la personalidad política en la idoneidad
política: Un asunto De Carisma? aDResearch ESIC Nº 4 Vol. 4 · Julio-Diciembre: 66-81.
Forbes. (2015). The World's Most Powerful People. Geraadpleegd op 15 april, 2015, op
http://www.forbes.com/powerful-people/list/#tab:overall
Foreign Policy (2012). Angela Merkel. Foreign Policy December 2012.Guardian (2009).
Merkel leads the quiet revolution. In: Guardian, 16/9/2009. Taken 20/3/2010 from:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/16/angela-merkel-germany.
Greenstein, F. I. (1969). Personality and politics: Problems of evidence, inference, and
conceptualization. Chicago: Markham.
Gross Stein, J. (2012) Foreign policy decision-making: rational, psychological and
neurological models. In Smithe, S., Hadfield, A. , Dunne, T., Foreign Policy: Theories,
Actors, Cases. Oxford: Oxford University Press: pp. 102-116.
22
Haus der Geschichte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. (2014). Biografie Angela
Merkel. Geraadpleegd op 17 maart, 2015, op
http://www.hdg.de/lemo/biografie/angela-merkel.html
Hermann, M. G. (1987). Assessing the foreign policy role orientations of sub-
Saharan African leaders. In S. G. Walker (Ed.), Role theory and foreign policy
analysis (pp. 161–198). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Holsti, O. R. (1962) The Belief System and National Images: A Case Study. The Journal of
Conflict Resolution, Vol. 6, No. 3, Case Studies in Conflict (Sep., 1962), pp. 244-252
Immelman, A. (2003). Personality in political psychology. In I. B. Weine
(Series Ed.), T. Millon & M. J. Lerner (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of psychology.
Vol. 5. Personality and social psychology (pp. 599–625). Hoboken, NJ: Willey.
Immelman, A. (2004). Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria Manual (2e ed.).
Manuscript, Department of Psychology, St. John's University, Collegeville, MN.
Immelman, A. (2002). The political personality of U.S. president George W.
Bush. In L. O. Valenty & O. Feldman (Eds.), Political leadership for the new
century: Personality and behavior among American leaders (pp. 81–103).
Westport, CT: Praeger.
Immelman, A. (2005). Political psychology and personality. In S. Strack (Ed.), Handbook of
personology and psychopathology (pp. 198–225). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Immelman, A. (Compiler) (2002). Millon inventory of diagnostic criteria (Second edition
revised, MIDC–II–R). Research Report, St. John’s University, Collegeville, MN.
Jordan, A., Schout, A. (2006). The coordination of the European Union. Oxford: Oxford UP.
Larson, D.W. (1985). Origins of Containment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Levy, J. (2003). Political Psychology and Foreign Policy. In D. Sears, L. Huddy & R. Jervis
(Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology (pp. 253-284). Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Marr, A. (2013). The making of Angela Merkel, a German enigma. In BBC, 24-09-2013.
Consulted 08-04-2015 on: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24159595
Mastenbroek, W. (1989). Negotiation in business. Oxford: Blackwell.
Middelhoff, J. , De Landtsheer, C. (2013). The role of personality in politics: Ashton, Barroso
and Van Rompuy, Trinity at EU? Politics, Culture & Socialization, Vol. 4, No. 2: 475-487.
Middelhoff, J. (2010). The giants of European decision-making. Master thesis, Universiteit
Antwerpen
Millon, T. (1990). Toward a new personology: An evolutionary model. New York: Wiley.
Millon, T. (with Weiss, L. G., Millon, C. M., & Davis, R. D.). (1994). Millon
Index of Personality Styles Manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
23
Millon, T., & Davis, R. D. (2000). Personality disorders in modern life. New York: Wiley.
Millon, T., & Everly, G. S., Jr. (1985). Personality and its disorders: A biosocial learning
approach. New York: Wiley.
Oldham, J. M., & Morris, L. B. (1995). The new personality self-portrait (Rev. ed.). New
York: Bantam Books.
Packer, G. , 2014. The Quiet German. In The New Yorker, 01-12-2014, 08-04-2015 van:
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/01/quiet-german.
Packer, G. (2014). The Quiet German. In The New Yorker, 01-12-2014. Consulted 08-04-
2015 on: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/01/quiet-german
Paterson, T. (2008). Merkel named most powerful woman in world (again). In the
Independent, 28/08/2008. Taken 29/4/2010 from:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/merkel-named-most-powerful-woman-in-
world-again-911891.html
Post, J. (2013). Psychobiography: The child is the Father of the Man. In Leonie Huddy, David
O. Sears, & Jack Levy (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, Second Edition (pp.
459-488). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Renshon, S. (2005). The 50% American: Immigration And National Identity in an Age of
Terror. Washington: Georgetown University Press.
Spiegel, 29/03/2010. Chancellor Abandons Germany's Post-War EU Policy.
Spiegel, 23-03-2015. ‘The Fourth Reich’: What Some Europeans See When They Look At
Germany. Consulted 09-04-2015 on: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-
power-in-the-age-of-the-euro-crisis-a-1024714.html
Steinberg, B., Immelman, A. (2008). Theoretical Links Between Personality Patterns and
Leadership Style. Research Report, St. John’s University, Collegeville, MN.
Strack, S. (1997). The PACL: Gauging normal personality styles. In T. Millon (Ed.), The
Millon inventories: Clinical and personality assessment (pp. 477–497). New York: Guilford.
