Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Gender Differences in the Workplace

by

In any business, there is a sharp contrast between the expectations of male and females in managerial positions. While we all share a similar orientation on cultural dilemmas, some specific dilemmas may be a higher prioritized expectation for some individuals rather than others. When concerning both women and men in this particular company, the treatment between the two genders can be contrasted as if two separate cultures.

 

With a fine line of what is acceptable in female management, it can be difficult to balance between masculine and feminine attributes. Hughes, Ginnet, & Curphy (2012) summarize how women are expected to perform masculine tasks (i.e. “take responsibility”) with a strong counterpoint of taking the task too far (i.e. “but follow others’ advice”). With each expectation having two ends of the spectrum that are unacceptable, it can be very difficult to find the sweet spot in the middle. This is almost “setting up for failure” as the expectations of female management is so much higher than the expectations of men. In the Eagly studies (1992, 1995, 2002), it was found that women in leadership positions are judged depending on their leadership style rather than their true ability. With women seen negatively when using a masculine autocratic/directive style (Eagly et al., 1992), they are perceived as less effective than if they had used a feminine participative or democratic style. These women who use a masculine leadership style also face another obstacle as others may view their style as deviating from general gender norms too far (Eagly & Karau, 2002). However, no matter the style, women are considered less effective than men while studies show that there is no difference in actual effectiveness (Eagly, Karau, & Makhijani, 1995). These struggles that women face based on other’s perceptions are the main support frames for the glass ceiling, or invisible barrier that prevents women from taking on executive leadership positions (Northouse, 2016, p. 399). This barrier of gender prejudice may not be as strong as it was decades ago, but the notion of effective leadership still holds extremely masculine traits. No matter the woman’s ability, she will always face a separate and higher set of expectations than her male counterpart.

 

While there are many barriers for women to succeed in leadership positions, the organizational barrier of higher standards of performance and the interpersonal barrier of lack of access to informal networks prove the strongest. In a family-owned business with very traditional Sicilian perspectives, women are treated very differently from men. As “women often are expected to perform higher and put in more effort for jobs than men in order to overcome stereotypes” (PSU WC, 2019, L. 13, p. 4), it is no surprise that the females in the company work 60 hour work weeks for nearly half the pay than the men work 40 hour work weeks. Women are given administrative duties while men are working on the floor. This leads to more and more tasks given to the women. With more and stricter deadlines, women are expected to complete all their responsibilities in superhuman time while the men are only expected to act as the face of the business with day-to-day duties. The lack of access to informal networks also coincides with the preference for gender similarity. For example, the business owner will hire a similar male as a general manager that is seen as a protégé rather than an employee. The manager and owner have similar hobbies and interests, so they will have more connections outside of work (like at sports events, wine tastings, etc.). Though I still share many interests with the owner and often act as his own personal assistant, there is little to no opportunity for sharing interests outside of work the way the male leaders do. With some barriers more evident than others, there are clearly methods to decrease the gender differences that women and men face in leadership.

 

With the perceptions of female leadership and gender preconceptions strong, there exists a different set of cultural expectations as well. The seven dilemmas posited by Huges, Ginnet, & Curphy (2012) hold each dilemma on a scale of two sides. The source of identity, or the degree to which individuals should contribute to a larger group goal is expected to be much more collective for females and individual for men. Males are given more autonomy and time for outside interests while women must constantly work, leaving all off-hours for maintaining house and home. Males are also rewarded more financial wealth (tough goals and means of achievement) while women are expected to gain spiritual satisfaction (tender) with lower pay as executives perceive women as already breaking the glass ceiling by working rather than being a “stay-at-home mom.” The response to ambiguity, or how uncertainty is tolerated, is very structured and stable for women. Tasks are highly structured with clear steps of solution and a high use of micromanaging while men face more dynamic responses with room for flexibility and punitive fluctuation. Conversely, the high task-structure that women face is also met with a high need for active knowledge acquisition and a constant search for new information while men in the company reflect on past problems and how they can be prevented in the future. With men in the company performing day-to-day tasks, men are given a plentiful time frame on a few large projects while the women face scarce time frames for a high volume of projects. In the company, the orientation to authority is corresponding between women and men, but is instead determined by familiarity. Another factor that is similar between genders is the outlook on life. With a large part of the business also including a working farm, there is a high sense of “Being” and living in conjunction with nature. While these dilemmas are ways to consider different cultures, they can also be applied to the different treatment between women and men.

