Logo en.artbmxmagazine.com

The origin of the leader

Anonim

Scientific research on leadership and personality is abundant over the past three to four decades. The research reviewed by Judge & Bono, (2000) can be summarized in their interest in defining what are the traits that characterize a leader and in responding if the leader is born or made. Although progress has been made in identifying leader characteristics, this question remains unanswered. What can be concluded from the research carried out? Have they shown a way to know if the leaders known to humanity are the result of the genetic lottery or if they are the result of an intentional plan and a clearly defined process?

Burns (1978) was the first to identify two types of leadership, which he called transformational and transactional, and which can be summed up in the ability to inspire followers vs. the ability to obtain the cooperation of others. Both are opposite. The leader who manifests transformational characteristics is recognized according to Bass (1985), for his ability to transmit a charisma to his followers, to inspire them with a motivating vision, to question what they see challenging the status quo, and to identify the needs of his followers and attend to them. While the leader who manifests transactional characteristics has no followers, but, going from more to less: provides valuable and adequate resources to the people he works with, monitors performance and takes corrective actions,and intervenes when problems become serious under the dynamics of avoiding mistakes, or simply avoids leading.

The studies carried out by House and Howell (1992) and by Bass (1998) showed in relation to the charismatic personality of the leader, that there is not enough information; that existing information is limited and fragmented, and that there is no reliable empirical support to draw conclusions.

Since then, studies have focused on analyzing models that allow us to examine the relationships between personality and transformational leadership; one of the most recognized is the Big Five, (Tupes and Christal, 1961), which has been widely accepted by the scientific community. The factors that make up the Big Five are: extroversion, being nice, awareness, emotional adjustment and openness to the experience. According to these authors: (a) «extraversion, represents the tendency to be sociable, energetic, active, and the emotion they seek», (b) «pleasantness, consists of the tendency to be kind, gentle, trustworthy and Confidence, and warm «, (c)» conscientiousness, is indicated by two main facets: performance and reliability «, (d)» emotional adjustment, often labeled by its opposite, neuroticism,Which is the tendency to anxiety, fear, depression, and a bad mood "," emotional adjustment is the main big five trait that leads to life satisfaction and freedom from depression and other mental illnesses "(McCrae and Costa, 1991), and (e) »openness to experience, represents the tendency to be creative, imaginative, insightful and reflective«. (p. 752).

Since then, authors such as (Judge and Bono, 2000; Judge, Bono, Ilies and Gerhardt, 2002; Bono and Judge, 2004; and D´Alessio, 2006, 2008) have been given the task of demonstrating the type of relationships existing between Each of these factors and the transformational leadership, for which they formulated different hypotheses, with which they sought to establish whether the type of relationship between the factors or dimensions and the transformational leadership was positive or negative.

Schneider & Hough (1995) synthesized the most significant criticisms of the Five Great Personality Traits, claiming that they are too broad and can mask important links between specific personality traits and specific behaviors; while leaders who show transformational behaviors that lead to effectiveness in their workplace, because of the results they show, are promoted to better positions within the company. Judge and Bono (2000). The results obtained by these authors, after applying and analyzing specialized tests, for each of the personality traits and types of leaders presented above,show that the dimensions known as neuroticism and consciousness did not present significant relationships with transformational leadership; while extroversion and agreeableness showed significant relationships with transformational leadership. The big five were measured with the NEO Personality Inventory test. (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Both transformational leadership and transactional leadership were measured with the multi-factor leadership questionnaire -MLQ, for its acronym in English. (Avolio, Bass, and Jung, 1995). Employee satisfaction with the leader was measured with three items from the diagnostic work survey (Hackman & Oldham, 1980); specifically: (a) employee satisfaction with the quality of supervision received,(b) employee satisfaction with the amount of support and guidance received and (c) employee satisfaction with the treatment received by the boss. Overall employee satisfaction with the job was measured with five Brayfield-Rothe elements of overall job satisfaction (Brayfield and Rothe, 1951). Employee engagement with the organization was measured on the affective engagement scale (Allen & Meyer, 1990). Employee motivation for work was measured with three MLQ items that assessed the employee's willingness to work better, as a result of the leader's influence. And finally, the leader's effectiveness was measured with five items completed by the leader's immediate supervisor. (Judge & Bono, 2000, p. 756).

The aforementioned authors considered that the results obtained regarding transformational leadership show that this type of leadership is effective, while the behaviors that characterize transactional leadership did not show significant results regarding its effectiveness. On this basis other authors such as Bass (1998) have concluded that the theory of transformational leadership is shown as a theory of human behavior and assumes that transformational behaviors can be learned. That is, a certain type of leadership that people are not born with can be learned. And regarding the theory of the five great personality traits, it can be concluded that through performance at work, transformational leadership can be predicted. (Judge & Bono, 2000).

The analysis of each of the five dimensions, according to Judge and Bono (2000) showed that pleasantness stood out in this research as the strongest predictor of transformational leader behavior; extroversion and openness to experience showed significant correlations with transformational leadership. However, no facet of neuroticism or consciousness was related to transformational leadership; Thus, Judge and Bono (2000) concluded that the five great factors cannot go beyond personality traits in predicting transformational leadership. This result according to them may be due to the fact that the study carried out did not consider within the research the influences of organizational factors,such as business conditions or organizational strategy; nor did he consider the characteristics of the followers. However, the results obtained by the study by Judge & Bono (2000) allow us to conclude that of the five great personality traits, there are at least three that could help organizations in the choice of leaders, namely: agreeableness, extroversion and openness to experience.

The Five Great Personality Traits and The Great Man Theory, according to Judge, Bono, Ilies, and Gerhardt (2002, p. 765), assume that leadership depends on the leader's personal qualities, but they differ in that The Big Five do not believe that leadership is within the reach of a few heroic men. These two theories show the existence of completely opposite positions towards leadership, the leader as a normal person vs. the heroic leader, from whom the film industry has not only taken much advantage, but has created stereotypes in which the leader appears as a person isolated from the reality that all human beings share, creating confusion. On the other hand, it is important to highlight that leadership leadership is not a matter of passively possessing certain personality traits,without doing anything else. Stogdill (1948). Action is essential and is what characterizes the leader. A person is recognized as a leader, among others, for his charisma and for his ability to inspire others and mobilize them around a vision. (Burns, 1978; Bass, 1985).

Understanding the passivity vs. dichotomy This activity probably motivated Judge et al., (2002) to incorporate a new element of analysis between personality traits and leadership, an element hitherto dismissed, the relationships between emerging leadership and effective leadership. They then took on the task of reviewing the results of the studies carried out so far on the Five Factor Model of Personality, and found that as a general conclusion that the validity of personality as a predictor of job performance was very low. (p. 767).

Regarding the criteria that characterize leadership, Hogan et al., (1994) found that leadership could be conceptualized in different ways, Lord et al., (1986) had proposed emerging leadership and effective leadership. Emerging leadership refers to the degree to which an individual is viewed as a leader by others; while effective leadership refers to measurable performance objectives achieved by the work group. (Hogan et al., 1994). Then, Judge et al., (2002) proposed relationships between the Big Five and the two types of leadership: emerging leadership and effective leadership.

Recall that critics of the Big-Five model agree that the Big Five show too broad a view; Additionally, this vision prevents him not only from predicting the criteria of leadership, but can also mask the relationships of the leadership personality, since the variables that make up the five factors may have different correlations with leadership. (Bass, 1990; Mount & Barrick, 1995a).

The positions found led Judge et al., (2002) to investigate more specifically variables of the five major traits, such as: (a) dominance and sociability, (b) achievement orientation and dependendability, and (c) self-esteem and locus of control. (p. 769).

The results showed that extroversion is the factor most strongly related to leadership, followed by awareness, and then neuroticism and openness to experience; while agreeableness showed a relatively weak correlation with leadership. With the information obtained by these results, Judge et al. (2002) re-pose the two main questions asked by Bass (1990): “What then distinguishes a leader from another person? And what is the magnitude of these differences? ” (p. 771); and concluded by stating that the five-factor model helped to resolve these questions, because the relatively strong correlation between these five personality factors and the leadership criteria suggests that the five-factor taxonomy is a fruitful basis for examining the predictors of leadership,let's see why.

Regarding each of the factors, the results obtained by Judge et al., (2012) showed in relation to extroversion, that social and dominant people have greater opportunities to emerge as leaders and be effective; in relation to conscience, they discovered that it is more strongly related to the emergence of the leader than to its effectiveness; Regarding openness to experience, they discovered that it is the most controversial and least understood factor. (p. 773). Finally, regarding pleasantness, they discovered that it has a weak correlation with leadership, being the least relevant of the five traits, because pleasant individuals tend to be passive and complacent, making them less likely to emerge as leaders.It should be noted that all the factors evaluated showed a correlation with leadership, to different degrees. The Big Five Theory predicted emerging leadership more strongly than predicted the effectiveness of leadership and leadership in business, government, or the military. (p. 774).

However, the research results cast doubt on neuroticism, and the question arises whether the negative relationship between neuroticism and leadership is because neurotic individuals are less likely to attempt to be leaders because they are less inspirational or because they have low expectations of themselves and of others. On the other hand, the question arises as to whether the controversy generated by open-minded individuals may be due to being more creative and divergent in thought, to being risk-takers, or because of their fanciful tendencies that could make them leaders. visionaries.

A subsequent study by Bono and Judge (2004) explored the relationship between the five personality traits and the eight dimensions of transformational and transactional leadership, which have been considered by several authors as "valid predictors of performance and job satisfaction", (p. 901); which means that the understanding of personality traits associated with charismatic and transformational leadership have important implications for the selection, training and development of potential leaders, as is the case with large companies throughout the world, which confirm that "some transformational leadership behaviors can be trained." (p. 901). "Conceptually, these eight dimensions each represent a single set of leading behaviors."

Transformational leadership behaviors are: (a) idealized influence, which refers to leaders who have a high level of moral and ethical conduct »; (b) inspiring motivation, which refers to leaders with a strong vision of the future based on values ​​and ideals. " Both dimensions are highly correlated and are recognized as charisma; (c) intellectual stimulation, which refers to leaders who challenge organizational norms, foster divergent thinking, and push their followers to develop innovative strategies; and (d) individual consideration, which refers to the behaviors of the leader aimed at recognizing the unique needs of growth and development of the followers, as well as the actions of training of followers and consulting with them ». Bono and Judge (2004,p. 901-902).

Transactional leadership behaviors aim to monitor and control employees: (a) "contingent reward" refers to leadership behaviors focused on sharing "resources between the leader and followers; (b) "active exception management" refers to monitoring performance and taking corrective action when necessary "; (c) "'passive-exception management" means that leaders take a passive attitude, intervening only when problems get worse "; and (d) 'laissez-faire', refers to avoiding leadership responsibilities.

Regardless of whether there is no agreement among researchers about the five-factor model that structures personality, this model provides an opportunity to integrate the various approaches to personality. (p. 902). Consequently, Bono and Judge, (2004) carried out a study using the five personality traits model and confronted them with "three dimensions of transformational leadership -charisma, intellectual stimulation and individual consideration- and three dimensions of transactional leadership -reward" contingent, exception-active management and passive leadership. The hypotheses formulated by Bono and Judge (2004) measured the relationships of each of the factors with dimensions of transformational or transactional leadership,based on the most significant characteristics of each of these factors. (eg neuroticism will be negatively related to charisma, intellectual stimulation, and transformational leadership, and positively related to passive leadership).

The results obtained by Bono & Judge (2004), unlike the previous studies, showed significant differences between personality traits and leadership behavior. For example: (a) extroversion and neuroticism showed links with the "charism" - transformational leadership-; (b) although the size of the pleasantness effect and openness to experience were close to extroversion and neuroticism, the credibility of the values ​​for these traits indicated that sometimes these traits were positively linked to the charism and at others they were negatively linked; (c) Regarding intellectual stimulation and individual consideration, similar association patterns were found. Extroversion and neuroticism had positive and negative links.respectively with the three dimensions of transformational leadership; (d) the relationships between personality and transactional leadership had less strong links than the relationships between personality and transformational leadership; (e) friendliness was the strongest predictor of the contingent reward dimension, but the credibility interval showed great variability between studies; Although the mean of the correlations were positive, more than 10% of these correlations were negative; (f) all personality traits except neuroticism were negatively associated with passive-exception management; and (g) in the final analysis, multiple regression was performed to examine all personality traits with the six dimensions of transformational and transactional leadership behavior.The results presented indicate that charisma was the trait most related to personality and management, except the least.

The widespread belief that leaders are born, not made, led Bono and Judge (2004) to analyze the relationship between personality and the two types of transformational and transactional leadership. The results obtained by them showed weak scores between these relationships, which are due to the fact that transformational and transactional leadership behaviors are not as inheritable, as emerging leadership and effective leadership are, since transformational and transactional leadership may have elements that are not captured in the analyzes that use the model of the five personality traits.

If transformational and transactional leadership behaviors are more transient than personality traits, this means that traits can predict the trend toward certain leadership behaviors; and therefore, the observed traits-behavior association can be weakened by leadership training, primarily transactional leadership behaviors that are commonly taught in business and management schools. Unlike transformational leadership, it can be learned according to the underlying empirical evidence, and the role life experiences play in the development of this type of leadership.The authors conclude by stating that continued use of the five broad traits can limit the knowledge of behavior manifested by transformational leadership and transactional leadership (Bono and Judge, 2004).

Despite the weak results Bono and Judge (2004), extroversion can be an important feature in the prediction and understanding of transformational and transactional leadership, given the strength obtained by this factor with both types of leadership, for which it deserves its dimensions are worth exploring, especially mastery and positive emotionality. In view of the fact that the results of the other four major traits were quite modest, the five major ones may not be the best way to discover the background of the personality and the qualifications of these two leaders. Consequently, the Big Five are useful as a general framework because they allow the accumulation and organization of information; however, in order to achieve greater prediction and understanding of transformational and transactional leadership,More specific traits are required, primarily because there is empirical evidence that some transformational leadership behaviors can be learned, and thus opens a path to a deeper understanding of how these leadership behaviors develop. (Bono and Judge, 2004).

D´Alessio (2008) synthesized in his study the dynamics that have characterized the relationship between personality and leadership, highlighting the innumerable attempts made by researchers to explain leadership on the basis of personality traits. And she proposed addressing three important questions: is leadership important? How are leaders chosen? And how is leadership forecast? formulated by (Hogan, Curpy and Hogan, 1994).

Personality continues to play a leading role in leadership styles, and these continue to be a concern in companies; For this reason, among others, it is necessary to investigate the development of leadership skills in business schools, in order to identify if leadership can be taught and what kind of skills are essential to teach the participants of these programs. In the development of his study, he proposed, on the one hand, a negative relationship between neuroticism and the three leadership styles: transformational, transactional and passive-avoidance, and on the other, a positive relationship between the three mentioned styles and the other four major personality factors, including work experience. Too,He proposed that the Big Five and work experience exert a combined influence on the three leadership styles mentioned. (D´Alessio, 2008).

The research incorporated elements of analysis of great interest such as differences by gender, age, professional career, years of work experience, and university attended. Regarding personality, D´Alessio (2008) found important differences: (a) by gender, (eg, the degree of neuroticism and extroversion is higher in women than in men); (b) by age, (eg participants between 23 and 30 years of age are less open to the experience than older participants); (c) by factor, (eg participants between 41 and 58 years old showed greater pleasantness, than younger participants); (d) by year of experience (eg, participants with less than 5 years of experience are less aware than those with more experience; and (e) by professional career (eg.engineering participants are less outgoing than those in other careers).

