Successful leadership is a complex and dynamic process that requires the “artful application of various conceptual, technical, and interpersonal skills” (McCormick, 2001, p.28). Instead of considering the inherent traits of great leaders, it seems more reasonable to address the knowledge and abilities that are necessary for leadership development. In fact, by doing so we are moving beyond an indefinite list of potential leadership traits and focus on a set of developable skills (Northouse, 2016); an approach that seems to find more application within real-life organizations. This approach includes a regimented selection of technical, human, and conceptual skills (Katz, 1955 as cited in Northouse, 2016) and a more dynamic skills model that encompasses individual attributes, achieved competencies, and leadership outcomes (Mumford et al., 2000 as cited in Northouse, 2015). As such, the skills, or competencies that individuals develop over their lifetimes can be viewed as being directly related to leadership outcomes.
While it is argued that the skills approach is primarily descriptive (Northouse, 2016), its main premise lies in the fact that an individual can theoretically achieve some mastery of key skills in order to become a successful leader. At the same time, as Bandura (1993) argues, “there is a marked difference between possessing knowledge and skills and being able to use them well under taxing conditions” (p.119). It is easy to imagine scenarios where people with similar sets of skills and knowledge arrive to entirely different outcomes, with some people failing to adapt and develop entirely. Thus, there must be more to the skills approach than the incremental development of the individual skills. As Northouse (2016) suggests, the skills approach lacks significant predictive value, which would otherwise allow us to explain how the variations in some skills affect the leadership outcomes. Therefore, the skills approach as described in Mumford et al. (2000 as cited in Northouse, 2016) should focus more on the interrelatedness between the variables as opposed to mastering each factor independently.
In my experience, the main link connecting both my individual attributes and competencies to the ultimate performance has been the level of self-efficacy I possess at any given moment. In his introduction of the concept, Bandura (1993) describes the contributions of self-efficacy to skill utilization as it affects the human perception of their own ability to perform tasks based on the combination of inherent characteristics, experience, as well as the ability to adapt to challenges and ambiguity. In its widest interpretation, efficacy influences people cognitive perceptions and behavioral tactics (Bandura, 1993). Regardless of my level of both inherited general cognitive ability and acquired crystallized cognitive ability, I can function effectively only if I believe in my own capability to control my own level of functioning (Bandura, 1993). Unfortunately, in many ways I tend to be low on self-efficacy, which significantly disrupts my ability to develop consistent leadership behaviors. For example, while I have developed a great set of social judgement skills, particularly in social perceptiveness, via my work as a family support advisor, I often fail to see how these skills would apply to other, potentially more difficult leadership situations. In other words, my competencies do not fully extend to effective problem solving of ambiguous situations. Simply, as Bandura (1993) points out, “it is difficult to achieve much while fighting self-doubt” (p.118).
When considering self-efficacy as the linkage between individual skills and knowledge and leadership outcomes, we are still lacking better understanding of how to overcome the obstacles of self-depreciation. On the one hand, research suggests focusing on a large selection of abilities that can be learned and developed through effective training; on the other hand, we might be stuck in one place should our level of self-efficacy not develop with accordance to the newly acquired competencies. Clearly, it would seem that the individual capacity for leadership implies a systematic and lifelong approach to human development that should include both cognitive and behavioral modifications. Perhaps, as Northouse (2016) suggests, taking periodic skills inventories could allow people to gain a better perspective on their own leadership competencies. In my case, it would be an extremely beneficial strategy in mitigating the effects of low self-efficacy thus reinforcing the self-perception of myself as a capable leader.
References
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational psychologist, 28(2), 117-148.
McCormick, M. J. (2001). Self-efficacy and leadership effectiveness: Applying social cognitive theory to leadership. Journal of Leadership Studies, 8(1), 22-33.
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. 7th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.