Introduction
Leadership is one of the most widely studied concepts in disciplines such as organizational behavior and management. Different scholars have focused on specific aspects of leadership, including theories, traits, processes, effects of leadership, and even its role in change and corporate performance. Others have also attempted to distinguish between leadership and management, thereby further illustrating the importance of this concept.
The basic idea behind leadership is influencing others in pursuing organizational or social goals (Gandolfi & Stone, 2018). In the business world, effective leadership has been attributed specific characteristics that are embedded in individuals or the leadership process. Requirements for good leaders have been outlined in various scholarly efforts. However, the distinction between the traits and the process has remained relatively ignored.
This paper seeks to define and evaluate the concepts of leadership traits and processes. The first step summarizes the two topics to achieve this objective, incorporating three articles for each. The second step is to evaluate the two concepts, with a primary focus on their definitions.
The third phase compares and contrasts the topics, focusing on how both apply to the broader idea of leadership. Lastly, consideration is given for future research and suggestions on discourses or models for future scholarly work. A concluding section summarizes the key points discussed in the paper.
Topic Summaries
Leadership Process
Leadership as a process can be described as a relatively novel and emerging idea, considering that few scholars are exploring it. The main article used in this paper to describe leadership has been presented by DeRue and Ashford (2010), who propose that leadership identity is constructed through a claiming-granting process. The method used is a systematic literature review, which means that no sample population exists. The quality of the journal is manifested through references to scholarly works. The article’s idea is that individuals claim and grant both leadership and follower identities.
Additionally, the authors argue that leadership involves mutual influence that is not dependent on the hierarchical structures within a particular social context. The main idea is that leadership can be viewed as forming identities and attaching meaning to the self-concept. Additionally, leadership is a multi-stakeholder paradigm, which necessitates identities created regarding the individual, relational, and collective dimensions.
The basic ideas in the main article, as summarized above, have been backed by other scholars. For example, Platow et al. (2015) reiterate that leadership is a group process where the leader is fundamentally part of the group. The method used in this article is also a systematic review of the literature, where quality is derived from references to past research on the subject. These scholars also oppose the idea that leadership is about the roles occupied, often meaning the hierarchical structures proposed by DeRue and Ashford (2010).
As a group process, psychological parameters can be used to define the relationships within the social settings. Social identity and self-categorization are two theories that help conceptualize leadership as a process. In summary, the main argument in this article is that leadership can only occur within a social group where leaders and followers can be defined through psychological processes.
Other articles have proposed an alternative approach to describing leadership as a process. The article by Uhl-Bien (2006) focuses on relational leadership, a process that can be described from entity and relational perspectives. The entity perspective explores the attributes of individuals in the context of interpersonal relationships.
The relational perspective perceives leadership as a social construction process. The basic tenet in both perspectives is that leadership occurs in a social setting where individuals are leaders or followers. The article employs thematic analysis as its primary method, which means that no sample populations are required. Additionally, the journal’s quality can only be assessed based on the quality of the studies used to support the key themes discussed.
Leadership Trait
Leadership has also been viewed from the trait-based perspective, which is relatively more common in literature. The main article on this subject was presented by Zaccaro (2007), who described the history of the trait-based perspective as long and checkered. The main argument in the article is that a combination of attributes is more likely to predict leadership when integrated conceptually, as opposed to being independent and additive single traits.
Therefore, the author does not necessarily rule out the effectiveness of leadership traits, but rather offers opinions on how they should be utilized. Most importantly, the meaning of traits has been explored, alongside the role played by the concept of situational context. The method employed by the scholar can be described as a systematic review of the literature, where multiple studies have been explored and used to support the author’s main arguments.
No sample population has been used since no primary research has been conducted. Regarding the journal’s quality, the article is peer-reviewed and published in a professional journal. Additionally, quality sources of information have also been used.
Different leadership traits are more effective in certain situations than others. The concept of emotional intelligence has been explored in an article by Hernon and Rossiter (2006) to examine which traits are most effective in developing emotional intelligence. The rationale adopted by the scholars is that leadership involves managing oneself and relationships with others, which is the basic conceptualization of emotional intelligence. The survey findings indicate that some essential traits include enthusiasm, articulateness, respect for learning, high energy levels, vision, creativity, the ability to motivate people, and risk-taking.
While this list is not exhaustive, scholars have concluded that emotional intelligence has theoretical components that are similar to those of transformational leadership. The researchers employ a combination of methods, including content analysis of job advertisements and survey research, with library directors serving as the sample population. Scientific methods have been employed as the primary research approach, which helps improve the journal’s quality.
Leadership experiences influence the value attributed to the concept of leadership traits. This position is held by Nichols (2015), who uses Amazon’s Mechanical Turk to experiment on leadership experiences. The methods employed by the scholar include survey research, which involves a sample of 195 participants (68% female). The journal’s quality is good, as it employs scientific methods in conducting primary research.
The key finding is that when people know which traits are essential in a leader, this knowledge will likely influence the selection of leaders. A comparison across the genders has also been made, where more experience among females reduces the need for control. In contrast, the level of control remains desirable to males regardless of the experience. The traits explored include supportiveness, pleasantness, fairness, ambition, assertiveness, dominance, and cooperation. Dominance and cooperation have received more attention as their desirability changes with experience in different terms between men and women. For example, dominance increases in desirability among males and declines among females.
Concept Evaluation
From the summaries of the articles presented above, it is apparent that different perspectives contribute to varied definitions and conceptions of leadership. However, the basic tenet across both topics is that leadership involves social influence within a group geared towards attaining set group, organizational, and societal goals. As a process, leadership focuses on building positive relationships and creating identities, whether as a leader or a follower.
However, scholars such as DeRue and Ashford (2010) emphasize that the position occupied by the leader is not essential, especially since the situation can change the individuals occupying such roles. On the contrary, the trait perspective is founded on the assumption that attributes and traits can define a leader’s effectiveness. Zaccaro (2007) is among the scholars who hold this view and also emphasizes that there should be no limits regarding the number of attributes. Therefore, the position is important because the individuals possessing the desired attributes are made to occupy the positions.
The question of how to define the two concepts can be answered by exploring the basic ideas expressed across the articles. For example, leadership involves creating identities that are both claimed and granted within a social setting (DeRue & Ashford, 2010). Leader-follower relations are formed through successful interpersonal and mutual influence.
According to Platow et al. (2015), the concept of leadership may become senseless when decontextualized and abstracted from the group. Additionally, leadership emerges from a group’s social-psychological processes, including interdependence. The basic implication of this definition is that if individuals fail to identify as members of a particular group, leadership cannot develop, as the necessary psychological and social processes are absent.
Relational leadership theory, as discussed by Uhl-Bien (2006), provides one of the most comprehensive definitions of the leadership process: it involves social influence processes that produce and construct social order and change. However, this definition emanates from the relational rather than the entity perspective, which views leadership as meanings constructed through individual actions. These approaches help solidify social groups as the core component of the leadership process definition.
The definitions of leadership traits also vary, depending on the aspects and theories of leadership that various scholars choose to explore. Zaccaro (2007) has explored the meaning of leader traits, expressing that some early scientific research defined traits as the heritable or innate qualities an individual possesses. During the first half of the 20th century, this definition shifted to encompass all enduring attributes that differentiate leaders from non-leaders.
Therefore, the definition adopted by Zaccaro (2007) is that leadership traits involve the integrated and coherent patterns of individual attributes and differences that support leadership effectiveness across organizational and group situations. To break down this definition further, it is essential to note that different traits produce leaders with higher effectiveness in specific situations. Such an observation is supported by Zaccaro’s (2007) insistence on combining traits rather than additive attributes. The bottom line is that individuals possess specific characteristics that persist in them and give them the ability to lead.
It is essential to emphasize the notion that leadership traits are used to define what leaders do and how they behave. This sentiment is held by Nichols (2015), who also reiterates that traits encompass individual tendencies and differences that exhibit consistent patterns. Nichols (2015) also expresses that the patterns are visible through actions, thoughts, and feelings, which can be labeled as leader behavior.
Personality plays a critical role in the development of a leader and categorizes individuals as people with or without leadership positions. An application of this categorization has appeared in the article by Hernon and Rossiter (2006), as they identify individuals with emotional intelligence and those without. In this case, emotional intelligence comprises a set of traits different from the traditional definition of leadership attributes. Some qualities are desired more in certain situations, an observation that explains that leadership and its effectiveness are subject to external conditions. Another point to note in these definitions is that not all scholars attempt to define the concept of leadership trait, as some pay more attention to modeling the concept of applying it to given contexts.
Comparison of Leadership Concepts
A comparison of the two concepts can focus on what aspects are similar and different based on the definitions discussed previously. In this case, it is essential to acknowledge that several similarities can be found while only a few significant differences emerge. First, the two concepts have different perceptions regarding how position applies to leadership. According to DeRue and Ashford (2010), leadership is a state of being that individuals can enter regardless of their formal position or role within the social setting.
