53 | P a g e

LEADERSHIP SKILLS: ILLUSION OR NECESSITY

STUDY BASED ON TRAIT THEORIES OF

LEADERSHIP

Ms Rekha Kanodia

Research Scholar, Department of Management, Faculty of Management and Commerce,

Mewar University, Chittorgarh, Rajasthan

ABSTRACT

The complex and unique phenomenon of leadership is the topic with universal appeal in almost all areas of

study. Trait based perspective of leadership has a long and controversial classic history. While researches

shows that the possession of certain identified traits alone do not guarantee leadership success, this is evident

that effective leaders are different from others in certain key respects. Trait approaches dominated the initial

decades of scientific leadership research. Later, which were disdained for their inability to offer clear

distinctions between leaders and non leaders and for their failure to account for situational variance in

leadership behavior. Recently, driven by greater conceptual, methodological, and statistical sophistication, such

approaches have again risen to prominence. This article provides a qualitative review of the trait perspective in

leadership research, followed by a meta-analysis. Based on a research review on the trait theory of leadership

and what is known about the concept of expertise, this paper attempts to find a convergence between leader and

expert traits. This article is based on the belief that the key leader traits help the leader acquire necessary skills;

formulate an organizational vision and an effective plan for pursuing it; and take the necessary steps to

implement the vision in reality. The whole study is based on the perspectives of the personnel working as leaders

in the Indian academic era.

Keywords: Academic Era , Expert Traits, Leadership, Traits

I. INTRODUCTION

The component common to almost all definitions is that ―leadership is an influence process that assists groups

of individuals towards goal attainment‖ (Northouse, 2007, p. 12). Similarly, the definition of expertise has been

the object of much debate. For the purpose of this paper, Swanson and Holton‘s (2001) definition is a good fit:

expertise is the combination of experience, problem-solving skills, and knowledge. To that definition, Germain

(2006) adds a self-enhancement factor, which includes attributes such as extraversion, self-assurance, or

charisma. For nearly half a century, the popularity of leadership and expertise has been rising in organizations as

well as in research. Both topics have been the object of a multitude of academic research articles and books

chapters nationally and internationally (Bass, 1990; Germain, Vecchio, Schriesheim, Martinko, & Van Fleet,

2004). Research centers have been built and training programs have been designed to improve employees‘

leadership skills and to increase their level of expertise. While the expertise and the leadership concepts have

seldom been the object of comparison and contrast in the human resource development (HRD) and in the

54 | P a g e

management research literature, a closer look at their respective human characteristics may help us better

understand human dynamics in organizations. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent to which

expert and leader characteristics converge, if at all. In order to accomplish that goal, a review of key research

journal articles and books on the topics of leadership trait theory and expertise was performed, the result of

which is presented in this paper.

II. PERSONALITY

Personality concept began to develop in the late nineteenth century, after Charles Darwin published his theory of

evolution.

―Personality‖ is the habitual patterns and sum of qualities of behaviour of any individual as expressed by

physical and mental activities and attitudes such as patterns of thoughts, feelings, emotion, activities and

behaviours consistently exhibited by an individual over time that strongly influence the expectations, self-

perceptions, values and attitudes, and predicts the reactions to people, problems and stress. It is the complex or

sum of such qualities and characteristics seen as being distinctive to a group, nation, place, etc. which is being

capable of making, or likely to make, a favourable impression on other people that make an individual unique.

Personality is the typical pattern of thinking, feeling, and behaviours that make a person unique and is

considered to be the totality of character attributes and behavioural traits. It is the study of human lives and the

factors which influence their course which investigates individual differences : Henry Murray.

III. TRAITS

Traits are the consistent and habitual patterns of thoughts, feelings, behaviour, emotions or actions that

distinguish one individual from another which are considered to be relatively consistent and distinctive ways

across situations and over time. They are the distinguishing quality or a unique set of characteristics, especially

of one‘s personal nature. . Traits are not fixed but they are acting as the basis tendencies that remain stable

across the life span, but characteristic behaviour can change considerably through adaptive processes. A trait is

an internal characteristic that corresponds to an extreme position on a behavioural dimension. For example,

introverts may be able to learn how to behave in a less introverted way, while extroverts may learn how to

control and moderate their extroverted behaviors when situations require it.

These are the measurable aspects of personality. The most common way to describe people is to list these traits

or qualities possessed by them. For example, friendliness, social, honesty, perseverance, submissiveness,

dominance, etc. Gatewood and Field (1998) considered traits as a permanent dimension (such as sociality,

independence, and achievement demands) being used for explaining the consistency of human behaviors in

various situations.

