Decision Makers: Recep Tayyip Erdoğan

A three-part assessment, based on the political personality profiling methodologies of Margaret Hermann, O. R. Holsti and David Winter, which seeks to understand how a leader’s beliefs, values and attitudes shape decision-making and predict future actions by analysing past responses and behavioural patterns.

Azure’s personality profiles can be fully tailored. Require an assessment of a head of state, a rising political figure, or a key decision maker? Contact us to discuss how we can cater to your needs.

Bio

Name: Recep Tayyip Erdoğan

Position: President of Turkey August 2014– ; former Prime Minister of Turkey 2003–14.

Age: 71 (d.o.b. February 26, 1954)

Place of Birth: Istanbul, Turkey

Key takeaways

•  Control through emotional manipulation: Erdoğan builds loyalty through a mix of reward and punishment, and emotionally charged rhetoric. Driven by strong power and affiliation needs, he seeks to dominate others and values close, loyal relationships – responding warmly to allies and reacting forcefully when allegiance is questioned.
• Cognitive rigidity: Erdoğan exhibits low conceptual complexity, high belief in control, and low self-confidence, leading to resistance to opposing views, institutional checks, and critical feedback.
• Conflict-orientated worldview: Erdoğan views the political landscape as hostile, reinforcing a zero-sum approach to politics and distrust of foreign actors and domestic opposition.
• Strategic flexibility: Despite ideological rigidity, he displays strategic and tactical adaptability, recalibrating alliances when needed for political survival.
• Identity-driven politics: He mobilises support through binary moral narratives, portraying Turkish-Muslim identity as under siege and political opponents as existential threats.
• Authoritarian shift: Following the 2013 Gezi Park protests and, more decisively, after the 2016 coup attempt, Erdoğan’s leadership shifted from transformational to authoritarian – marked by centralised power, the erosion of democratic norms and institutions, and a deep suspicion of dissent framed as betrayal.

I. Leadership traits and motivations

Insights are drawn from Margaret Hermann’s leadership trait analysis and David Winter’s motive imagery analysis and benchmarked against global averages. The analysis is based on a 27,906-word dataset from five speeches and interviews with Erdoğan between January 2016 and March 2025.

Key traits: Low conceptual complexity, high belief in control, high need for power and affiliation, low self-confidence.

Motivational profile: A strong need to influence, control others; a strong desire for friendly relationships.

Analysis

Erdoğan’s low score in conceptual complexity suggests limited openness to new or conflicting information. He appears to rely on a close circle of advocates who reinforce his pre-existing views, often discounting contradictory evidence. His cognitive style prioritises persuasion over deliberation or exploration of alternative perspectives. This approach simplifies decision-making by relying on a structured worldview rooted in fixed categories and stereotypes, but it can also limit flexibility in complex or shifting environments (Hermann, 2003).

A high belief in his ability to control events, combined with a strong power motivation, indicates a leader who frequently challenges external constraints and pushes the boundaries of what is politically feasible. Erdoğan demonstrates a strong sense of personal direction and is highly effective – both directly and indirectly – at achieving his objectives. He is inclined to intervene directly in policy decisions and their implementation and closely monitor outcomes to ensure they align with his expectations. His leadership is highly personalised, often involving close monitoring of subordinates, unannounced visits, and face-to-face diplomacy to assert control and test resolve. Erdoğan believes strongly in his ability to shape events. Once committed to a chosen course of action, he generally resists compromise or collaboration, operating with a strong sense of certainty. (Hermann, 2003; Winter, 1977).

His power motivation is expressed not only through forceful action and persuasion but also through emotionally resonant behaviours that enhance his visibility, prestige and influence. While this boosts his ability to lead, build alliances and mobilise support, it also makes him more susceptible to flattery, an overemphasis on success, and impulsive or aggressive responses under stress – particularly in the absence of institutional constraints, where heightened physiological strain can lead to risk-prone decision-making (Winter, 1977).

At the same time, Erdoğan exhibits a high affiliation motivation, meaning he prioritises emotionally close, trusting relationships – especially with those perceived as like-minded or loyal. He is more responsive to individuals he knows well and performs better when surrounded by trusted allies rather than unfamiliar experts. This reliance on personal relationships contributes to a leadership style that is emotionally anchored and insulated from dissent. In unfamiliar or adversarial environments, Erdoğan may struggle to cooperate or adapt and display defensive, prickly, or hostile behaviour. His low self-confidence may reinforce this pattern, as this indicates underlying insecurities that can manifest in inconsistent or reactive behaviour (Hermann, 2003; Winter, 1977).

Implications

Erdoğan’s decision-making style is shaped by a need for control, low tolerance for alternative or conflicting viewpoints, and reliance on a loyal inner circle. He approaches decisions with a strong sense of certainty, favouring persuasive and emotionally charged tactics over open-ended negotiation. His low conceptual complexity limits his ability to consider new or conflicting information, while his power motivation drives him to push boundaries and act unilaterally. He is more likely to trust intuition and personal relationships than technical expertise, which makes his decisions more rigid, personalised, and resistant to change – especially under pressure or in unfamiliar contexts.

II. Strategic trajectory

An Operational Code Analysis was conducted to evaluate Erdoğan’s belief system to understand how he views the political world and chooses strategies to achieve his goals.

