The Trait approaches (Stogdill, 1948; Mann, 1959; Gardner, 1989; Kouzes & Posner, 1987; Gardner, 1989) were considered the first theoretical framework in the scientific study of leadership. Considered as the traditional approach to leadership, trait theory in general suggests that the person who emerges as a leader in a group does so because he possesses certain traits. The traditional perspective of leadership type, Charismatic, is an example of leadership that is observed through trait approaches. Derived from a Greek word, charisma[[1]], meaning ‘divinely inspired gift’, was used by Weber (1947) to describe a basis of power or influence grounded in followers’ perceptions that a leader is endowed with exceptional personal qualities.
From the perspective of trait theory, a common set of personal attributes that distinguished leaders from followers or effective leaders from ineffective ones were identified. The personal attributes of leaders – in terms of physical, mental and social e.g. physical vitality, courage and resolution, self-confidence, assertiveness, honest, competent, forward-looking, inspiring and intellligent – became the focus of analysis.
During the 1930s and 1940s, hundred of trait studies were conducted world-wide. However, as pointed out by researchers, in general these studies were rather unsophisticated, both theoretically and methodologically (Steers et. al, 1996). The results of much of this research were brought together in a classic review by Stogdill (1948) which examined over one hundred empirical studies of leader attributes covering 27 recurring characteristics. Interestingly, one of the main findings shows that of the numerous attributes examined by researches, only intelligence and height seemed to distinguish leaders from followers.
In a more recent studies, Gardner (1989) prepared a list of traits that are thought to be central to leadership. Basing his study on a large number of North American organisations and leaders, he listed examples of leadership traits which he concluded as qualities or traits that did seem to mean that a leader in one situation could lead in another.
Gardner’s (1989) list of personality traits of a leader
Physical vitality and stamina
Intelligence and action-oriented judgement
Eagerness to accept reponsibilty
Task competence
Understanding of followers and their needs
Skill in dealing with people
Need for achievement
Capacity to motivate people
Courage and resolution
Trusworthiness
Decisiveness
Self-confidence
Assertiveness
Adaptability / flexibility
Note:
[[1]] Charisma is also referred to a movement of spiritual renewal, said to be rooted in Pentecostalism, which takes a variety of forms in Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox Churchess. It emphasises the present reality and work of Holy Spirit in the life of Church and the individual. It is sometimes accompanied by speaking in tongues. Crystal (1994:237).
[[2]] A study done by the University of Minnesota in 1940 looked at 20 experimental investigations into leadership and found that only 5 per cent of the traits appear in three or more of the lists. Another example of such research is shown by a study of which a questionnaire-survey of 75 top executives, carried out by the American business journal, Fortune, listed fifteen executive qualities, i.e. (1) judgement; (2) initiative; (3) integrity; (4) foresight; (5) energy; (6) drive; (7) human relations skill; (8) decisiveness; (9) dependability; (10) emotional stability; (11) fairness; (12) ambition; (13) dedication; (14) objectivity; and (15) cooperation. It was found that nearly a third of the 75 said that they thought all these qaulities were indispensable. The replies showed that these personal qualities have no generally-accepted meaning (Adair, 1984:8).
