Running head: TRAIT THEORY 1

The Trait Theory of Leadership

Jared Rummler

Fullerton College

TRAIT THEORY 2

Abstract

Leadership theories have been an essential element in identifying and developing leaders in

today's workforce. This paper researches one of the main theories of leadership called trait

theory. Trait theory is the oldest theory of leadership which requires much attention and

extensive investigation. Examination of trait theory has led into the analysis of trait findings and

books written by leading scholars. The research of trait theory focuses on key characteristic

traits that are found in affective leaders. Trait theory assumes that leaders are born, not made

and successful leaders have the correct combination of traits. These key traits have been linked

to the Big Five personality traits and current genetic research.

Keywords: Trait theory, leadership, great man theory, skills.

TRAIT THEORY 3

The Trait Theory of Leadership

For numerous ages, traits have been admired and looked upon as characteristics

affecting human behavior. Therefore, it is no wonder that the trait theory of leadership is one

of the basic and first theories of leadership. The trait approach to leadership is a powerful

theory which determines leaders both past and present. This approach to understanding

leadership began, in today’s recorded history, with the great man theory. Trait theory

determines leaders by defining key personality traits and connecting those traits with successful

leaders. Trait theory has the following three main assumptions: 1) leaders are born, not made

2) some traits are particularly suited to leadership 3) people who make good leaders have the

right combination of traits ("Leadership Theories," n.d.). These assumptions guided the trait

theory of leadership from its beginning to the research that is being discovered today.

To understand a man or a women one would have to first find the beginnings, or

childhood, of the individual. Trait theory is no different. The great man theory, founded by

Thomas Carlyle, could be defined as trait theory’s childhood. The great man theory is a

philosophical theory that aims to explain history by the impact of “great men”, or heroes with

certain characteristics. The great man theory’s main assumption is that great men arise as

leaders when there is a great need ("Leadership Theories," n.d.). This theory has the tendency

to focus only on men, or males. The leadership thought of the day accepted that there were

women with “great” traits, but failed to see these women in the role of leadership (Heifetz,

1998).

TRAIT THEORY 4

The idea of leaders with distinguished traits took root from Thomas Carlyle’s 1841 book

entitled On Heroes and Hero Worship and the Heroic in History. Carlyle wrote of leaders and heroes as

prophets, priests, kings, poets, and divinity and spoke of these men as "profitable company" and "the

living light-fountain, which it is good and pleasant to be near" (Thomas, 2007, p. 4) . Thomas Carlyle was

a distinguished Scottish writer, essayist and historian of his time who focused on the lives of such men as

Oliver Cromwell, William Shakespeare, Jesus of Nazareth and the Prophet Mohammed (Kunitz &

Haycraft, 1973, pp. 115-118). Scholarly followers of the great man theory today would study

the lives of such men as Sir Winston Churchill, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Joseph Stalin from the

Second World War. These men from the Second World War are good examples of great men

because they arose as leaders when there was a great need in the world.

The great man theory was developed more fully as it grew into what is now called the

trait theory of leadership. Trait theorists were researchers who studied the characteristics in

the current leaders of the day. These researchers guided their work by the following three main

questions: 1) What are the common traits underlying all great leaders? 2) Can we predict

people's leadership potential on the basis of these appropriate traits? 3) Can people learn to

become effective leaders? (Chamorro-Premuzic, 2007, p. 146). The early trait studies which

grew from these guiding questions "attempted to identify physical characteristics, personality

traits, and abilities of people who were believed to be natural leaders" (Yukl, 2001). Research

on these traits dominated leadership research for around 50 years. The research was pioneered

by Binet and Simon and reached its climax with Ralph Stogdill in 1948 (Berndt, 2003, pp. 3-4).

Stogdill "completed two comprehensive reviews by synthesizing more than 200 studies of the

TRAIT THEORY 5

trait approach. His two surveys identified a group of traits that were positively associated with

leadership such as intelligence, self-confidence, initiative, and persistence" (Liu and Liu 8).

Stogdill's extensive research helped him develop the main key traits and skills that are found in

leaders. The following table illustrates Stogdill's trait studies from 1949 through 1970:

Table I

Traits Skills

- Adaptable to situations - Clever (intelligent)

- Alert to social environment - Conceptually skilled

- Ambitious and achievement-oriented - Creative

- Assertive - Diplomatic and tactful

- Cooperative - Fluent in speaking

- Decisive - Knowledgeable about group task

- Dependable - Organised (administrative ability)

- Dominant (desire to influence others) - Persuasive

- Energetic (high activity level) - Socially skilled

- Persistent

- Self-Confident

- Tolerant of stress

- Willing to assume responsibility

Leadership Skills and Traits (Stogdill, 1974)

As trait theory continued to develop, criticism became more widespread against it. One critique

observed that each study tended to identify a different set of traits associated with leadership. In one

TRAIT THEORY 6

summary of over a hundred studies, only 5% of the traits were found in four or more studies (Carlisle,

1973, p. 124). Another criticism claimed that the trait theorists were focusing too much on traits and not

enough on situation. Stogdill came to this conclusion when he said the following:

A person does not become a leader by virtue of the possession of some combination of traits,

but the pattern of personal characteristics of the leader must bear some relevant relationship to

the characteristics, activities, and goals of the followers. Thus, leadership must be conceived in

terms of the interaction of variables that are in constant flux (M., 1990, p. 76).