 

The contrast in expectations based off of preconceptions is extremely rampant in the company where I work, though I am sure many others face the similar struggles. With different perspectives of women and men, there is a heightened awareness of the difference in which different genders are treated whether a conscious decision or not.

 

Resources:

Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573-598.

Eagly, A, Karau, S., & Makhijani, M. (1995). Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 3-22.

Eagly, A., Makhijani, M., & Klonsky, B. (1992). Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 125-145.

Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J. (2012). Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies.

Northouse, P.G. (2016).  Leadership: Theory and Practice.  Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

The Development of Authentic Leadership

by

With many forms of crisis rampant in society, many groups look to authentic leadership for guidance. Authentic leadership is a call for the authenticity or genuineness of the leader to be present in their direction. With three different ways to define authentic leadership – developmental, interpersonal, and intrapersonal– there are two methods of addressing and remedying lacking components of leadership through either practical or theoretical approaches. Through analyzing the factors of an individual’s leadership traits and comparing them to the goals of ideal authentic leadership, the leader is able to develop their own capabilities to lead a group.

As there are three ways to define authentic leadership, it is the developmental definition that is the most widely accepted. The developmental definition of authentic leadership is best explained by Avolio and Gardner (2005) as a type of leadership that is developed throughout a lifetime and can be triggered by strong life events, whether greatly positive or negative. Authentic leadership can also be viewed with the interpersonal perspective where authentic leadership is relational and focuses on the interactions between both leaders and followers (Eagly, 2005). The intrapersonal viewpoint is the narrowest perspective of authentic leadership as the definition focuses on the leader’s own self-concept, self-knowledge, and self-regulation (PSU WC, 2019, L. 12, p. 2). The developmental definition is the preferred definition as it exemplifies how ideal leadership can be gained rather than interpersonal or intrapersonal definitions of leadership as traits specific to an individual or the situation. Developmental authentic leadership takes into account the individual and their characteristics, their effectiveness leading a group, and the situation or the leader’s past life circumstances. In short, developmental offers a holistic view of the goals of authentic leadership.

Once authentic leadership is defined and the goal of ideal authenticity is set, the next step is to choose an approach, whether practical or theoretical, to get closer to the goal. The most developed practical approach includes the Authentic Leadership Approach. This approach is very similar to Terry’s (1993) Authentic Leadership Wheel and can even be understood as a more refined and specific version. As the Leadership Wheel focuses on 6 components of meaning, mission, power, structure, resources, and existence, each part must be fully functioning for the wheel to spin and fulfillment to occur. The Authentic Leadership Approach posited by George (2003) recreates the wheel with 5 dimensions, each dimension with its own inner level: purpose (inner passion), values (behavior), relationships (connectedness), self-discipline (consistency), and heart (compassion). The outer dimensions are observable outcomes while the inner characteristics in parenthesis are underlying qualities of the leader that may not be behaviorally observable (PSU WC, 2019, L. 12, p. 3). Each dimension and characteristic has its own spectrum in which the leader can hold any position. This approach aims to distinguish the most lacking component and reform the specific area of interest until the individual is higher on the spectrum and has “more of” the component’s capabilities. Contrasting to practical approaches, there is the Theoretical Approach that includes heavy analysis of leadership qualities and environmental impact. With Avolio (2003) explaining developmental leadership, the research on the Theoretical Approach is largely attributable to him. This approach focuses on two conditions central to authentic leadership: positive psychological capacities (confidence, hope, optimism, and resilience) and moral reasoning (PSU WC, 2019, L. 12, p. 4). Northouse (2016) explains the positive psychological capacities that stem from positive psychology research: confidence as self-efficacy and belief in task accomplishment, hope as the fuel for positive motivation, optimism as holding favorable expectations of the future, and resilience as the ability to recover from adverse situations. Moral reasoning is also described by Northouse (2016) as the ability to make ethical decisions. If these two conditions are met with high levels, the individual will be able to better face and recover from strong critical life events such as facing disaster or getting a huge job promotion. Their recovery then helps develop four components of great authentic leadership: self-awareness, relational transparency, internalized moral perspective, and balanced processing (Walumbwa et al., 2008). Self-awareness is a process where the leader can understand themselves, their abilities, and their effect on others, a key component of defining authentic leadership. Relational transparency is much like self-awareness, but instead refers to the observable projection of their internal characteristics, such as outwardly sharing the individual’s purpose with others. Internalized moral perspective is produced by self-regulation and being able to maintain consistency according to the individual’s values rather than be malleable towards outside forces. Balanced processing is another form of self-regulation in which the individual can objectively process new information or opinions. With the two antecedent conditions fulfilled along with the four components, true authentic leadership can then be realized.

