Leader Attribute Patterns

The Leader Attribute Pattern approach is a perspective of understanding leader individual differences. It is different from traditional trait perspectives. Specifically, it is based on theorists' arguments that leaders are best studied as entire patterns of traits rather than examining individual traits. This allows for an understanding of leader traits that better reflects the reality of individuals as whole entities. A better understanding of leader traits has implications for leader development, selection, and training.
History of the Trait Theory of Leadership
Early History
:The search for the characteristics or traits of leaders has been ongoing for centuries. History’s greatest philosophical writings from Plato’s Republic to Plutarch’s Lives have explored the question of “What qualities distinguish an individual as a leader?” Underlying this search was the early recognition of the importance of leadership and the assumption that leadership is rooted in the characteristics that certain individuals possess. This idea that leadership is based on individual attributes is known as the “trait theory of leadership.”
:This view of leadership, the trait theory, was explored at length in a number of works in the previous century. Most notable are the writings of Thomas Carlyle and Francis Galton. In Heroes and Hero Worship (1841), Carlyle identified the talents, skills, and physical characteristics of men who rose to power. In Galton’s (1869) Hereditary Genius, he examined leadership qualities in the families of powerful men and ultimately concluded that leadership was inherited. In other words, leaders were born, not developed. Both of these notable works lent great initial support for the idea that leadership is rooted in characteristics of the leader.
:For decades, this trait-based perspective dominated leadership research and theory. Using early research techniques, researchers conducted over a hundred studies proposing a number of characteristics that distinguished leaders from nonleaders: intelligence, dominance, adaptability, persistence, integrity, socioeconomic status, and self-confidence just to name a few.
The Rise of Situational Leadership Theories
:In the late 1940s and early 1950s a series of qualitative reviews of these studies (e.g., Bird, 1940; Stogdill, 1948; Mann, 1959) caused researchers to take a drastically different view of the foundations of leadership. In reviewing the existing literature, Stogdill and Mann found that while some traits were consistently related to leadership, the overall evidence suggested that persons who are leaders in one situation may not necessarily be leaders in other situations. As a result, leadership was no longer characterized as an stable, individual trait; situational approaches now suggested that individuals can be effective in certain situations, but not others. This situational approach dominated much of the leadership theory and research for the next few decades.
The Reemergence of the Trait Theory
:New methods were later developed that would ultimately reestablish the trait theory as the popular approach to leadership. For example, improvements in research design allowed researchers to see that individuals can and do emerge as leaders across a variety of situations and tasks. Additionally, during the 1980s statistical advances allowed researchers to conduct meta-analyses, in which they could quantitatively analyze and summarize the findings from a wide array of studies. Meta-analyses allowed trait theorists to create a clearer picture of previous leadership research. Equipped with these new methods, leadership researchers revealed the following:
:::*Individuals emerge as leaders across a variety of situations and tasks
:::*Significant relationships exist between leadership and such individual traits as:
::::*intelligence
::::*adjustment
::::*extraversion
::::*conscientiousness
::::*openness to experience
::::*general self-efficacy
Criticisms of the Trait Theory
:While the trait theory of leadership has certainly regained popularity, it is still criticized for a number reasons..
:Specifically, Zaccaro (2007) noted that trait theories still:
::#Focus on a small set of individual attributes such as Big Five personality traits, neglecting cognitive abilities, motives, values, social skills, expertise, and problem-solving skills
::#Fail to consider patterns of multiple attributes
::#Do not distinguish between those leader attributes that are generally constant over time and those that are influenced by the situation
::#Do not consider how stable leader attributes account for the wide variety of behaviors seen in effective leaders
Leader Attribute Pattern Approach
:Considering the criticisms of the trait theory outlined above, several researchers have begun to take a different perspective of leader individual differences - the leader attribute pattern approach. In contrast to the trait approach, the leader attribute pattern approach views the person as a specific combination of individual traits. In other words, the leader attribute pattern approach argues that combinations of individual differences may explain substantial variance in both leader emergence and leader effectiveness beyond that explained by single attributes.
The Pattern Approach and Trait Theory Criticisms
Broader Conceptualizations of Traits