These critics led leadership research into situational and behavioral studies. Instead of viewing leaders

as born, researchers began to believe leaders could be developed or made. History reveals some leaders

who weren't born as such but later developed into great men. For example, some historians claim that

Franklin D. Roosevelt was transformed from a politician to a leader by the impact of the Great

Depression (Moran, 1993).

Situational research tended to focus too much on the situation and not enough on character

traits. Therefore, it was necessary for a revival of trait theory after years of neglect.

Charnorro-Premuzic (2007) wrote, Although Great Man theories of leadership are part of the

history - rather than the present - of leadership research, the trait approach has arguably

survived the emergence of situational theories and began to be the focus of much leadership

research during the 1990s. In fact, in recent years there has been a revival of the trait approach

(p. 149).

Charnorro-Premuzic further explains that trait research today has determined timeless and universal

characteristics found in effective leaders. Some of these timeless traits are found in psychologists Big

Five personality traits. The Big Five's well known traits are introversion/extroversion, openness to

experience, conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stability. Beginning in the early 1990s the

Big Five were examined in the workplace with researchers such as Furnham, Hogan and Silversthorne

TRAIT THEORY 7

(Charnorro-Premuzic, 2007, pp. 149-150). Sashkin compared the Big Five with the factors which derail

top executes founded by McCall and Lombardo in 1983. The following table shows a comparison

between these "derailing factors" and key personality traits:

Table 2

Parallel Comparison of the "Big Five" Personality Factors

and McCall and Lombardo's "Derailing Factors"

Big 5 Personality Factors Derailing Factors

Introversion/Extroversion Inability to act

Openness to Experience Fails to learn from experience

Conscientiousness Cannot be trusted

Agreeableness Cannot get along with people

Emotional Stability Narcissism

(Sashkin & Sashkin, 2003, p. 28)

Sashikin (2003) concluded from the above table that "the obvious parallels suggest that while leadership

may not be the result of having and applying certain traits, failure in leadership may well be attributable

at least partly to the lack of key traits" (pp. 27-28). Chamorro-Premuzic (2007) concluded similarly when

he wrote that "stable individual differences (i.e., traits) do predict who becomes, stays, and derails as a

leader... Great leaders tend to be bright, open to experience, conscientious, extraverted, and stable" (p.

152).

Another reason why leadership theory has revived the trait approach is because of the current

scientific research in heritability and genes. With these new studies leadership theorists are now

balancing the importance of situation as well as traits and concluding that leaders are born as well as

made. Ruth Bass stated the following:

TRAIT THEORY 8

Leaders may be born as well as made, as we can see if we examine research of the past 30 years

on genes, heritability, and leadership. Leadership theory and research from 1975 to 2005 have

turned us back again to considering the importance of traits (Bass, 2008, p. 104).

Research in co-twin studies, which is the study of fraternal and identical twins, has shown a direct

linkage of genetics and leadership. Bass continues,

Not only are we able to present numerous studies showing the effects of genes on personality

traits found to be predictive of leadership; there are also investigations that have directly

connected genetics to leadership. Avery, Rotundo, Johnson, et al. (2006) obtained data from the

Minnesota Twin Registry to compare 238 identical twins (each pair genetically the same) with

188 fraternal twins (each pair with 50% in common in genetic background). They found that 30%

of the variance in emergence as leaders was attributable to genetics (Bass, 2008, p. 105).

With the current research on genetics and the development of the Big Five leadership theorists have

had to consider whether leadership was a consequence of nature or nurture. Now trait theory is placed

more on the center stage than it has been in decades. Although situation and behavior remains

important, evidence suggests that nature has a great role in all leaders.

The power of the trait approach to leadership has been tested and found creditable through

centuries of criticism, debate and research. Although it is the oldest theory of leadership it has

withstood the test of time. It had its decline in a battle with the situational theorist but has now become

its brother through its reemergence with the Big Five and the study of heritability and genetics. It now

stands and looks eye to eye with the situational theorists showing that nature as well as nurture is

important in today's world of leaders.

References

TRAIT THEORY 9

Bass, R. (2008). The Bass Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial

Application (4th ed.). Simon and Schuster.

Berndt, R. (2003). Leadership in turbulenten Zeiten (Herausforderungen an das Management).

New York: Springer.

Carlisle, H. M. (1973). Situational management a contingency approach to leadership. [New

York]: AMACOM.

Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2007). Personality and Individual Differences (Bps Textbooks in

Psychology). Grand Rapids: Blackwell Limited.

Heifetz, R. (1998). Leadership Without Easy Answers. New York: Belknap P.

Kunitz, S. J., & Haycraft, H. (1973). British authors of the nineteenth century. New York: H.W.

Wilson.

Leadership Theories. (n.d.). Retrieved November 2, 2009, from

http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/theories/leadership_theories.htm

Liu, J., & Liu, X. (2006). International Journal of Business and Management. A Critical Review of

Leadership Research Development, 1-9.

M., B. B. (1990). Bass & Stogdill's handbook of leadership theory, research, and managerial

applications. New York: Free P, Collier Macmillan.

Moran, B. B. (1993). LEARNING ABOUT LEADERSHIP: WHAT WORKS IN MODERN

ORGANIZATIONS. Retrieved November 2, 2009, from Google Docs.

TRAIT THEORY 10

Sashkin, M., & Sashkin, M. G. (2003). Leadership That Matters The Critical Factors for Making a

Difference in People's Lives and Organizations' Success. New York: Berrett-Koehler.

Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of the literature,. New York: Free P.

Thomas, C. (2007). Heroes and Hero Worship. Chicago: Book Jungle.

Yukl, G. A. (2001). Leadership in Organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.