Witnessing the development of authentic leadership can be seen in many leaders if observed long enough. With a restaurant manager of a high-end restaurant, Eli, beginning as a busser, his leadership qualities and capabilities were very low and nearly nonexistent. Since the beginning of his career, he was always optimistic and hopeful. His positive psychological capacities were already filled, but his moral reasoning was lacking. After a period of time, Eli found many of his friends facing medical problems and the restaurant undergoing health-safety concerns. This allowed his moral reasoning to grow and he was able to make better decisions and discern right from wrong, leading him to higher positions in the company. After his promotion to general manager, Eli had realized how drinking and drug abuse was affecting his own health and the productivity of the restaurant as a whole. This awareness to the issue fueled motivation towards further development of leadership skills to help himself and the business elevate to an even higher level. Without added distractions of drugs and alcohol, Eli became more passionate about his hobbies and work. He was then able to become more self-aware of his own motives, vision, and purpose. The realization of these factors allowed him to then share his vision to the rest of the staff and the owners with relational transparency. As he continued to face hard decisions and remained hopeful for a profitable future, Eli held his moral beliefs even more strongly with his refreshed perspective and swayed less to outside influences. This quickly snowballed into allowing him to discern the quality of sources of information to have more balanced processing. While the process had taken nearly a decade, Eli is now a great manager for the restaurant and a very liked person. He brings his genuineness and honesty to the workplace and can be seen as a very authentic leader and true-to-heart as opposed to a “fake” leader.

Authentic leadership can be analyzed by many perspectives, but it is best seen as a developmental process where the leader’s end goal is to be genuine and transparent in their emotions and motives. The theoretical approach is the best option for remedying any lacking components of authentic leadership and helps determine specific components that are less than favorable. With the definition and approach in combination, it is obvious that authentic leadership can be grown and honed for the best qualities of a leader to shine their brightest for the most effective influence over a group.

Resources:

Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L., (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338.

Eagly, A. H. (2005). Achieving relational authenticity in leadership: Does gender matter? Leadership Quarterly, 16, 459-474.

George, B. (2003). Authentic leadership: Rediscovering the secrets to creating lasting value. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Northouse, P.G. (2016).  Leadership: Theory and Practice.  Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2019). PSYCH 485 Lesson 12: Authentic Leadership. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/canvas/su19/2195min-5376/content/12_lesson/printlesson.html

Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L, Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34(1), 89-126.

Team Based Structure in Business Operations

by

In any business, there is a staff that must work synergistically as a team to meet organizational goals. Having a team-based structure can be immensely beneficial for any organization.  Parker (1990) identifies many positive outcomes of teamwork: “greater productivity, more effective use of resources, better decisions and problem solving, better-quality products and services, and greater innovation and creativity.” With these prosperous qualities of member involvement improving the organization, group functions and team leadership can be more effectively analyzed and aligned to the business’s respective purposes.

The first step in reaching organizational goals of profitability and meeting customer service demands is to define the roles and functions of each group. Group roles are “expectations associated with specific jobs or positions in the group” (PSU WC, 2019, L. 9, p. 3). This is more simply the delegation of responsibility so that each member is aware of what their assigned role is. There are two distinct categories of roles: task roles (for followers or task functions for leaders) and relationship roles (for followers or maintenance functions) (PSU WC, 2019, L. 9, p. 4). According to the PSU WC lesson commentary (2019), task roles include “getting the task done… initiating, information seeking, information sharing, summarizing, evaluating, and guiding.” A similar responsibility for the leaders is task functions, or helping the group to accomplish the tasks. Relationship or maintenance functions are similar as a specified individual is charged with “keeping the group maintained and functioning” (PSU WC, 2019, L. 9, p. 4) while also “developing a positive climate, solving interpersonal problems, and developing cohesion.” With most businesses, there is a hierarchal structure with owners/executives at the top with the most power followed by managers/supervisors then entry-level staff. Entry-level or lower level staff are primarily concerned with task roles and completing the bulk of the work while managers are responsible for maintenance functions and cultivating strong relationships. For example, when completing a wedding setup, the managers of the restaurant are charged with delegating stations and tasks. If any outbursts or problems arise, relationship roles come into play and the manager must be able to mend any interpersonal issues. The servers and bussers are in turn responsible for performing the work through cleaning the venue and ensuring proper setup of floorplans and layouts. With each role and necessary functions defined specifically to fit the organizational purpose, all expectations can be met in order to best reach productivity goals.

For team leadership to be truly profitable, maintaining optimal group functioning can be achieved through Hackman and Walton’s (1986) outlining of 3 components: (1) a clear, elevating goal, (2) an enabling performance situation, and (3) adequate material resources. Northouse (2016) better defines the goal as one that is “very clear so that one can tell whether the performance objective has been realized” (p. 368). In addition, the common purpose must be stimulating enough so that members believe in its purpose. An enabling performance situation includes proper task structuring, competent and dedicated team members, and collaboration between members. In hosting a wedding, there are many moving parts with different areas of responsibility. By having an event showcase each individual’s strengths in their work, individuals must be properly assigned a role depending on their abilities. Their assignments help create conduct norms for consistent work while also giving the opportunity to hone their craft in a specific area of the restaurant. This initial delegation helps structure the business towards better results with specified roles, allows employees to train and become highly competent in their respective areas, and creates unity and teamwork throughout the whole staff for unity and collaboration. Adequate material resources and be improved through standards of excellence and listing expectations of how each task should be completed. This helps to bring awareness of the currently accessible resources and what is lacking. External support and recognition may not be a material resource, but can still act as a great asset as it gives the employees the confidence to work harder and improve.

As employee turnover causes the staff group to change with new members, Tuckman’s (1965) different stages of development are evident so it is important to recognize what stage the group is in at all times. This will help foster relationships and determine the most effective action plans given the situation. Tuckman (1965) identified four stages of development: forming, storming, norming, and performing. The forming stage includes the initial contact and “getting to know you” phase when individuals are first assigned to a group. With a high turnover rate and new employees entering the business, this stage can occur regularly. While the group may not be experiencing it all at the same time, the majority of the group can still experience it with the new member with the majority still being in a different stage amongst themselves. The second stage of storming “is characterized by group conflict” (PSU WC, 2019, L. 9, p. 3). This is much like brainstorming in which a goal is broken down into tasks and each member is assigned a task. In a restaurant, this is simplified as the manager is able to quickly assign tasks given the prior employee’s abilities and ranking tasks from simplest to most complex to match for the new hire. Norming is the “emergence of a leader and development of group norms” (PSU WC, 2019,  L. 9, p. 3) and is when roles are more clearly assigned. Expectations of behavior and work quality are given during training for each position as are social cues. Performing is the actual carrying out of the tasks and completion of the project. Once the new hire is adequate in their performance, a new group is formed and is able to strongly work together without micro-managing or struggle.

Though hosting a party requires a good amount of manual labor, the necessity of leadership and organizing the group is highly apparent. Guidance for the staff is provided and the teambuilding is facilitated leading to optimal productivity and better overall service for the customer.

 

References

Hackman, J. R., & Walton, R. E. (1986). Leading groups in organizations. In P.S. Goodman & Associates (Eds.), Designing effect work groups (pp. 72-119). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Northouse, Peter G. (2016) Leadership, Theory and Practice, 7th ed., Sage Publications.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2016). PSYCH 485. Lesson 9: Team Leadership. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/canvas/su19/2195min-5376/content/09_lesson/printlesson.html.

Parker, G. M. (1990). Team players and teamwork. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small group. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384-399.

