Following the Fuhrer’s Lead: Hitler’s Leadership Style and its impact on the Nazi Party structure By Brooks E. King

Leadership Models Transformational/Charismatic Authoritarian Hitler Laissez-Faire Democratic Transactional Paternalistic Nazi Party Leaders Bureaucratic

Weimar Republic Period Hitler’s leadership followed the Transformational/Charismatic model. “‘Leader’ does not follow man made rules… he creates new ones.” –Pg. 518, H. Gerth, 1940 Beerhall Putsch Executive Orders that give Nazi party more power and control Creates ethical standard and establishes himself to be on the ethical ‘high- ground.’ Acts as a messianic, prophetic authority, creating a narrative that pits Germany against ‘Jewish aggressors’ and casts himself as leading a crusade. Consistent in speech and actions, doesn’t ‘flip-flop’ on issues. Appeals to followers ideals i.e. creating a better, morally pure Germany through National Socialism.

Influence on Party Party members idealize Hitler as a result of his transformational leadership; his charisma wins himself leading role in party. Helps ignite fervor against Jews, Bolsheviks, etc. through inflammatory ideology, creating unity in party and fear in populace. Draws scores of voters through charismatic speeches, followers view him and Nazi party as best hope for Germany. Driving force in Nazi party’s rise to power.

Influence on State Eliminates opposition and establishes Nazi dominance through executive orders, loyal militants carrying out his will, etc. Myth of ‘World-Jewry’ Nazis appear to be morally correct Builds sympathy for Nazi cause in German populace Unity against common foe Designates himself as bearer of the torch

Third Reich Period Hitler followed the Laissez-Faire model of Leadership Designs overarching goals for party leaders Party leaders are expected to accomplish goals without further guidance from the leader Implementation of goals left to party leaders, given a great deal of autonomy in carrying out their tasks. Success by these leaders means further goals are given to them to accomplish, greater status with party. Hitler chose self-motivated individuals with strong belief in party ideology. Competitiveness within the party encouraged

Influence on Party Party leaders set out to accomplish Hitler’s goals, the successful leaders gained positions of higher status within the Nazi Party Examples: Heinrich Himmler, Reinhard Heydrich Hitler had only to state an objective and the rest would be taken care of by Nazi leadership Created rivalries within party, with competition being commonplace amongst Nazi elite; fits within Nazi ideology of the most superior person gaining the most power and traction within the party. Despite competition, the myth of ‘World-Jewry’ gave party leaders a common enemy to unite against Creation of SS and elevation of SS officers to elite status

Influence on State Nazi Party leaders given direct role in handling all tasks of state governance Bureaucracy grows around the implementation of Hitler’s policies The “Final Solution” takes place largely without Hitler’s guidance, reflecting the goal-oriented aims of Nazi leadership Nazi ideology is implemented in all forms of administration of the state, Nazi leaders take prominent role in this administration

The Fall of Germany Bureaucratic form of Leadership becomes dominant in this period, more exclusive of Hitler’s direct influence Over the course of the Third Reich Hitler became increasingly reclusive Although Hitler had final say in all decisions made by Nazi Leadership, his charismatic and laissez-faire presence had waned as Nazi administration largely took control of state activities During this period Hitler’s exercised little control over Reich activities, however his Charismatic leadership was deferred to as final authority in all decisions