IV. PERSONALITY TRAITS

―Personality traits‖ is a complex of qualities and characteristics or the pattern of thought, emotion, and

behaviour of one people that is stable across time and many situations and seen as being distinctive to a group,

nation, place etc. It is an enduring patterns of perceiving, relating to, and thinking about the environment and

oneself that are exhibited in a wide range of social and personal contexts which generally assume : (a) traits are

55 | P a g e

relatively stable over time, (b) traits differ among individuals (for instance, some people are outgoing while

others are reserved), and (c) traits influence behaviour.

Personality traits are distinguishing qualities or characteristics that are the embodiment of an individual‘s. They

are often seen as separate or different from one to other person‘s based on their own thinking, feeling, sensation,

and intuition. Thinking enables individual to recognize meaning, feeling helps individual to evaluate, sensation

provides individual with perception, and intuition points to possibilities available to individual.

The groups of personality traits are known as personality factors or dimensions of personality. Personality traits

play a significant role in any individual‘s development. It is the ability to get along in adult situation; it is the

person‘s type of action, reaction, opinion and mood. (Mullanattom: 1993). Personality trait is one particular

characteristics of a person. It is a generalized and dependable way of thinking, felling and otherwise reacting.

The groups of personality traits are known as personality factors or dimensions of personality.

4.1 Trait Research

A trait underlines a competency and therefore it forms a base for performance. The basis assumption of trait

research is that internal disposition has an influence on behaviour. It is often clear from the studies that the

characteristics of the person determine individual‘s behaviour. It is implicitly assumed that the personality

affects behaviour. It does not imply that traits predispose an individual to behave in exactly the same way,

irrespective of the situation. In fact, approx. 85% of the success and happiness will be the result that how well

one can interact with others with good personality and its traits.

4.2 Trait theory

Trait theory is an approach to study human personality that identifies and measures the degree to which certain

personality traits—recurring patterns of thought and behavior, such as anxiousness, shyness, openness to new

things—exist from individual to individual.

Trait theorists believe personality can be understood by positing that all people have certain traits, or

characteristic ways of behaving. (Boundless Psychology. Boundless, 2015)

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of the American Psychiatric Association, personality

traits are prominent aspects of personality that are exhibited in a wide range of important social and personal

contexts. In other words, individuals have certain characteristics that partly determine their behavior; these traits

are trends in behavior or attitude that tend to be present regardless of the situation.

4.3 Famous Trait theories

Gordon Allport‘s 4000 traits theory (1897–1967)

Raymond Cattell‘s Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (1905–1998)

Hans Eysenck‘s Three Dimensions of Personality (1916–1997)

The Five-Factor Theory of Personality ( The Big Five / OCEAN)

4.4 Gordon Allport’s 4000 traits theory

Gordon Allport was one of the pioneers of formal personality psychology and is considered as first modern trait

theorist who had adopted the trait approach against the type approach for the description of personalities.

56 | P a g e

According to him, the traits are the basic units of personality and every person develops a unique set of

organized tendencies called traits. In 1936, he found that a single English language dictionary alone contained

more than 4000 words which describe the human personality traits.

Allport categorized the traits into three levels:

Cardinal Traits: These are traits that dominate an individual‘s whole life, often to the point that the person

becomes known specifically for these traits such as Ebenezer Scrooge‘s greed or Mother Theresa‘s

altruism. They stand at the top of the hierarchy and are collectively known as the individual's master

control. These traits emerge as the dominant force in a personality. People with such personalities often

become so known for these traits that their names are often synonymous with these qualities. Consider the

origin and meaning of the following descriptive terms: Freudian, Machiavellian, narcissistic, Don Juan,

Christ-like, etc. Allport explained that cardinal traits are rare and tend to develop later in life.

Central Traits: These are the general characteristics found in varying degrees and form the basic

foundations of personality in every person. These central traits, while not as dominating as cardinal traits,

are the major characteristics a person might use to describe another person, they shape the makeup of a

personality as their building blocks. Terms such as intelligent, honest, shy and anxious are considered

central traits.

Secondary Traits: These are the traits that are sometimes related to attitudes or preferences and often

appear only in certain situations or under specific circumstances. They are plentiful but are only present

under specific circumstances; they include things like preferences and attitudes. Some examples would be

getting anxious when speaking to a group or impatient while waiting in line.

V. RAYMOND CATTELL’S SIXTEEN PERSONALITY FACTOR QUESTIONNAIRE (1905–

1998)

Trait theorist Raymond Cattell , the research assistant of Charles Spearman ;reduced the number of main

personality traits from Allport‘s initial list of over 4,000 down to 171, mostly by eliminating uncommon traits

and grouping common characteristics.

