Having learned about leadership theories and approaches in previous courses, I came into this semester with a preference as to how leadership should be perceived. Or rather, how it should not be perceived. While I understand that each conceptualization of leadership has both its strengths and weaknesses, I believe that the trait approach is one of, if not the weakest of the major conceptualizations. This is especially the case when compared to the skills approach.
The trait approach can be considered weak for many reasons, starting with the fact that it doesn’t account for the fact that circumstance may change and a leader that is successful in one situation may not necessarily be successful in another (Northouse, 2016). Assuming that people are born with certain personality traits that will determine their success as a leader means that there is no room for growth. Conversely, the skills approach posits that “skills are competencies that people can learn or develop” (Northouse, 2016). Similar to playing a musical instrument, some people may be born with natural talent, however, anyone can develop their skills and become just as good over time. Under this approach, someone who was unsuccessful in a certain situation would have the ability to learn from it and develop skills to become more effective the next time around.
Additionally, the trait approach is not a suitable method for developing education (Northouse, 2016). As previously stated, personality traits are not something that can be easily changed, if they can be changed at all. By this logic, anyone without these personality traits may as well give up on trying to become a successful leader. However, leadership development programs are a very successful business and often times consist of content that matches that of the skills approach (Northouse, 2016). This clearly shows that the skills approach an effective way of viewing leadership when education and training is concerned.
While the trait approach was “one of the first systematic attempts to study leadership” (Northouse, 2016), it’s highly unlikely that they summed up such an ambiguous concept such as leadership on the first try. The trait approach, while important, is rigid and outdated. Instead, the focus should be more on approached similar to the skills one as leadership is more situational and can be developed like a skill.
References:
Northouse, P. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Retrieved from https://mbsdirect.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483317540/cfi/6/2[;vnd.vst.idref=cover]!
rxb5512 says
I couldn’t agree more, out of all of the theories covered in this class, trait theory is the weakest. It is the simplest and the easiest to dismiss. Due to the limited inputs, only considering the impact of the leader’s characteristics, trait theory isn’t capable of consistently predicting the required behaviors and outcomes of leadership situations; as it doesn’t take into consideration any of the external factors (Northouse,2016). On the flipside, I understand there is value in self-evaluation to determine areas of weakness. With this information identified, we may take classes or training to increase our knowledge and abilities in these areas. Example if you lack social skills, there are seminars and self-help books that may offer assistance. Throughout history, a clearly defined pattern of leadership traits has established there is a link between characteristics and effective leadership (Northouse, 2016). Trait theory is descriptive of leadership, not prescriptive (Northouse, 2016).
Reference-
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Rebekah Dubin says
Hi Kevin,
I agree that the trait approach can be considered weak for many reasons. However, I also believe that a skill cannot defined as leadership on its own. It takes a lot more than just a skill to be a leader. As mention in Northouse 2016, there are five central traits that if one wants to be perceived by others as a leader, 1: Intelligence 2) Self-confidence 3) Determination 4) Integrity 5) Sociability.
In addition, there are strengths to the trait approach as well. The individuals that are leaders are different and possess special traits where if one was not a leader would not have any special traits like determination. Now that is not saying it cannot be learned. One can believe that just because he or she may not be self-confident or determined doesn’t mean you cannot acquire those traits over time.
Alongside the Three-Skill Approach, (technical, human, and conceptual) one would make a great leader. Leadership skills are the ability to use one’s knowledge and competencies to accomplish a set of goals or objectives. (Northouse 2016, pg 44) By using their analytical, people, and strategic skills it would allow a leader to assist group members in working cooperatively as a group to achieve common goals.
The combination of the right skill and trait will be the most effective leader whether female or male.
Reference:
Northouse. P. G. (2016). Leadership Theory and Practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications