Trait Theory

In an increasingly politically correct, democratic society—where equality of treatment and equity of outcome oftentimes overshadow individual performance—trait theory of leadership has managed to survive. Instead of focusing on the context of a specific leadership situation or the subordinates in an organization, trait theory targets only the man or woman in charge. Essentially, trait theory suggests that potential leaders and great leaders who have already demonstrated success are best analyzed in a vacuum. While trait theory may have fallen in an out of favor over the past century, it does have certain advantages that are especially pertinent to those in the military. Before treading any further into its occupational applicability, however, the reader will benefit from a brief survey of trait theory’s origins, approach, strengths, and critiques.

Origins

Arguably the first approach to the study of leadership, the trait approach was employed in the field long before it was tackled in the classroom. After all, Sun Tzu preached “know your enemies” (Sun Tzu, 2002 pg. 6) long before Socrates entreated students to “know thyself” (Socrates, 1879, pg. xi). From ancient battlefields to philosophical mysteries, understanding the inherent characteristics of a person has proven a worthy goal. People’s aspirations to leadership however, had yet to be matched with a theoretical basis for many years. It was not until the early 20th century that the topic found itself under the scholar’s gaze.

Approach

Initial studies often focused on the “great man” approach, whereby already successful and admired leaders were scrutinized to find common characteristics (Northouse, 2010, pg. 15). Jesus, Washington, Napoleon, and the like found t...

... middle of paper ...

...ew people who I initially felt were more reserved than I would have liked. As the season progressed, two individuals progressed along with it, ultimately becoming very aggressive on the court. Whether, I was incorrect in my initial read of the individuals or if they truly grew into their role I am unsure. Yet, the example does highlight some of the criticisms of using the trait approach.

In the end, people, unlike the trait approach to leadership, do not operate in a vacuum. I should not rely on initial assessments unless necessary when establishing an organization. Additionally, I should be wary of rejecting challenging missions based on an assessment of my traits. Just as certain members of the floor hockey team ultimately exceeded my expectations as the season progressed, I too must remember that leadership is a process and a journey, not a checklist.