However, saying that a trait is either present or absent does not accurately reflect a person‘s uniqueness, because

(according to trait theorists) all of our personalities are actually made up of the same traits; with the difference

only in the degree to which each trait is expressed.

Cattell believed it necessary to sample a wide range of variables to capture a full understanding of personality.

The first type of data was life data, which involves collecting information from an individual's natural everyday

life behaviors. Experimental data involves measuring reactions to standardized experimental situations,

and questionnaire data involves gathering responses based on introspection by an individual about his or her

own behavior and feelings. Using this data, Cattell performed factor analysis to generated sixteen dimensions of

human personality traits: abstractedness, warmth, apprehension, emotional stability, liveliness, openness to

change, perfectionism, privateness, intelligence, rule consciousness, tension, sensitivity, social boldness, self-

reliance, vigilance, and dominance.

Based on these 16 factors, he developed a personality assessment called the 16PF which has become the most

commonly used personality rating tool. Instead of a trait being present or absent, each dimension is scored over

57 | P a g e

a continuum, from high to low. For example, your level of warmth describes how warm, caring, and nice to

others you are. If you score low on this index, you tend to be more distant and cold. A high score on this index

signifies you are supportive and comforting. Despite cutting down significantly on Allport's list of traits,

Cattell's 16PF theory has still been criticized for being too broad. According to Cattell, every individual have

these main traits, and their personalities are determined by the degree to which each is present.

5.1 Hans Eysenck’s Three Dimensions of Personality

Hans Eysenck continued the research on personality traits and would had narrowed the list of characteristics to

three main areas. Originally, he said everyone could be defined by just two rubrics—Introversion-Extroversion

and Neuroticism-Emotional Stability. But in his studies, he found that certain subjects displayed behavior that

couldn‘t be tied to these categories. The result was the convenient third category that encompassed mental

illness—Psychoticism. Eysenck observes that personality traits exists in clusters and not directly observable as

they are not active all times.

Introversion/Extraversion: Introversion involves directing attention on inner experiences, while extraversion

relates to focusing attention outward on other people and the environment. So, a person high in introversion

might be quiet and reserved, while an individual high in extraversion might be sociable and outgoing.

Neuroticism/Emotional Stability: This dimension of Eysenck‘s trait theory is related to moodiness versus even-

temperedness. Neuroticism refers to an individual‘s tendency to become upset or emotional, while stability

refers to the tendency to remain emotionally constant.

Psychoticism: Later, after studying individuals suffering from mental illness, Eysenck added a personality

dimension he called psychoticism to his trait theory. Individuals who are high on this trait tend to have difficulty

dealing with reality and may be antisocial, hostile, non-empathetic and manipulative.

5.2 The Five-Factor Theory of Personality ( The Big Five / OCEAN)

Today, many contemporary researchers believe that there are five core dimensions of personality, often referred

to as the "Big 5" personality traits. The five broad personality traits described by the theory are extraversion,

agreeableness, openness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism.

However, many researchers felt that Gordon Allport's theory is too vast, Cattell's theory was too complex and

Eysenck's was too limited in scope. As a result, the five-factor theory emerged to describe the basic traits that

serve as the building blocks of personality. Evidence of this theory has been growing over the past 50 years,

beginning with the research of D. W. Fiske (1949) and later expanded upon by other researchers including

Norman (1967), Smith (1967), Goldberg (1981), and McCrae & Costa (1987).

5.3 "Big Five" broad five categories of personality traits

Extraversion: This trait includes characteristics such as excitability, sociability, talkativeness, assertiveness

and high amounts of emotional expressiveness.

Agreeableness: This personality dimension includes attributes such as trust, altruism, kindness, affection,

and other prosocial behaviors.

58 | P a g e

Conscientiousness: Common features of this dimension include high levels of thoughtfulness, with good

impulse control and goal-directed behaviors. Those high in conscientiousness tend to be organized and

mindful of details.

Neuroticism: Individuals high in this trait tend to experience emotional instability, anxiety, moodiness,

irritability, and sadness.

Openness: This trait features characteristics such as imagination and insight, and those high in this trait also

tend to have a broad range of interests.

Table 1: The Big Five Personality Dimensions

Lower End Dimensions Higher End

Angry,Tense,Nervous,Envious,

Unstable

Emotional Stability Calm, Relaxed, At Ease, Not Envious,

Stable

Unintelligent,Imperceptive,Unanalytic

al,

Uninquisitive, Unimaginative

Openness to Experience Intelligent, Perceptive, Analytical,

Inquisitive, Imaginative

Introverted, Unenergetic, Silent,

Unenthusiastic, Timid

Extraversion Extroverted, Energetic, Talkative,

Enthusiastic, Bold.

Cold, Unkind, Uncooperative,

Selfish, Rude.

Agreeableness Warm, Kind, Cooperative, Unselfish,

Polite

Disorganized, Irresponsible,

Undependable, Negligent, Impractical.

Consciousness Organized, Responsible, Reliable,

Conscientious, Practical.

Source: Richard L. Daft (2005) The Leadership Experience, Third Edition, US: Thomson South-Western.

The trait approach was one of the first systematic attempts to study leadership in the early 20th century up to

late 1940s. The trait approach advocated that leadership ability is innate and linked to personal qualities. Despite

its weaknesses the trait approach provides valuable information about leaders and leadership. It can be used at

individual as well as at organizational level. For example, through various tests and questionnaires, individuals

can analyze their own traits and understand their strengths and weaknesses and how others see them in

organization. Thus, it can be used by managers to assess where they stand within their organization and what is

needed to strengthen their position. The trait approach also gives us some benchmarks for what we need to look

for if we want to be leaders (Northouse, 2007).

In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the trait approach. several researchers have tried to

explain how traits influence leadership. Northouse (2007, p.16) notes that the trait approach began with an

emphasis on identifying the qualities of great person; next, it shifted to include the impact of situations on

leadership, and most currently, it has shifted back to reemphasize the critical role of traits in effective

leadership.

5.4 Rational of Trait Theory of Leadership

The trait model of leadership is based on the characteristics of many leaders - both successful and unsuccessful -

and is used to predict leadership effectiveness. The resulting lists of traits are then compared to those of

potential leaders to assess their likelihood of success or failure.

59 | P a g e

Successful leaders definitely have interests, abilities, and personality traits that are different from those of the

less effective leaders. Through many researches conducted in the last three decades of the 20th century, a set of

core traits of successful leaders have been identified. These traits are not responsible solely to identify whether a

person will be a successful leader or not, but they are essentially seen as preconditions that endow people with

leadership potential.

Researchers have studied leadership skills directly or indirectly for a number of years (see Bass, 1990, pp. 97–

109). However, the impetus for research on skills was a classic article published by Robert Katz in the Harvard

Business Review in 1955, titled ―Skills of an Effective Administrator.‖ Katz‘s article appeared at a time when

researchers were trying to identify a definitive set of leadership traits. Katz‘s approach was an attempt to

transcend the trait problem by addressing leadership as a set of developable skills. More recently, a revitalized

interest in the skills approach has emerged. Beginning in the early 1990s, a multitude of studies have been

published that contend that a leader‘s effectiveness depends on the leader‘s ability to solve complex

organizational problems. This research has resulted in a comprehensive skill-based model of leadership that was

advanced by Mumford and his colleagues (Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, Jacobs, & Fleishman, 2000;

Yammarino, 2000).

In this study, researcher has identified the core traits which are as follows:

Articulate : Communicate effectively with others

Perceptive: Discerning and insightful

Self - confident : Believes in oneself and one's ability

Persistent: Stays fixed on the goals , despite interference

Determined: Takes a firm stand, act with certainty

Trustworthy: Is authentic, inspires confidence

Self Assured: Secure with self, free of doubts

Dependable: Is consistent and reliable

Friendly: Shows kindness and warmth

Outgoing: Talks freely , gets along well with others

Conscientious : Is thorough, organized and careful

Diligent: Is industrious, hardworking

Sensitive: Shows tolerance, is tactful and sympathetic

Empathetic: Understands others, identifies with others

Democratic and Participative

Shows Integrity & be responsible

Courageous: have courage to take initiative and risk

VI. STRENGTHS/ADVANTAGES OF TRAIT THEORY

The strength of the trait perspectives is their ability to categorize observable behaviors. Researchers have found

that examining the aggregate behaviors of individuals provides a strong correlation with traits; in other words,

observing the behaviors of an individual over time and in varying circumstances provides evidence for

the personality traits categorized in trait theories.

