Are the traits of a leader obviously positioned on the surface or underlying deep in the psyche? When we think of a leader the general consensus would be the identification of traits that a leader embodies. Those people that exude emotional strength, intelligence, resolve under pressure, empathy and so forth. But it can be questioned if the leader personality goes deeper to encompass traits such as spatial awareness, influential energies, and a specific aura of life.

Psychology as a science is concerned with affirmed data of measurable things. But beyond the box of numbers, charts and data graphs there is more to the human experience than exuded emotional characteristics. The five factor model gives us an outline of the dimensions of personality; conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness to experience, and extraversion. While science is confined to the available knowledge of presiding time, I wonder if these ‘dimensions’ can be measured on an even more generalized level. Such as the vibrational energies of successful leaders, and if this could be measured in reverse. Such as to say that a leader can be identified before the characteristics are assessed in that person.

Though this may seem a science fictional assumption, I think it is not beyond reason. There is a pattern in the traits of leaders. A sense of strong will, influential emotion and the ability to draw on a knowledge base, all contribute the characteristic dimensions aforementioned. There is a large body of research that shows extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability are all positively correlated with leadership success. (PSU, 2015) If it is continuously proved that these same personality traits are identifiable in all leaders then it would be a correct assumption to say successful leaders would all exude the same living vibrations which allow them to perform in a way which influences those around them.

The issue with this theory is the same brought up for trait approaches such as the Five Factor Model. The challenge that Stogdill (1948) suggested is that there is no consistent set of traits that are different in leaders and followers. Leaders in one situation are not necessarily leaders in another situation. (PSU, 2015) What is the solution to this conflict? Can a leader be pin pointed indefinitely or is it a specific state of being that comes and goes depending on circumstance? Only time will tell in the scientific study of leadership and the progression of methods to gathering data. But on any side of the argument it can be agreed upon that leadership is a state of being and this state of emotional output can be measured. It is my suggestion that leadership’s dimensional output can be measured prior to other means which require cognitive analysis, if only we had the advanced science available to do so.

 

 

Citations

Penn State University Course Creator.(2015). Lesson 2: Trait Approach. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/fa15/psych485/001/content/02_lesson/01_page.html

Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A review of the literature. Journal of Psychology, 25, 35-71.

Brianrhythm.png. (2013) Retrieved from: http://humansarefree.com/2011/03/does-conspiracy-extend-to-musical-scale.html