Regarding leadership, D´Alessio (2008) found that the factors that make up transformational leadership and transactional leadership can be reduced to the three proposed leadership styles, mentioned above, as opposed to previous studies. It also found important differences: (a) by age (eg, participants between 41 and 58 years of age present transformational leadership behaviors more frequently than participants between 23 and 40 years of age; likewise, participants between 41 and 58 years of age showed higher frequency of passive leadership avoidance behaviors than participants between 23 and 40 years of age; and (b) by years of work experience (eg, participants with experiences between 11 and 40 years of age showed more frequent transformational leadership behaviors,that participants with work experiences under 11 years old; Likewise, participants with experiences between 11 and 40 years old showed more frequent passive avoidance behaviors than participants with work experience between 6 and 10 years old.

Regarding the relationship between personality, work experience and leadership styles, D´Alessio (2008) found that consciousness obtained the strongest positive association with transactional leadership, followed by extroversion; while the other three factors did not show significant statistical correlations. In relation to passive avoidance, consciousness showed a moderate negative association; neuroticism, with a relatively weak association; extroversion, with a weak negative association; and openness to experience and agreeableness, without significant correlation. Work experience showed a relatively weak positive association with transformational and transactional leadership, and none with passive avoidance.

Regarding leadership styles, D´Alessio (2008) showed that conscience, closely followed by extroversion, showed the most important effect on transformational leadership; while for transactional leadership, awareness was the most important, followed by extroversion and work experience. And by passive avoidance leadership, consciousness had the greatest negative effect, followed by neuroticism, being positive; and extroversion, being negative.

In reference to the five factors and their relationship with the three types of leadership mentioned, D´Alessio (2008) found that neuroticism has a negative relationship with transformational leadership, and a positive relationship with passive avoidance leadership; extroversion and conscience have a positive relationship with the transformational and transactional leaders, and a negative relationship with the third; openness to experience has a positive relationship with transformational leadership; and pleasantness has no significant correlation with any leadership style. Similarly, work experience has a positive relationship with transformational and transactional leadership. All factors together with work experience showed significant influence on transformational leadership. Extroversion,awareness and experience have a significant influence on transactional leadership. And neuroticism, extroversion, and consciousness exert a significant influence on passive avoidance leadership.

Returning to the initial questions in this article, it can be concluded from the research carried out that: (a) extroversion is the most consistent personality trait and most strongly related both to emerging leadership and effective leadership, and to leadership styles transformational and transactional; (b) the other four personality traits, although they are related to leadership and serve to explain it, do not characterize it; (c) transactional leadership can be learned, specifically from two components - contingent reward and active management by exception -; (d) Another trait that recently seems to be strongly associated with the transformational leadership style is consciousness, which is characterized by tenacious and persistent individuals.with a strong sense of work orientation, vision and goals to achieve. A promising personality trait remains to be deepened in further research, given its ability to build future scenarios, openness to experience; (e) transformational leaders are also transactional, but the same does not happen in the opposite direction; (f) it cannot be affirmed that leadership is the result of the genetic lottery, although there are leaders who are, more by origin than by virtue; it is postulated that these are identified more with the transactional leaders; (g) it is possible to learn to be a leader; experiences in this regard are more linked to transactional leadership than to transformational leadership; and (h) the transformational leader seems to be closer to the born leader, however,Longitudinal research into these types of leaders is required, which can be easily identified, because they are the protagonists of human history at the local, regional and global levels.

References

  • Bono, JE, & Judge, TA (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (5), 901-910. D'Alessio, F. (2008). The Influence of Personality Domains and Working Experience in Peruvian Managers' Leadership Styles: An Initial Study. Journal of CENTRUM Cathedra, 1 (1), 13-33. Judge, TA, & Bono, JE (2000). Five-Factor Model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85 (5), 751-765. Judge, TA, Bono, JE, Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, MW (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (4), 765-780.

The Origin of the Leader

Scientific research on leadership and personality are very abundant along the last three or four decades. Research reviewed by Judge & Bono, (2000) can be summarized in its interest in defining the traits that characterize a leader and to respond if the leader is born or made. Although progress has been made in identifying the characteristics of the leader, this question remains unanswered. What can be concluded from the research? Have they shown a way to establish whether leaders known to mankind are the result of the genetic lottery or if they are the result of a deliberate plan and a clearly defined process?

Burns (1978) was the first to identify two types of leadership, which he called, transformational, transactional, and can be summarized as the ability to inspire followers vs. the ability to obtain the cooperation of others. Both are opposed. The transformational leader who manifests characteristics are recognized by Bass (1985), for its ability to convey a charisma to his followers, motivating vision to inspire, to question what they see challenging the status quo, and to identify the needs of their followers and address them. While having characteristics transactional leader has no followers, but, going from most to least: provides valuable resources and appropriate to people with whom you work, he tracks the performance and take corrective actions, and intervenes when problems become serious under the dynamic to avoid mistakes,or just avoid lead.

Studies by House and Howell (1992) and Bass (1998) showed in relation to the leader's charismatic personality, that there is not enough information, that existing information is limited and fragmented, and there is no reliable empirical support that allows draw conclusions.

Since then studies have focused on analyzing models to examine the relationships between personality and transformational leadership, one of the most recognized is the big five, (Tupes and Christal, 1961), which has been widely accepted by the scientific community. The factors that make up the big five are: extroversion, agreeableness, consciousness, emotional adjustment and openness to experience. According to these authors: (a) «extraversion, represents the tendency to be outgoing, assertive, active, and excitement seeking»; (b) "agreeableness, consists of tendencies to be kind, gentle, trusting and trustworthy, and warm"; (c) "conscientiousness, is indicated by two major facets: achievement and dependendability"; (d) «emotional adjustment, is often labeled by its opposite, neuroticism, which is the tendency to be anxious, fearful, depressed,and moody »; "Emotional adjustment is the main Big Five trait that leads to life satisfaction and freedom from depression and other mental ailments" (McCrae & Costa, 1991); and (e) "openness to experience, represents the tendency to be creative, imaginative, perceptive, and thoughtful." (p. 752).

Since then, authors like (Judge and Bono, 2000; Judge, Bono, Ilies and Gerhardt, 2002; Bono and Judge, 2004, and D 'Alessio, 2006, 2008) then gave the task of demonstrating the kind of relationships between each of these factors and transformational leadership, for which different hypotheses formulated in which sought to establish whether the type of relationship between the factors or dimensions and transformational leadership was positive or negative.

Schneider & Hough (1995) synthesized the most significant criticism that have been made to the Big Five personality traits, saying they are too broad and may mask important links between specific personality traits and specific behaviors, while leaders showing in your workplace transformational behaviors that lead to effectiveness, the results show that they are promoted to higher positions within the company. Judge and Bono (2000). The results obtained by these authors, after applying and analyze specialized tests for each of the personality traits and types of leaders presented above show that the known dimensions such as neuroticism and conscientiousness showed no significant relationships with transformational leadership whereas extraversion and agreeableness did show significant relationships with transformational leadership.“The Big Five were measured with the NEO Personality Inventory test. (Costa & McCrae, 1992). " Both transformational leadership and transactional leadership were measured by Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). (Avolio, Bass, and Jung, 1995). “Subordinate satisfaction with leader was measured with three items from the job diagnostic survey, (Hackman & Oldham, 1980)”, specifically: (a) employee satisfaction with the quality of supervision received, (b) employee satisfaction with the amount of support and guidance received and (c) employee satisfaction with the treatment received by the boss. "Subordinate overall job satisfaction was measured with five items taken Brayfield-Rothe measure of overall job satisfaction (Brayfield and Rothe, 1951).”“ Subordinate organizational commitment was measured with the Affective Commitment Scale (Allen & Meyer, 1990). ” “Subordinate work motivation was measured with three items of the MLQ that assess subordinate willingness to exert extra motivation as a result of the leader's influence.” Finally, “Leader effectiveness was measured with five items completed by the leader's immediate supervisor.” (Judge & Bono, 2000, p. 756).

The above authors considered the results obtained regarding transformational leadership show that this type of leadership is effective, while behaviors that characterize the transactional leadership showed no significant results on their effectiveness. On this basis other authors like Bass (1998) have concluded that transformational leadership theory is shown as a theory of human behavior and assumes Transformational behaviors can be learned. This means that some kind of leadership that people are not born can be learned. And as for the theory of the big five personality traits, we can conclude that through job performance can be predicted transformational leadership. (Judge & Bono, 2000).

The analysis of each of the five dimensions, according to Judge and Bono (2000) showed that the agreeableness was highlighted in this research as the strongest predictor of transformational leader behavior, extroversion and openness to experience showed significant correlations with transformational leadership. However, no facet of neuroticism or the conscientiousness were related to transformational leadership: therefore Judge and Bono (2000) concluded that the Big Five cannot go beyond the personality traits in predicting leadership transformational. This result as they could be because the study did not consider research into the influence of organizational factors, such as business conditions or organizational strategy, and did not consider the characteristics of the followers. However, the results obtained by the study of Judge &Bono (2000) permit to conclude that Big Five personality traits, there are at least three that could assist organizations in choosing leaders, namely agreeableness, extroversion and openness to experience.

The Big Five personality traits and the theory of the great man, according to Judge, Bono, Ilies, and Gerhardt (2002) assume that leadership depends on the leader's personal qualities but differ in that the big five do not believe that leadership is available to a few heroic men. (p. 765). These two theories show the existence of completely opposite positions in leadership, the leader such a normal person vs. the heroic leader, which the film industry has not only got a lot out, but has created stereotypes in which the leader appears as a character isolated from reality that all humans share, creating confusion. On the other hand, it is important to say that leadership is not a matter of passively possess certain personality traits, without doing anything else. Stogdill (1948). The action is essential and is what characterizes the leader.A person is recognized as a leader, among others, by his charisma and his ability to inspire and mobilize others around a vision. (Burns, 1978; Bass, 1985).

Understanding the dichotomy passivity vs. activity probably led to Judge et al., (2002) to incorporate a new element analysis between personality traits and leadership, an element so far dismissed, the relationship between emergent leadership and effective leadership. Then given the task of reviewing the results of the studies conducted so far on Five Factor Model of Personality, and found that as a general conclusion that the validity of personality as a predictor of job performance was very low. (p. 767).

In relation to the criteria that characterize leadership, Hogan et al., (1994) found that leadership could be conceptualized in different ways, Lord et al., (1986) had proposed the emerging leadership and effective leadership. The emerging leadership refers to the degree to which an individual is seen as a leader by others, while effective leadership refers to measurable performance targets achieved by the working group. (Hogan et al., 1994). Then, Judge et al., (2002) proposed a relationship between the Big Five and the two types of leadership: the emerging leadership and effective leadership.

Recall that critics of the Big-Five model agree that the Big Five traits show an overly broad. Additionally, this view not only prevents you from predicting leadership criteria, it can mask the relationship of leadership personality, since the variables that make up the five factors can have different correlations with leadership. (Bass, 1990; Mount & Barrik, 1995a).

The opposing views led to Judge et al., (2002) to investigate more specifically the five major variable traits, such as: (a) dominance and sociability, (b) achievement orientation and dependendability, and (c) self-esteem and locus of control. (p. 769).

The results showed that extraversion is the factor most strongly related to leadership, followed by consciousness, then neuroticism and openness to experience, whereas the agreeableness showed relatively weak correlation with leadership. With the information obtained by these results Judge et al., (2002), again raising the two major questions posed by Bass (1990): «What then distinguishes a leader from another person? and what is the magnitude of these differences «(p. 771), and concluded by stating that the model of the five-factors helped to resolve these questions, because the relatively strong correlation between these five personality factors and criteria leadership, suggest that the taxonomy of the five-factor is a fruitful basis to examine the predictors of leadership, let's see why.

For each one of the factors, the results obtained by Judge et al., (2012) showed in relation to extroversion, social and dominant people have greater opportunities to emerge as leaders and be effective; in relation to consciousness, discovered that this is more strongly related to the leader emergence with its effectiveness; in relation to openness to experience, found that is the most controversial and least understood. (p. 773). Finally, regarding the agreeableness, found that has a weak correlation with the leadership, being the least important of the five traits, for the reason that nice guys tend to be passive and compliant, making them less likely to emerge as leaders. It should be noted that all the factors evaluated correlated with leadership, to varying degrees.The theory of the Big Five traits predicted the emerging leadership more strongly than it predicted leadership effectiveness and leadership in business, government or the military. (p. 774).

However, the results of the investigation show doubts about neuroticism, and raises the question whether the negative relationship between neuroticism and leadership is that neurotic individuals are less likely to try to be leaders, because they are less inspirational or because they have low expectations of themselves and others. On the other hand, the question arises whether the controversy generated by open individuals can be because they are more creative and divergent thinking, they are risk takers, or because of their imaginative tendencies that could become leaders visionaries. (Judge et al., 2002).

A subsequent study by Bono and Judge (2004) elaborated on the relationship between the five personality traits and the eight dimensions of transformational and transactional leadership, which have been considered by several authors as «valid predictors of follower job performance and satisfaction», (p. 901); this means that understanding the personality traits associated with charismatic and transformational leadership have important implications in the work of selection, training and development of potential leaders, as with large companies throughout the world that confirm that «some transformational leadership behaviors can be trained.» (p. 901). The eight dimensions represent a unique set of leader behaviors.

Transformational leadership behaviors are: (a) "idealized influence", refers to leaders who have high standards of moral and ethical conduct "; (b) ´inspirational motivation´, refers to leaders with a strong vision for the future based on values ​​and ideals. » Both dimensions are highly correlated and specifically charisma; (c) ´intellectual stimulation´, which refers to leaders who challenge organizational norms, encourage divergent thinking, and who push followers to develop innovative strategies ”; and (d) “´individual consideration´, the fourth transformational leadership dimension, refers to leader behaviors aimed at recognizing the unique growth and developmental needs of followers as well as coaching followers and consulting with them.» Bono and Judge (2004, p. 901).

Transactional leadership behaviors are aimed at monitoring and controlling employees: (a) “´contingent reward´ refers to leadership behaviors focused on exchange” of resources between the leader and the followers; (b) “´management by exception – active´ refers to monitoring performance and taking corrective action as necessary”; (c) “´management by exception – passive´, leaders take a passive approach, intervening only when problems become serious”; and (d) 'laissez-faire', refers to avoid of leadership responsibilities.

Regardless of the absence of an agreement among researchers about the model of the five personality factors that structure, this model provides an opportunity to integrate the various approaches to personality. (p. 902). Consequently, Bono and Judge (2004) conducted their study using the model of the five personality traits and confronted with «three dimensions of transformational leadership, charisma, intellectual stimulation and individual consideration, and three dimensions of transactional leadership -reward contingent, management by exception - active and passive leadership. The hypotheses made by Bono and Judge (2004) measured the relationship of each factor with dimensions of transformational leadership or transactional, based on the most significant features of each of these factors, (eg neuroticism will be negatively related to charisma,intellectual stimulation and transformational leadership and leadership positively related to passive).

The results obtained by Bono & Judge (2004) unlike previous studies showed significant differences between personality traits and leadership behavior. For example: (a) extroversion and neuroticism showed links to the «charisma» transformational - leadership -, (b) although the size of the effect of agreeableness and open to experience were close to extraversion and neuroticism, the credibility of the values ​​for these traits indicated that sometimes these traits were positively linked to the charisma and elsewhere were negatively related, (c) with respect to intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration were found similar patterns of association, extraversion and neuroticism, had positive and negative links, respectively with the three dimensions of transformational leadership,(d) the relationship between personality and transactional leadership had looser ties that relations between personality and transformational leadership, (e) the friendliness was the strongest predictor of contingent reward dimension, but the credibility interval showed great variability between studies, although the average of the correlations were positive, more than 10% of these correlations were negative, (f) all personality traits except neuroticism were negatively associated with management by exception - passive, and (g) in the final analysis, multiple regression was performed to examine all personality traits with the six dimensions of behavior of transformational and transactional leadership. The results presented indicate that charisma was the trait most related to personality and management by exception the least.

The widespread belief that leaders are born, not made, led to Bono and Judge (2004) to analyze the relationship between personality and the two types of transformational and transactional leadership. The results obtained showed them weak scores from these relationships, which are due to the behavior of transformational and transactional leadership are not heritable, as are the emerging leadership and effective leadership as transformational and transactional leadership may have elements that are not captured in the analysis that use the model of the five personality traits.

If the behaviors of transformational and transactional leadership are more transitory than personality traits, this means that traits can predict the tendency toward certain leadership behaviors, and therefore, the association observed behavior traits, could be undermined by training leadership, mainly transactional leadership behaviors that are Commonly taught in business schools and management. Unlike transformational leadership can be learned according to the underlying empirical evidence, and the role of life experiences in the development of this type of leadership. They conclude by stating that the continued use of the big five traits can limit the knowledge of the behavior shown by transformational leadership and transactional leadership (Bono and Judge, 2004).

Despite the weak results Bono and Judge (2004), extraversion may be an important feature in predicting and understanding transformational and transactional leadership, given the strength obtained by this factor with both types of leadership, therefore, deserves worth exploring its dimensions, especially the domain and positive emotionality. Given attention to the results of the other four traits were quite modest, the big five, cannot be the best way to discover the history of personality and qualifications that cast these two leaders. Consequently, the big five are useful as a general framework that allows accumulate and organize information; However, for purposes of achieving greater forecasting and understanding of transformational and transactional leadership are needed more specific features,mainly because there is empirical evidence argues that some transformational leadership behaviors can be learned, and thus opens the way to a deeper understanding about how to develop these leadership behaviors. (Bono and Judge, 2004).

D'Alessio (2008) summarized in his study the dynamic that has characterized the relationship between personality and leadership highlighting the many attempts by researchers to explain the leadership on the basis of personality traits. He proposed to address three important questions made by (Hogan, Curpy and Hogan, 1994): how important is leadership ?, how leaders are chosen ?, and how does one forecast leadership?

The personality continues to play a major role in leadership styles, and they continue to be a concern in enterprises why, among others, research is needed to develop leadership skills in business schools, in order to identify whether leadership can be taught and what skills are essential to teach the participants of these programs. In developing the proposed study, on one hand, a negative relationship between neuroticism and the three leadership styles: transformational, transactional and passive-avoidance, and secondly, a positive relationship between the three styles mentioned and the other four major personality factors, including work experience. Also proposed that the Big Five and work experience exert a combined influence on the above three styles of leadership. (D 'Alessio, 2008). The awareness that those with more experience,and (e) career (eg engineering participants are less outgoing than other careers).

Research analysis incorporated elements of great interest such as gender differences, age, career, years of experience, and attended college. In relation to personality D'Alessio (2008) found important differences: (a) gender, (eg, is greater in women than in men the degree of neuroticism and extraversion), (b) age, (eg participants between 23 and 30 years of age are less open to experience, that the older participants), (c) factor, (eg participants between 41 and 58 years showed greater agreeableness, lower participants age), (d) experience love tha (eg participants with less than five years of experience are less aware than those with more experience, and (e) career (eg engineering participants are less extroverted than other careers).

Regarding leadership D´Alessio (2008) found that the factors of the transformational leadership and transactional leadership can be reduced to the three leadership styles proposed above, as opposed to previous studies. Also found important differences: (a) by age (eg participants between 41 and 58 years present more often transformational leadership behaviors that participants between 23 and 40 years old, the same way the participants between 41 and 58 years showed higher frequency of passive avoidance behavior of leadership that participants between 23 and 40 years of age; and (b) by years of work experience (eg participants with experience between 11 and 40 years showed behaviors more frequently transformational leadership that participants with work experience less than 11 years,the same way the participants with experience between 11 and 40 years showed more often passive avoidance behaviors that participants with leadership experience between 6 and 10 years.

Respect to the relationship between personality, work experience and leadership styles, D'Alessio (2008) found that consciousness got stronger positive association with transactional leadership, followed by extroversion, while the other three factors showed no significant statistical correlations. Regarding passive avoidance, consciousness showed moderate negative association, neuroticism, with a relatively weak association, extroversion, with a weak negative association, and openness to experience and agreeableness, no significant correlation. The experience showed a relatively weak positive association with transformational leadership and the transactional, and none with passive avoidance.

