Men Are Better Leaders Than Women

19). Still a part of the Great Man Leadership era, these trait theories just went a step further in attempting to pinpoint exactly which traits of these “great men” were consistently associated with the leaders, in an effort to more clearly define what a great leader was. This was again a further attempt to be able to identify a leader early on and predict which individuals were born to become leaders. It is thought that a major flaw with these theories was the failure to account for external factors, such as the environment in which the individuals were brought up in, as well as the situations they experienced (Horner, 2007, p. 270). Still today we do continue to study the characteristics of leaders in order to better define and understand what makes someone a good leader.

Foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my advisor Ms. Upekha Manamendra for the continuous support of create this report, for her patience, motivation, enthusiasm and immense knowledge. I could not have imagined having a better advisor and mentor for create my report.

In Lesson 6, Dr. Fischer explores the ideas of whether leaders are born or made. In some cases certain traits such as extroversion, conscientiousness, openness, and emotional intelligence can suggest that leaders can in

One identified contributor to women's slower than expected assent into leadership is the persistence of assumptions and stereotypes that women are intrinsically "communal" or "dependent" and "passive", and therefore, lack the capacity to succeed as leaders. (National Academy of Sciences National Academy of Engineering Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, 2006 as cited by Isaac, Kaatz & Carnes, 2012).

Throughout time the question of “ Are leaders born or made?” continues to be debated. This question has been part of several myths that try to explain what makes a person a leader. According to the trait approach theory, it sets a benchmark for what certain traits an individual must possess in order to make them a leader. Before leadership traits were considered innate. However, as time has progressed research has indicated that situations differentiate leaders from non-leaders. Therefore, an individual does not possess certain traits, rather it is the relationship between the person and its society that make him/her leader. All leaders must have a set of skills that help them lead subordinates to reach an overall vision. A vision must originate from both the leader and its followers, and it is the leader's job to articulate the vision. Furthermore, leaders demonstrate the capacity to lead their followers and

As a growing debate, the question at hand is whether great leaders are born with specific leadership traits, or if one can be taught certain traits over time. According to (Wikipedia.com) the approach of listing leadership qualities, often termed "trait theory of leadership", assumes certain traits or characteristics will tend to lead to effective leadership. I believe that leadership traits such as honest, competent, initiative, inspiring, hardworking, intelligent, and the ability to lead the masses, are some of the leadership traits one should possess. Within this paper, I will examine the overall concept of leadership traits, while observing the traits that were, or can be associated with successful leaders.

Winston Churchill, Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King, Jr. – all possessed such leadership traits as ambition, self-confidence, and intelligence. These cannot be learned; they are innate. Two well-respected research studies that support the notion that personality traits can predict leadership were published in the Journal of Applied Psychology and in the Leadership Quarterly.

Winston Churchill, Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King, Jr. – all possessed such leadership traits as ambition, self-confidence, and intelligence. These cannot be learned; they are innate. Two well-respected research studies that support the notion that personality traits can predict leadership were published in the Journal of Applied Psychology and in the Leadership Quarterly.

The trait leadership theory focuses on the individual leader’s personal characteristics as the basis of its investigations. It is one of the earliest leadership theories upon whose tenets many researches on leadership have been done. Although it is not very coherent, its heuristic nature has contributed to its significance in leadership research. Zaccaro and Klimoski (2002) define traits of reference to leadership as the stable personality characteristics, which result in a consistent leadership performance pattern, given different scenarios and groups. They include individual personalities, temperament, rationale, prowess, as well as cognitive abilities. Initially, the theory explored both physical and psychological characteristics that tell apart leaders from non-leaders.

The biology of leadership had been under scientific investigation for many years. Identical twins (identical or monozygotic twins, share 100% of their genetic material) have the same genes and it’s a perfect start to get some clues about the effects of inheritance on leadership. By following twins through their life and carefully studying their cognitive functions and behaviors, a lot of valuable data can be collected and analyzed. Li et al., (2012) studied 107 pairs of identical and 89 pairs of fraternal female twins and reported that only about one-third of the variance in leadership role occupancy can be explained by genetic factors; which is not very surprising. Although identical twins share exactly the same genes but they have been exposed

The critique with the most supporting evidence to suggest that trait theory is flawed is possibly the Style approach to leadership. The style approach was developed in the 1940’s and is centralised around the idea that it is not what traits and characteristics the leader possesses, but rather the in the behaviours they exhibit (Roberts, 2013). This argument analyses the types of behaviours, which the leader has, and they ways in which they carry out their business, as opposed to the trait they may have been born with.

In a Forbes article written by Glen Llopis, The Most Undervalued Leadership Traits of Women, Llopis, highlights his theories and opinions on each undervalued trait. Llopis provides specific details that make women effective leaders. The author predicates his assessment on women and leadership from his personal and professional experiences. Within the article, Llopis identifies six leadership traits that women naturally possess, which are undervalued:

Moreover, the trait approach gives a deeper understanding of the leader element in the leadership process by emphasising exclusively on the leader, (Gore et al, 2011). The trait theory does not offer hypotheses about the role of situational variance or characteristic of the followers. Instead, this approach provide information about leaders, and about which traits cause which behaviours and that certain set of traits are central to the leadership process and play an indispensible part of effective leadership.

This theory is based on the premise that there are certain personality characteristics that are essential for a person to possess in order to be a leader. The main emphasis is on what the person is in terms of a constellation of personality traits. This theory searches for that set of universal leadership traits that will assure success. Numerous traits have been suggested: courage, integrity, loyalty, charisma, ambition, intelligence, honesty, clairvoyance, persistence, arrogance, health, political skill, confidence and vision.

Research on leadership began with a search for inherited characteristics that differentiated leaders from non-leaders and