60 | P a g e

Trait theories use objective criteria for categorizing and measuring behavior. One possible proof of this is that

several trait theories were developed independently of each other when factor analysis was used to conclude a

specific set of traits. While developing their theories independently of each other, trait theorists often arrived at a

similar set of traits.( General Strengths and Limitations of Trait Perspectives, 2015)

It is naturally pleasing theory and valid as lot of research has validated the foundation and basis of the theory. It

serves as a yardstick against which the leadership traits of an individual can be assessed. It gives a detailed

knowledge and understanding of the leader element in the leadership process. Nonetheless, defining expertise

solely with personality traits would undermine previous research findings, which assert that expertise is also a

matter of skills, mainly problem-solving skills (Germain, 2006; Swanson & Holton, 2001). Mumford, Zaccaro,

Harding, Jacobs, & Fleisman (2000) suggest that the three components of leadership skills theory are social

judgment skills, knowledge, and problem-solving skills, the latter two being clear evidence-based components

of expertise (Swanson & Holton, 2001; Germain, 2006). Expertise could therefore be a combination of traits and

skills theories, as Stogdill‘s (1948; 1974) leadership traits and skills classification suggests, accompanied with

years of experience (Swanson & Holton, 2001).

6.1 Limitations of the Trait Theory

The limitations of a trait theory is that is doesn‘t strong predictive power (Gleitman, Fridlund & Reisberg,

2004). Also, Judge, Bono, Ilies, and Gerhardt‘s (2002) meta-analysis, many traits studied and many conflicting

results. Additionally, it is still somewhat unclear as to why personality is associated with leadership. Finally, a

trait approach may ignore a situational specificity. For instance, if a person is high on an extraversion and an

openness measure, is she or he effective in all situations? Trait theory suffers from the difficulties of specifying

the trait(s) that constitute effective leadership (and therefore expertise) and of explaining how much of each trait

one needs in order to cope best in different situations (Hill, 1998). However, simply because we cannot define

and measure the variables scientifically should not exclude them from our consideration (Maccoby, 1981).

There is bound to be some subjective judgment in determining who is regarded as a ‗good‘ or ‗successful‘

leader. The list of possible traits tends to be very long. More than 100 different traits of successful leaders in

various leadership positions have been identified. These descriptions are simply generalities. There is also a

disagreement over which traits are the most important for an effective leader.

6.2 Implications of Trait Theory

The trait theory gives constructive information about leadership. It can be applied by people at all levels in all

types of organizations. Managers can utilize the information from the theory to evaluate their position in the

organization and to assess how their position can be made stronger in the organization. They can get an in-depth

understanding of their identity and the way they will affect others in the organization. This theory makes the

manager aware of their strengths and weaknesses and thus they get an understanding of how they can develop

their leadership qualities.

6.3 Recent Researches on the trait approach

As the trait approach fell out of favor in industrial/organizational psychology, researchers began to develop new

situational approaches to leadership. They also began to focus their attention on leader behaviors, which led to

61 | P a g e

the emergence of behavioral theories of leadership. Many modern researchers adopted a contingency approach

to leadership, which posits that leaders who posses certain traits will be more effective in some situations than in

others. Recently, however, there has been somewhat of a resurgence in research on the trait approach to

leadership, especially with the emergence of the five-factor model of personality. Recent research has attempted

to correct some of the methodological shortcomings of the earlier research on leadership traits. For example,

researchers have developed conceptual models linking leadership attributes to organizational performance.

Additionally, they have begun to highlight consistent patterns of relationships between traits and performance

measures. Rather than simply studying what combinations of traits would be successful in a particular situation,

researchers are now linking clusters of personality traits to success in different situations.

6.4 Contributions to the field of Human Resource Development

Despite a few shortcomings, the trait approach provides valuable information about expertise. It can be applied

by individuals at all levels and in all types of organizations. Although the trait approach does not provide a

definitive set of traits, it does provide direction regarding which traits are good to have if one aspires to be an

expert. By taking personality tests people can gain insight into whether they have certain traits deemed

important for expertise, and they can pinpoint their strengths and weaknesses. Moreover, the trait approach

suggests that organizations will work better if the people in managerial positions have designated expertise

profiles. Also, organizations can specify the characteristics or traits that are important to them for particular

positions and then use personality assessment measures to determine whether an individual fits their needs.

Hence, a trait assessment could help managers determine whether they have the qualities for a lateral or vertical

move in the company. It could give individuals a clearer picture of who they are as experts and how they could

fit into the organizational hierarchy. In areas where certain of their traits are lacking, experts could try to make

changes in what they do or where they work to increase the potential impact of their traits. Ultimately, a trait

approach gives us some benchmarks for what we need to look for if we want to be experts.