OCA distinguishes between philosophical beliefs (about the nature of politics) and instrumental beliefs (about effective means for action). These are derived from coding the verbs in Erdoğan’s unscripted public statements and comparing the results to a global norm group. This analysis reveals whether Erdoğan perceives the political universe as hostile or cooperative, and whether he favours persuasive or coercive tactics in pursuit of political objectives.

Strategic profile vs. world leader benchmark

I1. Direction of strategy – conflict/cooperation
Erdoğan scores slightly lower than the world leader average, which suggests a similar level of strategic orientation.

I2. Intensity of tactics – conflict/cooperation
His tactical intensity also falls slightly below the global average, reflecting a tactical approach that is broadly within the expected range.

P1. Nature of political universe – hostile/friendly
Erdoğan’s score is lower, which indicates that he views the political world as more hostile and threatening. This aligns with his siege mentality, distrust of foreign actors, and zero-sum approach to politics.

P2. Realisation of political values – pessimistic/optimistic
His very low score indicates a pessimistic outlook on the likelihood of achieving ideal political outcomes, possibly due to perceived external threats or internal betrayal. This reinforces a defensive and control-oriented posture.

Use of means for advancing one’s interests

Erdoğan shows low use of self-targeted strategies (e.g., self-punishment, self-promise, self-reward) but places high emphasis on self-appeal – a trait consistent with his strong affiliation motivation. This reflects a desire to maintain emotional connection, approval and loyalty.

Erdoğan relies heavily on strategies directed at others, especially reward, punish and appeal. His use of appeal is often emotionally charged, designed to foster loyalty, while his use of punishment suggests a reactive stance when that loyalty is challenged.

Implications

While Erdoğan’s strategic and tactical political approach does not differ significantly from the global average for political leaders, his perception of the political landscape is notably more conflictual. He exhibits a marked pessimism about the feasibility of achieving ideal political outcomes. This may stem from a perception of persistent external threats and internal betrayal, reinforcing a defensive and control-oriented strategic posture. To advance his interests, Erdoğan often relies on emotional manipulation: appealing to the sentiments of his voter base, rewarding loyalty and punishing dissent.

III. Behavioural analysis

Foundations of character: Early life and identity formation

Born in 1954 in Istanbul’s working-class Kasımpaşa district to a devout Muslim family from Rize, near the Black Sea, Erdoğan’s early life was marked by poverty, strict discipline and religious conservatism (Britannica, 2025). These formative conditions shaped a character shaped by psychological compensation – a need to assert control and significance in response to limited early social capital (Adler, 1956; Post, 2003).

Leadership style

Erdoğan initially presented himself as a transformational leader – one who motivates followers by articulating a compelling vision and aligned with shared values. In the early 2000s, he championed pro-EU reforms and minority rights. However, his leadership style shifted markedly following the 2013 Gezi Park protests and, more decisively, the 2016 coup attempt. The latter, experienced as a profound personal and political betrayal, is likely to have triggered a psychological shift. Research shows that such trauma, particularly betrayal by in-group institutions, can strengthen authoritarian tendencies, defensive aggression, and a heightened need for control (Post, 2003; McAdams, 2011). Since then, Erdoğan’s leadership has become increasingly authoritarian-paternalistic, centred on loyalty, nationalism and institutional dominance. He has centralised power, curtailed dissent, and framed opposition as an existential threat to national unity (Britannica, 2025; Çağaptay, 2017).

Personal identity as political vision

Erdoğan’s leadership reflects a grandiose self-image projected onto the nation. He frequently invokes Ottoman heritage and Turkish greatness as extensions of his personal legacy (Çağaptay, 2017; Britannica, 2025). Rooted in political Islam and a religious-nationalist worldview (Yavuz, 2009), he frames political issues through emotionally charged binaries: loyal vs. traitor, Muslim vs. secularist, Turkish sovereignty vs. Western interference. In line with social identity theory, which links self-worth to one’s group status and often leads to in-group bias and out-group hostility (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), Erdoğan promotes a dominant Turkish-Muslim identity while marginalising Kurds, Alevis, secularists and liberals. This contributes to entrenched societal polarisation.

His handling of crises, such as the 2018 detention of American pastor Andrew Brunson, illustrates the dominance of symbolic politics – not rational calculation – in his decision-making. Erdoğan framed the crisis as a matter of national honour and resistance to foreign pressure, even as it imposed significant economic or diplomatic costs (BBC, 2018).

Strategic flexibility

Despite a rigid ideological worldview, Erdoğan displays tactical adaptability, recalibrating alliances with actors like the EU, Russia or the US when needed for political survival (Hermann, 2003; Britannica, 2025).

Manipulative tendencies and emotional politics

Erdoğan regularly employs emotional narratives to solidify loyalty, portraying himself as a paternal protector of Turkish-Islamic identity. Through speeches, religious symbolism, and strategic displays of anger he fosters a sense of belonging while deflecting attention from autocratic governance (Yilmaz & Bashirov, 2018; Freedom House, 2023).

Implications

Erdoğan’s decision-making reflects a leadership style shaped by early experiences of deprivation, an identity-driven worldview, a grandiose national self-concept, and psychological responses to perceived betrayal. While ideologically rigid, he is capable of tactical flexibility. He consistently utilises emotionally charged rhetoric and polarising narratives.  Led by emotions, he often prioritises short-term control and symbolic positioning over long-term stability.

Editor’s note: Specifics on data aggregation are available upon request.