After reading through this weeks lesson on trait leadership I found some conflicting points when focusing on inclusion and diversity. Trait approach can seem extremely appealing, identifying specific traits to identify a leader or acquiring traits to improve your own leadership almost sounds too good to be true. As our text points out, a criticism of trait approach is that it fails to take situations into account (Northouse, 2013). Also, this approach can result in a highly subjective determination of the most important leadership traits (Northouse, 2013). In the past year inclusion and diversity in the workplace, including leadership, has been a focus for many companies. Through the examination of an article titled “Think Leader, Think White? Capturing and Weakening an Implicit Pro-White Leadership Bias” and trait approach covered in our text I am looking to identify drawbacks to trait leadership when it comes to an inclusive and diverse leadership team.
In the article “Think Leader, Think White? Capturing and Weakening an Implicit Pro-White Leadership Bias” the abstract states findings of evidence for an implicit pro-White leadership bias that helps explain the underrepresentation of ethnic minorities in leadership positions. This study states that both White-majority and ethnic minority responded stronger to White names and leadership roles as well as leadership traits. This links back to the subjectivity of traits identified in trait leadership theory, is further worth exploring in a mixed culture setting. When we discuss the major traits of Intelligence, Self-Confidence, Determination, Integrity and Sociability (Northouse, 2013) how can we account for cross culture differences? Is the same standard of “self-confidence” explored when assessing an ethnically and culturally diverse candidate? I would argue that these traits can look very different depending on ones background and may in some cases even intimidate another person based on their lack of experience with race or culture.
I also believe there to be a large gap in inclusion and diversity when exploring the trait approach of intelligence and leadership. It is stated in our course notes that intelligence is not enough to guarantee leadership success(PSU WC, 2021, L. 2). , but it is highly calculated in many traits. Furthermore, using IQ scores and tests have been found in multiple instances to be bias towards groups not speaking english or with english as a second language. As well, a notion of determination or integrity can have extremely blurry lines when there is a cultural and ethnic difference involved. Without accounting for these differences I believe it is easy to exclude diverse candidates from leadership roles based upon a misunderstanding of their trait strengths.
From the findings of “Think Leader, Think White? Capturing and Weakening an Implicit Pro-White Leadership Bias” and our texts criticisms of trait approach I do not feel that it supports inclusion and diversity in leaders. I think there is a need to study the traits of great leaders but can not see the value in trying for a one size fits all approach to what makes great leaders.
References
Northouse, P.G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sage Publications.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2021). Psych 485 Lesson 2: Trait Approach.
Gündemir, S., Homan, A., De Dreu, C., & Van Vugt, M. (2014, January 8). Think leader, think White? Capturing and weakening an implicit pro-White leadership bias. Retrieved February 01, 2021, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3885528/