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

2

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).