Steinberg, B. S., & Immelman, A. (2008). Theoretical Links Between Personality Patterns
and Leadership Style.
Suedfeld, P (2000). Domain-Related Variation in Integrative Complexity: Clinton, Gingrich,
Gorbachev, and Various Canadian Political Leaders. A Measure of Political Importance and
Responsiveness? In C. De Landtsheer and O. Feldman, Beyond Public Speech and Symbols.
Westport, Connecticut: Praeger.
The Economist, 05-09-2015. Merkel the bold: On refugees, Germany’s chancellor is brave,
decisive and right. Consulted 18-12-2015 on:
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21663228-refugees-germanys-chancellor-brave-
decisive-and-right-merkel-bold.
24
The Press And Information Office of the Federal Government. (2015). Angela
Merkel. Geraadpleegd op 17 maart, 2015,
http://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/Webs/BKin/EN/AngelaMerkel/Profile/profile_node.html
The Telegraph, 29/9/2010, German Elections: Merkel‘s coalition must pursue divisive
reforms. Taken 23/4/2010 from:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/6237789/German-elections-
Merkels-coalition-must-pursue-divisive-reforms.html
Vick, K. & Shuster. S. (2015). Person of the year, Chancellor of the free world, Angela
Merkel’s journey from daughter of a Lutheran pastor in East Germany to de facto leader of a
continent. In Time Magazine, December 2015. Consulted 18-12-2015 van:
http://time.com/time-person-of-the-year-2015-angela-merkel/
Walt, V. (2013). Europe’s New Iron Lady. In Fortune, 08-12-2013.
Winter, D. G. (2003). Personality and Political Behavior. In David O. Sears, Leonie Huddy, &
Robert Jervis (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology (pp. 110-145). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Winter, D. G. (2013). Personality Profiles of Political Elites. In Leonie Huddy, David O.
Sears, & Jack Levy (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, Second Edition (pp.
423-458). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25
Appendix. Table 1. Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria: Scales and Gradations
(Immelman, 2004) (a= score 1, b= score 2, c= score 3, d= score 4, e= score 5).
Scale 1A: Dominant pattern
a. Asserting
b. Controlling
c. Aggressive (Sadistic)
Scale 1B: Dauntless pattern
a. Adventurous
b. Dissenting
c. Aggrandizing (Antisocial)
Scale 2: Ambitious pattern
a. Confident
b. Self-serving
c. Exploitative (Narcissistic)
Scale 3: Outgoing pattern
a. Congenial
b. Gregarious
c. Impulsive (Histrionic)
Scale 4: Accommodating pattern
a. Cooperative
b. Agreeable
c. Submissive (Dependent)
Scale 5A: Aggrieved pattern
a. Unpresuming
b. Self-denying
c. Self-defeating
Scale 5B: Contentious pattern
a. Resolute
b. Oppositional
c. Negativistic (Passive aggressive)
Scale 6: Conscientious pattern
a. Respectful
b. Dutiful
c. Compulsive (Obsessive compulsive)
Scale 7: Reticent pattern
a. Circumspect
b. Inhibited
c. Withdrawn (Avoidant)
Scale 8: Retiring pattern
a. Reserved
b. Aloof
c. Solitary (Schizoid)
Scale 9: Distrusting pattern
d. Suspicious
e. Paranoid
Scale 0: Erratic pattern
d. Unstable
e. Borderline
26
Appendix. Table 2. Millon’s Five from Eight Attribute Domains (Immelman, 2004).
Attribute Description
A: Expressive behavior The individual’s characteristic behavior; how the individual
typically appears to others; what the individual knowingly or
unknowingly reveals about him- or herself; what the individual
wishes others to think or to know about him or her.
B: Interpersonal conduct How the individual typically interacts with others; the attitudes
that underlie, prompt, and give shape to these actions; the
methods by which the individual engages others to meet his or
her needs; how the individual copes with social tensions and
conflicts.
C: Cognitive style How the individual focuses and allocates attention, encodes
and processes information, organizes thoughts, makes
attributions, and communicates reactions and ideas to others.
D: Mood/temperament How the individual typically displays emotion; the
predominant character of an individual’s affect and the
intensity and frequency with which he or she expresses it.
E: Self-image The individual’s perception of self-as-object or the manner in
which the individual overtly describes him- or herself.
27
Appendix. Table 3. The MIDC Profile (Immelman, 2004) of Angela Merkel
i “Attribute A: Expressive Behavior. The individual’s characteristic behavior; how the
individual typically appears to others; what the individual knowingly or unknowingly reveals
about him- or herself; what the individual wishes others to think or to know about him or her.
Scale 1. Dominant: Asserting–Controlling–Aggressive (Sadistic)
1Aa Assertive: tough, strong-willed, outspoken, unsentimental.
1Ab Forceful: controlling, overbearing; power-oriented tendencies evident in occasional
intransigence, stubbornness, and coercive behaviors.
1Ac Aggressive: domineering, belligerent, precipitate; inclined to react in sudden abrupt
outbursts of an unexpected and unwarranted nature.
SAD Precipitate: disposed to react in sudden abrupt outbursts of an unexpected and
unwarranted nature. ii These tendencies should be considered when the subject obtains a score of 15 or above on
Scale 1A, 1B, 2, 3, or 5B, or a score of 16 or above on Scale 9. For a comprehensive
classification of antisocial personality subtypes, see Millon and Davis (1998).
top related