Contingency Theory and the Hiring Process

by

With many different types of leadership evident in different businesses, it is pertinent to find the best leader for each respective situation. How should a certain individual be matched to the circumstance? This is outlined in contingency theories, more specifically Fiedler’s Contingency Model. Fiedler’s theory is centered around the notion that “leaders have general behavioral tendencies and specifies situations where certain leaders may be more effective than others” (PSU WC, 2019, L. 6, p. 4). In hiring and implementing new members of management, identifying the key characteristics of normal restaurant situations can greatly improve the effectiveness of a manager through identifying characteristics of prospective individuals. Their normal behavioral tendencies can be indicative of how fit they are for the position of managing the high-end restaurant that is more prone to criticism than other businesses of the industry. There are two major components of Fiedler’s Contingency Theory (1967) – leadership styles and situational variables – that are matched together to help the organization reach its ultimate goals.

Fiedler’s Contingency Model is primarily concerned with leadership styles and the relevant situations (Northouse, 2007, p. 113). Leadership styles are described as either task or relationship motivated. Task motivated leadership aims to reach pre-determined goals while relationship motivated leadership aims to foster close relationships between leaders and followers. In restaurant management, task motivated leadership is prominent as staff members are given clear directions of required customer service to work towards the goal of business profitability. With deciding upon applicants for a managerial position, task-oriented personalities are preferred as they are able to clearly outline and structure tasks for subordinates so that each task is completed in a timely and consistent manner. This also gives a sense of autonomy to the subordinates so that they can individually evaluate if their responsibilities are completed correctly. The follower autonomy allows the manager to oversee all tasks in favorable situations while still being able to handle unfavorable or out of control situations (Northouse, 2007, p. 115). In this particular industry, an applicant that is relationship motivated may not be fit for the position as situations often have certain results of either customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction through proper or improper service. There is little to no grey areas in which personal relationships affect job performance. The leadership styles of Contingency Theory are pertinent in finding the right individual to fit the restaurant business so that outlined tasks are effectively completed and personal matters that may distract from responsibilities are left out of the workplace.

Another integral component of Fiedler’s Contingency Theory are the situational variables at hand. Northouse (2007) posits that there are three factors that are used to characterize situations, “leader-member relations, task structure, and position power” (p. 114). Leader-member relations explain the degree of leader-follower relationships and whether they are cooperative or antagonistic (PSU WC, 2019, L. 6, p. 7).  It is important that leaders and prospective managers are able to cultivate a positive atmosphere in which there is ample trust and friendliness. With the manager and subordinates working closely together and tag-teaming their responsibilities, trust is of foremost importance so that the manager is confident of the subordinate’s job completion and also so that the subordinate is comfortable calling upon the manager when necessary without hesitation. Furthermore, this loyalty and personal attraction towards the leader or manager can help foster stronger autonomy in staff members so that they are more devoted to performing well. Task structures, or “the degree to which the requirements of a task are clear and spelled out” (Northouse, 2007, p. 114), are high in rigidity in this industry. Staff members are given clear and precise instructions that help them accomplish their tasks in a correct, pre-determined manner that is definitively outlined. There is little room for variation and creativity to maintain consistency in service. In hiring a manager, being able to establish and supervise these instructions are important capabilities to take into consideration. If a prospective manager were to provide vague and unclear tasks for subordinates to navigate and problem-solve on their own, consistency is lost and the business will be more open to negative criticism. Position power is the last situational characteristic. This describes the “title of authority or rank, the authority to administer reward and punishments, and the legitimacy to conduct follower performance appraisals” (PSU WC, 2019, L. 6, p. 7). With filling a managerial position, position power is already written into the professional role. In having managerial duties of reward and punishment administration, it is important to match the position to a leader that is capable of such responsibilities even when situations get tense. If a manger were unable to implement disciplinary actions or lacked the authority to do so, weak leader position power will create subordinate misconduct and a lack of respect towards the leader. Northouse (2007) notes that “situations that are rated most favorable are those having food leader-follower relations, defined tasks, and strong leader position power” (p. 115). With each of these three factors describing the workplace situation, it is opportune for the business to find leaders that have a shared alignment with the restaurant’s organization and circumstances.

In order to reach business goals, the business must consider of each applicant’s leadership styles and how congruent they are to the situational characteristics at hand. With a clear definition of what is favorable or unfavorable in workplace management conditions, effective leadership can be defined and directed towards characteristic goals. Fiedler’s Contingency Theory helps businesses outline and identify what characteristics are needed in both leaders and situations for a positive synergistic result.

References:

Fiedler, F. E. (1967). Cognitive resources and leadership performance. Applied Psychology: An International Review 44(1), 5-28.

Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2019). PSYCH 485 Lesson 6: Contingency & Path-Goal Theories. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/canvas/su19/2195min-5376/content/06_lesson/printlesson.html

Leadership with the Big Five Personality Traits

by

What is it that makes an individual a true leader? It isn’t a role that is assigned or even determined only by intelligence, but instead leadership is an amalgamation of some key personality traits and how others are influenced by the mix. When considering the Five Factor Model of Personality (Grice, 2019), each individual’s personality can be determined according to 5 spectrums: conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness to experience, and extraversion. Leadership success has been known to correlate with high levels of openness and conscientiousness. Similarly, extraversion has proven to have strong predictive validity of leadership in a position following a job interview (Salgado, 1997).

Working in the wedding industry, I have found that strong leaders are what really makes an event successful. As both a wedding coordinator and venue coordinator, I have found that each piece of the wedding requires its own leader, whether for venue set-up, decorations, catering, and everything in between. It is necessary for each facet to have at least one individual prepared with all the details and to answer any questions that may arise, providing direction and executing the vision. What I have found are a few universal traits that are help by each team leader: responsibility of task execution towards a goal (a key part of conscientiousness), problem solving and critical thinking (or openness to novel ideas when things may go wrong), and extraversion with confidence and little self-doubt (Northouse, 2016).  In short, wedding operations are definitely fueled by personal duties, creative thinking, and communication!

Conscientiousness, or self-discipline, is one of the most important factors in a leader, particularly under stressful situations when responsibility and reliability is pertinent. With a conscientious leader, individual tasks are delegated and completed, consequences of decisions are directed towards one entity, and in-group social issues are given a directed option for a solution. Being a reliable individual is also closely related to intelligence on the matter at hand. While there may be many other forms of intelligence that the individual may lack, knowledge about the relevant situation is key. With florists, caterers, and venues working a wide variety of events, I am often the information hub about the wedding itself as the coordinator. Through verifying each detail and keeping the overall vision in mind, I realize that it is my responsibility to make sure everything is executed to perfection even when team members may not have the same goal in mind.

Openness to experience is important with team leading as the situation is constantly evolving. When a problem arises and someone forgets to bring zip ties to secure the flowers on the ceremony arch, there needs to be someone to make the executive decision to ask the kitchen for some cooking twine instead. Even with packing lists detailing every last bit of supplies, more often than not something gets left behind. With the most minuscule of problems, creative thinking and trying new methods can get any team out of a pinch. This flexibility helps diffuse frustration and exhibits how creative, curious, and resourceful a leader must be when the unexpected occurs. As the third most important Big Five Personality Factor in terms of leadership (Northouse, 2016), individuals scoring high on openness to experience are the open-minded and imaginative leaders that enthusiastically absorb information and are quick to problem-solve.

Extraversion is known to be the most necessary personality trait for a team leader to have. More specifically, it is the individual’s self-confidence, decisiveness, and driven nature that greatly influences each member of the group. As many have said, “confidence is contagious.” So is self-doubt. If a leader does not have a strong belief in themselves, the group will also doubt themselves and the team. Decision making mixed with confidence creates many solutions and provides direction for group members with lower self-confidence that they are working in the right direction. When staff is helping to decorate a venue, they often doubt themselves if they are doing it correctly and if it represents the wedding vision. With a leader reassuring the staff that yes, they are doing something right, more tasks get completed in a timely fashion. Without the reassurance, a specific table may be decorated and redecorated multiple times before the next table is even set. Extraversion helps the team leader influence the group even with basic social interactions as it tells the team, “We are doing it right. Keep going.”

There are many personality traits that are evident in every strong leader. High levels of conscientiousness, openness to experience, and extraversion are among the most prominent Big Five Personality Traits that makes a leader a truly effective one. Whether leading a small part or the whole picture, each of these three facets of personality can make an individual stand out among the rest and guide the group towards a singular goal.

 

References:

Grice, J. W. (2019, January 04). Five-factor model of personality. Retrieved May 15, 2019, from https://www.britannica.com/science/five-factor-model-of-personality

Northouse, P.G. (2013).  Leadership: Theory and Practice.  Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Salgado, J. F. (1997). The five-factor model of personality and job performance in the European community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1),30-43

Skip to toolbar