{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03878406708595388, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010482180293501049, 'mean_word_length': 5.970802919708029, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Climatic ecology of charismatic leadership ideals

On the basis of the ecological leadership theory (van de Vliert & Smith, 2004), the perceived effectiveness of charismatic leadership in a country's organizations is conceptualized as an adaptation to two interacting characteristics of the environment—cold, temperate, or hot climate, and national wealth. A secondary analysis of managerial survey data gathered in 61 countries (House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004) supports the viewpoint that charismatic organizational leadership is endorsed more in higher income countries with more demanding climates (e.g., Scandinavia) but less in lower income countries with more demanding climates (e.g., Soviet successor states). These climatoeconomic effects are mediated by national culture: charismatic organizational leadership thrives in niches of climate-based demands, wealth-based resources, low power distance, and low uncertainty avoidance.