A Military View through Trait Approach Leadership
Analyzing leadership definitions and traits in the military and learning about military world leaders along with reading about Trait Approach to leadership, I have found that the Big Five Personality Factors as represented by Mr. Northouse in Leadership: Theory and Practice (2016, p. 27) to hold a lot value as defined traits. Of course, we will review and learn about many different approaches and theories to leadership during this semester, but Trait Approach is particularly interesting when the base assessment of the defined traits can be applied to military leadership.
Listening to and viewing different documentaries on Winston Churchill, Cuban President Fidel Castro, Adolf Hitler, General George Patton, and working with many U.S. Army leaders, I can find that the Big Five Personality Factors hold true in their definitions. As the Big Five Personality factors are itemized by characteristics and behaviors like decisive, trusting, accepting, creative, informative, assertive, vulnerable, and hostile (Northouse, 2016), Army leadership is characterized by attributes and competencies like character, presence, intellect, leads, develops, and achieves to motivate followers (U.S. Department of the Army, 2012). These approaches to leadership have very like core ideals that describe leaders that possess the ability to influence followers to achieving a common goal.
With Army attributes, words like discipline confidence, military and professional bearing can be seen in leaders like Fidel Castro and General Patton, but they can also show the trait approach factors from the big five personality factors of extraversion, openness, and conscientiousness with the hidden neuroticism when leading a group of people (Northouse, 2016). ADP 6-22 also defines the attributes as characteristics internal to a leader which is very comparable to Mr. Northouse’s text of basic factors that make up what we call personality (2016) and both documents see this as having traits associated with being an effective leader (Northouse, 2016).
Neither of these approaches is positive or negative in nature, just fact bearing in relation to analyzing personality traits or characteristics that make a good or successful leader. I also find it very interesting that both require the intelligence and education to help be decisive in decision-making or developing the environment (U.S. Department of the Army, 2012) to assist followers on the correct course. The documentaries on Adolf Hitler, Fidel Castro, Winston Churchill, and many other military leaders along with my current leadership are very educated individuals and continue to read various publications to increase knowledge for critical thinking. My leaders today have the opportunity to increase their education base by attending civil education all the way to achieving a Doctorate that parallels with military education.
The competencies accentuate attributes to further intertwine with the Big Five Personality Factor as they involve leading others, build trust, and lead by example and communication (U.S. Department of the Army, 2012). Learning to apply the trait approach theory with heavy guidance from the Big Five Personality Factors could help the military gather valuable information about leadership and can be applied at all levels (Northouse, 2016, p. 32). Learning about both military and civilian approaches to defining leadership presents with approaches and theories that parallel each other especially when reading and viewing documentaries of military leadership throughout the ages.
References:
Headquarters, Department of the Army. (August 2012). ADP 6-22: Army Leadership. Washington, D. C. Army Doctrine Reference Publications. Retrieved on 16 September 2018 from http://data.cape.army.mil/web/repository/doctrine/adp6-22.pdf
Northouse, Peter G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Matthew Keith Creel says
I certainly agree with you in that military leadership is strongly tied to the Big Five personality factors. One thing I would like to add that I consider the most important piece to the trait approach is sociability. Sociability is the key to all relationships, even in leadership situations (Northouse, 2016). Leaders who are show sociability are able to not only build lasting relationships but build them in a way that followers will listen to and give the leaders what they need.
Followers need a leader that shows concern for them (Northouse, 2016), regardless of where they fall in the hierarchy. Showing that they care, leaders are more likely to achieve the results they want from followers. You mention Fidel Castro in your post and one of the most impressive things about Castro is his ability to use sociability to influence others (Bravo, 2001). He was able to overthrow an entire regime by building relationships early on in his academic life and these relationships carried on for years (Bravo, 2001).
Yes, it is important for leaders to show extraversion – the factor most associated with leadership, conscientiousness, openness and low neuroticism (Northouse, 2016), but I think the one that should be just as important as extraversion is sociability. Keeping in mind that other traits will always come into play depending upon the situation (Northouse, 2016), an extravert that can build pleasant relationships is likely to be a great leader.
References
Bravo, E. (Director), Bravo, E. (Executive Producer), Fountain, A. (Producer), Frankel, D. (Executive Producer), & Steven, S. (2, August,2001). Fidel: The untold story. [Documentary, Biography Film]. United States, Bravo Films & Four Point Entertainment. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2Obp6YS4SY.
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.