Subsequently, one ought to question whether expertise traits and skills can be taught. Just as the question of

whether leadership can be learned is a matter of semantics, so could it be for expertise. Nevertheless, based on

previous and current findings, the question ―can leadership be learned or can it be taught?‖ would make sense

for the concept of expertise. Although there is no definite answer, some scholars concur that leadership can be

taught, even though some are more specific in their beliefs and assert that only some aspects of leadership are

―teachable‖. Mott (2002) considers continuing professional education as a means of developing professional

expertise. That being said, effective experts seem to be individuals who are ambitious, driven, and outgoing,

among other qualities. Such attributes or values seem to be intrinsic and may be ―unteachable‖. Others believe

that even though some individuals may be better equipped to assume leadership roles, leadership training can

enhance their abilities (Germain et al., 2004). They take an attributional perspective on the topic, making

reference to findings in positive psychology as well as in authentic leadership. Similarly, it is expected that some

attributes of expertise may be teachable and /or may be enhanced through formal education and that some

individuals might be better equipped to assume expert roles. Some could argue that a trait approach to expertise

may not be particular useful for training and development because individuals‘ personal attributes are largely

stable and fixed, and therefore their traits are not amenable to change. Skills, however, can be taught. Problem-

62 | P a g e

solving skills, social judgment skills, and knowledge are at the core of leadership skills theory (Mumford et al.,

2000) and can be learned through leadership training. Consequently, careful selection and assessment of

individuals may be necessary before further developing employee skills through training.

Future research should further investigate the trait approach but also focus on a skills‘ approach, hence shifting

the focus from personality traits to skills and abilities that can be learned and developed. This could further

confirm or refute the premise that experts can learn the knowledge component of expertise (Swanson & Holton,

2001; Germain, 2006) and strengthen existing definitions for expertise. Finally, additional research is needed to

find out if other leadership theories could apply to expertise. For instance, although situational theories of

leadership have often been challenged (Doh, 2003), one may wonder whether experts become experts simply

because they are at the right place at the right time. They may find themselves in an organization that promotes

or fosters employees‘ manifestation of their personality traits such as extroversion or drive. Employees that are

credulous and easily impressed may also surround the so-called experts, hence nurturing their expert-like

behavior. Or it is possible that they emerge at a time when an organization offers a positive climate for

individuals who show expert-like characteristics, evidence or self-enhancement based? If employees can be

trained to become experts, expertise training may be viewed as the teaching of skill sets that can be further

developed with experience. Expertise still requires dedication and self-determination on the part of the

apprentice. Human resource developers can stimulate, encourage, nurture, and expand such commitments, but

the question remains: Can we create experts from whole cloth?

6.5 Objectives of study

To study the trait theories of leadership

To study and analyze the selected traits on linkert scale

To study the superiority of the traits for effective leadership or managerial skills.

To study the relevance of the selected appropriate traits in academic era

6.6 Methodology

For the purpose of this study, random samples have been collected from employees working in Amity

University, a No. 1 ranked private non profit educational organisation, total 196 of sample were collected;

among them middle level and senior level employees of both genders are involved. Samples were collected

through structured open ended questionnaire and personal interviews. Data have been collected from both

primary and secondary sources and further analysed through factor analysis ,weighted mean and correlation

ranking method.

VII. FINDINGS & LIMITATIONS

Through this study , the analysis has been done for selected 17 core traits / skills and further 08 traits are

identified which have ranked superior from selected 17 core traits which are as follows:

Articulate : Communicate effectively with others

Self - confident : Believes in oneself and one's ability

Trustworthy: Is authentic, inspires confidence

Self Assured: Secure with self, free of doubts

63 | P a g e

Diligent: Is industrious, hardworking

Empathetic: Understands others, identifies with others

Shows Integrity & be responsible

Courageous: have courage to take initiative and risk

Even from above 02 traits or skills are ranked highest i.e. Articulate and Courageous, as per the opinion of 95%

employees there are strongly agree that these traits are the must have traits for a leader to be effective and

efficient for retained to be on any managerial post. Their one opinion is common that traits are mostly

responsible for any leader behaviour pattern but these traits can be nurtured and learned through experience and

knowledge and can be used as developed skills instead of defined as traits only. So there must be further study

for skills based approach for finding out whether these traits can be converted , learned and utilized as skills so

that future effective leaders or mangers can be trained for sustainable organizational growth.

VIII. CONCLUSION

The traits approach gives rise to questions: whether leaders are born or made; and whether leadership is an art or

science. However, these are not mutually exclusive alternatives. Leadership may be something of an art; it still

requires the application of special skills and techniques. Even if there are certain inborn qualities that make one

a good leader, these natural talents need encouragement and development. For example : A person is not born

with self-confidence. Self-confidence is developed, honesty and integrity are a matter of personal choice,

motivation to lead comes from within the individual, and the knowledge of business can be acquired. While

cognitive ability has its origin partly in genes, it still needs to be developed. None of these ingredients are

acquired overnight.

Bibliography

[1]. Allport, G.W. & Odbert, H.S. (1936). Trait-names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs,

47(211).

[2]. Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill‘s handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial

application (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press.

[3]. Boeree, C. George, (2009), Trait Theories of Personality, General Psychology,

http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/genpsytraits.html

[4]. Boeree, C.G. (2006). Gordon Allport. Personality Theories. Found online at

http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/allport.html

[5]. Cattell, R.B. (1965). The scientific analysis of personality. Baltimore: Penguin Books.

[6]. Connelly, M. S., Gilbert, J. A., Zaccaro, S. J., Threlfall, K. V., Marks, M. A., & Mumford, M. D. (2000).

Exploring the relationship of leadership skills and knowledge to leader performance. Leadership

Quarterly, 11(1), 65–86.

[7]. Doh, J. P. (2003). Can leadership be taught? Perspectives from management educators. Academy of

Management Learning and Education, 2(1), 54-67.

[8]. Encyclopedia of Management (2009). Leadership Theories and Studies. In Encyclopedia of Management.

http://www.enotes.com/management-encyclopedia/leadership-theories-studies

64 | P a g e

[9]. Eysenck, H.J. (1992). Four ways five factors are not basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13,

667-673.

[10]. Fiske, D. W. (1949). Consistency of the factorial structures of personality, ratings from different sources.

Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology.44. 329-344.

[11]. Fleenor, John W. (2011),"Trait Approach to Leadership." Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational

Psychology. 2006. SAGE Publications. 16 Feb. 2011.pg 830-832

[12]. Fu Chen Kuo and Shang-Pao Yeh.,(2014), Traits or Training? The Effects of Traits and Training on

Managerial Competency and Effectiveness of Medical Directors, Kamla Raj , Ethno Med, 8(1): 33-41

[13]. Gatewood R D, Field H S 1998. Human Resource Selection.4th Edition. New York: Dryden Press,

Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

[14]. Germain, M. L. (2006). Development and preliminary validation of a psychometric measure of expertise:

the generalized expertise measure. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Barry University, Florida.

[15]. Germain, M. L. (2006). Development and preliminary validation of a psychometric measure of expertise:

the generalized expertise measure. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Barry University, Florida.

[16]. Germain, M. L., Vecchio, R. P., Schriesheim, C. A., Martinko, M. J., & Van Fleet, D. D. (2004,

November). Can Leadership be Taught? Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Southern

Management Association. November 3-6, 2004, San Antonio, TX. 10-1

[17]. Gleitman, H., Fridlund, A. J., & Reisberg, J.D. (2004). Psychology. Sixth Edition. New York: W.W.

Norton.

[18]. Hill, L. B. (1998). Leadership. In W. G. Christ (Ed.), Leadership in times of change (pp. 199-224).

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[19]. Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative

and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765-780.

[20]. Katz, R. L. (1955). Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard Business Review, 33(1), 33–42.

[21]. Kendra, Cherry,. (2014) Psychology Expert, Trait Theory of Personality, about health online portal, Dec

20, 2014

[22]. Maccoby, M. (1981). The leader: A new face for American management. New York: Simon and

Schuster.

[23]. McCrae, R. R., & COSta, P. T., Jr. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across

instruments and observers. Journal of Person.7/ity and Social Psychology. 52. 81-90.

[24]. Mott, V. W. (2002). The development of professional expertise in the workplace. In V. W. Mott and B. J.

Daley (Eds.) New directions for adult and continuing education (Vol. 2000, Issue 86, pp. 23-31). New

York: Wiley.

[25]. MSG Experts,(2015) Trait Theory of Leadership, Management Study Guide

[26]. Mumford, M. D., & Connelly, M. S. (1991). Leaders as creators: Leader performance and problem

solving in ill-defined domains. Leadership Quarterly, 2, 289–315.

[27]. Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Connelly, M. S., & Marks, M. A. (2000). Leadership skills: Conclusions

and future directions. Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 155–170.

65 | P a g e

[28]. Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Harding, F. D., Jacobs, T. O., & Fleisman, E. A. (2000). Leadership

Skills for a Changing World: Solving Complex Social Problems. Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 11-35.

[29]. Mumford, M.D., Zaccaro, S.J., Connelly, M.S., Marks, M.A. (2000). Leadership skills: conclusions and

future directions. Leadership Quarterly, 11 (1), 155-70.

[30]. Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership: theory and practice. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

[31]. Passini, F. T., & Norman, W.l: (1966). A un' conception of personality, structure?,J ournal of Personality

Social Psychology, pg: .44-49 .

[32]. Robert Hogan, Gordon J. Curphy, and Joyce Hogan, (1994),What we know about leadership,

Effectiveness and Personality, American Psychologist, Vol. 49. No.6. 493-504

[33]. Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature. Journal of

Psychology, 25, 35-71.

[34]. Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of the literature. New York: Free Press.

[35]. Swanson, R. A., & Holton III, E. F. (2001). Foundations of human resource development. San Francisco:

Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

[36]. Virkus , Sirje., (2009) Leadership Models, Digital Library Learning Erasmus Mundus, Sirje Virkus,

Tallinn University.

[37]. Yulk, Gary,.(2011), Leadership in Organisations, Book Pearson, seventh edition

Useful Links

[38]. Academic Leadership: the online journal http://www.academicleadership.org/index.shtml

[39]. The Ken Blanchard Companies http://www.kenblanchard.com/

[40]. Leadership Development Resource Center http://work911.com/leadership-development/index.html

[41]. Leadership Education Resources http://www.ila-net.org/communities/MIGs/Resources.htm

[42]. Leadership Resources, Books, Readings & Articles

http://www.leadershipdevelopment.edu.au/Content_Common/pg-resources-readings-articles.seo

[43]. Leadership Resources International http://www.leadershipresources.org/

[44]. Leadership Traits - Impact of Personality http://www.business-leadership-

qualities.com/leadershiptraitspersonality.html

[45]. Resources for Leadership http://resourcesforleadership.com/

[46]. Hazem Abolrous, Leadership and Innovation, blog on Thoughts on leadership, management and how they

pertain to innovation and enterprise survival, February 21, 2010,

http://leadershiptheories.blogspot.in/2010/02/skills-approach.html

[47]. http://www.humanresourcestoday.com/hr/hr-management/

[48]. http://traittheory.com/

[49]. ―Allport's, Cattell's, and Eysenck's Trait Theories of Personality.‖ Boundless Psychology. Boundless, 20

Aug. 2015. Retrieved 08 Dec. 2015 from https://www.boundless.com/psychology/textbooks/boundless-

psychology-textbook/personality-16/trait-perspectives-on-personality-79/allport-s-cattell-s-and-eysenck-

s-trait-theories-of-personality-310-12845/

66 | P a g e

Annexures: Questionnaire

Identification of Leadership Traits in Managerial Positions

Demographic Profile:

1. Name and Address of the organization:

2. Main Area of Business:

3. Sex: (i) Male (ii) Female

4. Qualifications: (i) Graduate (ii) Post Graduate

5. Age: (i) Below 40 yrs (ii) 40-50yrs (iii) Above 50 yrs

6. What is your Current Designation:

(i) Lower Level (ii)Middle Level (iii) Higher Level

7. Work Experience:

(i) Less than 10 yrs (ii) 10-20 yrs (iii) 20-30yrs (iv) Above 30 yrs

8. Did you attend any management Development Programme on Leadership Traits during last 05 years?

(i) Yes (ii) No

9. What is the annual turnover (Rs.in crores) of your organization?

(i)Below 200 (ii)200-500 (iii) Above 500

10. What is the employees‘ strength in your organization?

(i)Below 100 (ii)100-250 (iii)250-500 (iv)Above 500

Identification of Leadership Traits in Managerial Positions

Purpose:

1. To gain an understanding of how traits are used in leadership assessment

2. To obtain an assessment of your own leadership traits

Assessment Parameters:

Leadership skills

Interpersonal skills

Group dynamics

Values and Ethics

SCORING

If the respondent‘s opinion, mentioned trait is unsatisfactory and not important in any situation then he

scores 1

If the respondent‘s opinion, mentioned trait is unsatisfactory but can stay in cluster list then he scores 2

If the respondent‘s opinion, mentioned trait is slightly satisfactory but can be important in unknown

situations then he scores 3

If the respondent‘s opinion, mentioned trait is satisfactory and can be proved important in many situations

then he scores 4

If the respondent‘s opinion, mentioned trait is highly satisfactory and must have quality then he scores 5

67 | P a g e

Traits list Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

agree

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

1. Articulate

2. Perceptive

3. Self-confident

4. Self-assured

5. Persistent

6. Determined

7. Trustworthy

8. Dependable

9. Friendly

10. Outgoing

11. Negotiable & Flexible

12. Democratic &

Participative

13. Integrity &

Responsible

14. Initiative taker & Risk

Taker

15. Any other Quality as

per your opinion