In relation to leadership styles D´Alessio (2008) found that consciousness, followed closely by extroversion showed the most significant effect on transformational leadership, while for transactional leadership, the most important was the awareness, followed by extroversion and work experience. And passive avoidant leadership, consciousness had the greatest negative effect, followed by neuroticism, being positive, and extroversion, being negative.

In reference to the five factors and their relation to the three types of leadership mentioned, D´Alessio (2008) found that neuroticism has a negative relationship with transformational leadership, positive and passive avoidant leadership. Extraversion and consciousness have a positive relationship with transformational and transactional leadership, and negative to the third. Openness to experience has a positive relationship with transformational leadership. Agreeableness has no significant correlation with any style of leadership. Similarly work experience has a positive relationship with transformational and transactional leadership. All factors together with work experience showed significant influence on transformational leadership. Extraversion, consciousness and experience a significant influence on transactional leadership. And neuroticism,extraversion and consciousness exert significant influence on passive avoidant leadership.

Taking up the initial questions of this article can be concluded from the research that: (a) extroversion is the personality trait more consistently and more strongly related to both emerging leadership and effective leadership, and with the leadership styles transformational and transactional, (b) the other four personality traits but are related to leadership and serve to explain, not characterized, (c) transactional leadership can be learned, specifically from two components - contingent reward and active management by exception - (d) another feature which recently seems to be strongly associated with transformational leadership style is consciousness, which is characterized by persistent and tenacious individuals with a strong sense of work orientation, vision and goals to achieve.It remains for further research to deepen personality trait promising, given its ability to build future scenarios, openness to experience, (e) are also transactional transformational leaders, but not so in the opposite direction; (f) cannot be said that leadership is the result of the genetic lottery, but there are leaders, more for your home than for their virtue and posits that they identify more with transactional leaders; (g) it is possible to learn to be a leader, about the experiences are more linked with transactional leadership with transformational, and (h) the transformational leader seems closer born leader, however, research is needed on longitudinal nature of this type of leaders who can be easily identified because they are the protagonists of history at the local, regional and global levels.given its ability to build future scenarios, openness to experience, (e) are also transactional transformational leaders, but not so in the opposite direction; (f) cannot be said that leadership is the result of the genetic lottery, but there are leaders, more for your home than for their virtue and posits that they identify more with transactional leaders; (g) it is possible to learn to be a leader, about the experiences are more linked with transactional leadership with transformational, and (h) the transformational leader seems closer born leader, however, research is needed on longitudinal nature of this type of leaders who can be easily identified because they are the protagonists of history at the local, regional and global levels.given its ability to build future scenarios, openness to experience, (e) are also transactional transformational leaders, but not so in the opposite direction; (f) cannot be said that leadership is the result of the genetic lottery, but there are leaders, more for your home than for their virtue and posits that they identify more with transactional leaders; (g) it is possible to learn to be a leader, about the experiences are more linked with transactional leadership with transformational, and (h) the transformational leader seems closer born leader, however, research is needed on longitudinal nature of this type of leaders who can be easily identified because they are the protagonists of history at the local, regional and global levels.(e) are also transactional transformational leaders, but not so in the opposite direction; (f) cannot be said that leadership is the result of the genetic lottery, but there are leaders, more for your home than for their virtue and posits that they identify more with transactional leaders; (g) it is possible to learn to be a leader, about the experiences are more linked with transactional leadership with transformational, and (h) the transformational leader seems closer born leader, however, research is needed on longitudinal nature of this type of leaders who can be easily identified because they are the protagonists of history at the local, regional and global levels.(e) are also transactional transformational leaders, but not so in the opposite direction; (f) cannot be said that leadership is the result of the genetic lottery, but there are leaders, more for your home than for their virtue and posits that they identify more with transactional leaders; (g) it is possible to learn to be a leader, about the experiences are more linked with transactional leadership with transformational, and (h) the transformational leader seems closer born leader, however, research is needed on longitudinal nature of this type of leaders who can be easily identified because they are the protagonists of history at the local, regional and global levels.more for your home than for their virtue and posits that they identify more with transactional leaders; (g) it is possible to learn to be a leader, about the experiences are more linked with transactional leadership with transformational, and (h) the transformational leader seems closer born leader, however, research is needed on longitudinal nature of this type of leaders who can be easily identified because they are the protagonists of history at the local, regional and global levels.more for your home than for their virtue and posits that they identify more with transactional leaders; (g) it is possible to learn to be a leader, about the experiences are more linked with transactional leadership with transformational, and (h) the transformational leader seems closer born leader, however, research is needed on longitudinal nature of this type of leaders who can be easily identified because they are the protagonists of history at the local, regional and global levels.research is needed on longitudinal nature of this type of leaders who can be easily identified because they are the protagonists of history at the local, regional and global levels.research is needed on longitudinal nature of this type of leaders who can be easily identified because they are the protagonists of history at the local, regional and global levels.

References

  • Bono, JE, & Judge, TA (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (5), 901-910. D'Alessio, F. (2008). The Influence of Personality Domains and Working Experience in Peruvian Managers' Leadership Styles: An Initial Study. Journal of CENTRUM Cathedra, 1 (1), 13-33. Judge, TA, & Bono, JE (2000). Five-Factor Model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85 (5), 751-765. Judge, TA, Bono, JE, Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, MW (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (4), 765-780.
The origin of the leader