Trait Approach to Leadership

 

  The trait approach is the oldest approach to leadership, and it’s still prevalent today. People are very interested in what traits a president has, they are interested in the traits of the candidates who are going to run for the Parliament. People have it in their heads that traits play a big role in leadership. A hundred years of research hasn’t come up with the definitive traits that a leader should have. 

  In short, the trait approach is alive and well, it is one of the most researched approaches in leadership. It started with a focus on discovering excellent person attributes, evolved to incorporate the impact of situations on leadership, and then shifted again to reemphasize the importance of traits in effective leadership.

  Throughout the 20th century, many studies were made to identify the traits a leader should possess. Personality qualities, according to some researchers, could be utilized to distinguish leaders from non-leaders. Others discovered that personality and situational characteristics influenced leadership. The below table summarizes the various studies done to determine the traits of a leader.

  As can be seen, numerous features are shared throughout research, making it difficult to identify certain traits as definitive leadership attributes. Intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability are some of the common features found across the studies.  

  There are many important traits, one of them is determination, it’s a trait that can change. If you want to become more determined as a leader, you can focus more. Steve Jobs is an example of a determined leader, he was very determined about certain qualities of Apple and that determination was really important in the outcome of the artistic nature of the devices they produced.
Some of the traits we can’t change, if traits have to do with being extroverted, for example, extroverts tend to have an easier time at leadership.

  The above-mentioned traits are closely related to the Five-Factor Personality Model and Leadership which are neuroticism, extraversion (sergeancy), openness (intellect), agreeableness, and conscientiousness (dependability). To put these traits in the order of their importance, extraversion is the trait most closely linked to leadership, followed by conscientiousness, openness, and low neuroticism, according to studies. Agreeableness was the least factor associated with leadership, and some studies have found it not linked to leadership.

Emotional intelligence:

  Emotional intelligence is concerned with our ability to understand emotions and apply this under-standing to life’s tasks. Specifically, emotional intelligence can be defined as the ability to perceive and express emotions, to use emotions to facilitate thinking, to understand and reason with emotions, and to effectively manage emotions within oneself and in relationships with others. Some researchers developed a practice-oriented model of emotionally intelligent leadership, which suggests that leaders must be conscious of three fundamental facets of leadership: context, self, and others.

How does the trait approach work? 

  In essence, the trait approach is concerned with what traits leaders exhibit and who has these traits. Organizations can specify the characteristics or traits that are important to them for particular positions and then use personality assessment measures to determine whether an individual fits their needs. The trait approach is also used for personal awareness and development.

Strengths:

  The trait approach has several identifiable strengths. First, the trait approach is intuitively appealing. A second strength of the trait approach is that it has a century of research to back it up. Another strength, more conceptual in nature, the trait approach is devoted to only the first of these – leaders. Last, the trait approach has given us some benchmarks for what we need to look for if we want to be leaders.

Criticisms:

  In addition to its strengths, the trait approach has several weaknesses. First and foremost is the failure of the trait approach to delimit a definitive list of leadership traits. Another criticism is that the trait approach has failed to take situations into account. A third criticism, derived from the prior two criticisms, is that this approach has resulted in highly subjective determinations of the most important leadership traits. Research on traits can also be criticized for failing to look at traits in relationship to leadership outcomes. A final criticism of the trait approach is that it is not a useful approach for training and development for leadership.

  Although the trait approach does not provide a definitive set of traits, it does provide direction regarding which traits are good to have if one aspires to a leadership position. 

  There aren’t certain traits that make someone a leader, even though people still like to know what their leadership traits are. One of the ways to do that is to take the Myers Briggs, it gives us a sense of what our traits are. Another thing to do is to take the Strengths Inventory, it shows which areas in our life or which areas in our personality, our way of being, are the strongest. Intuitively, all of us know what our traits are in terms of leadership, some of us are more extroverted than others, for example. Some of us know that determination or sociability is one of our strengths. Others of us are more introverted, but we know that maybe we have a really strong brain. Research does show that intelligence plays a role in leadership. It’s something we can’t do much with in terms of becoming stronger or weaker, but there are other traits like determination, we can probably work on to become better at. So in essence, what we want to do is, we look at ourselves and find out what our strengths are, what our personality styles are, and we try to use those in our leadership the best way we can.