Platow et al. (2015) reiterate that leadership is not about people occupying these roles. This is from the process point of view, where scholars agree that position is less critical since the social interactions within the groups take precedence. Additionally, leadership can be viewed as the outcome of the social dynamics within a group setting, indicating that the position is only secondary or unimportant.
However, the concept of leadership traits has a different approach to leadership positions. The rationale is that traits distinguish between leaders and non-leaders, as Zaccaro (2007) explained. Therefore, leadership can be described in terms of the roles and positions of individuals possessing the right attributes. In other words, leadership is the preservation of people who display persistent qualities that make them effective leaders in certain situations. Even though the scholars do not emphasize the importance of position while defining leadership traits, it can be inferred that a hierarchical structure tells leaders from followers.
The concept of the leadership process differs from leadership traits in that the influences are often interpersonal and mutual. In leadership traits, the influence is majorly one-way since leaders simply need the followers to follow them towards the set goals. The leadership process comprises group members experiencing social and psychological dynamics involving mutual influence. A leader may emerge regardless of the hierarchical structure, and the followers can influence the leader. At the same time, discussing leadership traits, scholars such as Nichols (2015) pit cooperation against dominance, illustrating how influence usually works. On the contrary, the relationship-oriented behaviors in process leadership illustrate how members interact with others.
There are several areas where similarities between leadership traits and the process can be found. A key example is the role of the situation in the development or emergence of leaders in any social context. The article by DeRue and Ashford (2010) argues that identity creation shifts across situations.
In the leadership process, any given condition can grant an individual a leadership role, while a different situation bestows the powers on a different person. In leadership traits, the title of situation has been discussed by Zaccaro (2007), who argues that situation can be a significant source of variance in leadership effectiveness. The key point is that a leader possessing certain traits will be effective in certain situations and not others. Therefore, both concepts are similar in that they appreciate the role of situations in developing leadership behavior and effectiveness.
Other similarities include that both concepts hold that leadership occurs in a social or group context. In both cases, a social setting has to be present where relationships are fostered. The differences may manifest in how leadership develops, but the basic idea is that groups of people have to be present in a particular context where leadership is desired. Lastly, interpersonal influences are present in both concepts, where leaders and followers influence each other in various ways. In other words, leadership is all about interpersonal influences, whether from the process or trait points of view.
Future Direction for Research
The leadership process model should be considered for future research since it has largely been neglected in the current literature. Considering the importance of leadership in academia and practice, it can be assumed that research on the subject will not cease. Therefore, there are a few considerations for future research involving the process. This area has emerged to be relatively neglected, as not many scholars give much attention to the idea of leadership as a process.
A broad understanding of leadership development in a group setting has been offered. Therefore, future research needs to refine these ideas and offer a more comprehensive view of leadership processes. Psychological processes may have been mentioned as part of leadership development. However, further research on the theoretical underpinnings needs to be conducted, and the current research also needs to be updated. The processes must be highlighted and examined before new theories can be developed.
Conclusion
The focus of this paper was to explore leadership traits and processes as various scholars have used them. The article summaries have highlighted the main ideas and arguments related to each subject. An evaluation has explored the basic definitions of the topics, mainly derived from the discussions offered in the articles.
In this case, the key similarities and differences appear, which have also been outlined. Regarding the differences, the process is based on the idea that position does not matter, while leaders express the importance of the position. The similarities include that both process and trait appreciate the importance of social contexts and the role of interpersonal relationships. However, there is still room for further research and updates; new theoretical developments could help keep these concepts current.
References
DeRue, S., & Ashford, S. (2010). Who will lead and who will follow? A social process of leadership identity construction in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 627-647. Web.
Gandolfi, F., & Stone, S. (2018). Leadership, leadership styles, and servant leadership. Journal of Management Research, 18(4), 261-269.
Hernon, P., & Rossiter, N. (2006). Emotional intelligence: Which traits are most prized? College & Research Libraries, 67(3), 260-275. Web.
Nichols, A. (2015). What do people desire in their leaders? The effect of leadership experience on desired leadership traits. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(5), 658-671. Web.
Platow, M., Haslam, A., Reicher, S., & Steffens, N. (2015). There is no leadership if no-one follows: Why leadership is necessarily a group process. International Coaching Psychology Review, 10(1), 20-37.
Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relational leadership theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership and organizing. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 654-676. Web.
Zaccaro, S. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist, 62(1), 6-16. Web.