:In response to the first criticism of the trait theory - narrow set of traits- the pattern approach takes a broader perspective of leader traits. Recent conceptualizations of leader traits describe the construct as inclusive of a variety of personal qualities that promote leader effectiveness. Consistent with this perspective, the pattern approach moves beyond considering only personality attributes and includes motives, values, cognitive abilities, expertise, social and problem solving skills as traits.
:Clearly, this approach blurs the distinction between personality, skills, competencies, and expertise. Figure 1 identifies sets of leader attributes including: cognitive capacities, dispositional qualities, motives, values, skills, social capacities, and tacit knowledge. Reviews by Bass (1990), Zaccaro (2001), Zaccaro et al. (2004), and Yukl (2006) have identified specific attributes that are subsumed by these larger sets. While by no means exhaustive, Figure 2 provides a summary of particular attributes relative to the primary sets of traits identified in the leader attribute model.
Consideration of Pattern Integrations
:Addressing the second criticism of the trait theory, the leader attribute pattern approach to examining leadership conceptualizes an individual as a totality rather than a simple summation of attributes. This approach argues that constellations of individual attributes can explain substantial variance in leadership outcomes (i.e., emergence and effectiveness) beyond a simple variable (i.e., bivariate), or additive combination of attributes.
:Recent research has demonstrated the utility of this leader attribute pattern approach across leadership effectiveness and emergence criteria.
:::*Individuals who exhibited high levels of meta-cognition, tolerance for ambiguity, and social intelligence were associated with higher ratings of leader performance, while individuals who scored low on any one or two of the studied attributes performed no better than those individuals who were low on all three.
:::*Individuals with a pattern of high intelligence, high dominance, and high general self-efficacy emerged as leaders significantly more frequently than all other patterns of individuals.
:::*Additional predictive patterns of attributes have included motivational needs, intelligence-gender role, and intelligence-dominance-general self efficacy- self-monitoring.
Recent Theoretical Developments
Malleability and Stability of Traits
:While previous research on the pattern approach has shown promise, the construction of these patterns has lacked any theoretical foundation. That is, it is unclear as to why a set attributes should be examined as a pattern. Recent theoretical developments by Zaccaro et al., (2004) on the influence of traits on leadership criteria provide a foundation in which to construct such “patterns.” Effectively, such an approach can address yet another concern raised on the leader trait literature - malleability of traits over time and the role situational influences.
:The model in Figure 1 identifies several integrated sets of attributes, including dispositional (i.e., personality), cognitive capacities, motives and values, problem-solving skills, social capacities, and tacit knowledge. As implied by the model, some of the characteristics are more situationally bound than others. That is, the contribution of certain leadership attributes vary as a function of leadership situation demands. For example, expertise and tacit knowledge in a particular leadership situation may not be relevant in another. The model also identifies the importance of several distal attributes that exert a stable and significant influence on leadership, independent of situational influences. These distal attributes are thought to serve as foundational qualities which promote effectiveness across generic leadership situations.
:Further, this multi-stage model proposes that certain distal attributes (e.g., personality) serve as precursors for the development of more situationally bound (i.e., proximal) personal characteristics. It is believed that these proximal attributes, as opposed to distal attributes, are more amenable to change. This is reflected in leadership interventions that tend to focus on developing particular skills, expertise, and competencies.
Construction of Attribute Patterns
:Considering that certain leader attributes may differ in their relative stability over time and the degree to which they are specific to particular situations, the construction of leader attribute patterns necessitates not only contextual but also causal considerations. First, in constructing leader attribute patterns, it is crucial to consider what proximal leader attributes are necessary for the leadership demands of the situation. That is, selected proximal attributes must be theoretically grounded and relevant to the demands of the situation. Additionally, one must also consider more distal attributes that serve as precursors for the growth and development of situationally bound personal characteristics.

:The utilization of this framework can further develop the trait approach to examining leadership phenomenon. Based on examining the relationships between a series of variables, researchers will be able to identify optimal constellations of attributes that provide a more sophisticated approach in studying leadership traits. As leadership is a complex behavioral phenomenon, the pattern approach reflects this reality by looking at leadership traits as integrated within an individual rather than in existing in isolation.

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu