The Qualities Of A Good Leader


A good leader with his team

Leaders have an important role within an organisation related to its success, productivity and the performance of the employees. The ‘fundamental

task of a leader is to build and maintain a high performing team’ (Furnham, 2005, p.566). However, Yukl (2013, p.18) argues that there are numerous

and diverse definitions concerning the concept of a leader as well as the term leadership, although a general consensus appears to suggest it involves a

process of influencing and guiding relationships within an organisation . Guirdham (2002, p.15) emphasises the importance of leaders having good

interpersonal and communication skills, which as Yukl suggest involves the ability to persuade others. Yukl (2013, p.18) further states there are

additional factors that contribute to good leadership such as the situational context and the use of power. Another issue regarding the characteristics of

leaders is that many theories and models have been based on Western perspectives (House and Aditya, 1997, p.409) and typically based on research with white

males (Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, CIPD, 2008, p.7). There is some cultural crossover in servant leadership, which according to

Northouse (2013, p.219), was originally proposed by Greenleaf in the 1970s, and also has origins in ancient Eastern and Western philosophies; for example,

it is deeply embedded in Arab-Islamic culture (Sarayrah, 2004, p.59). A further concern is raised by Mullins (2008, p.265) who states that determining who

is a ‘good leader’ is a subjective judgement and cannot be based, for example, on financial performance alone. The aim of the following essay

is to investigate whether certain characteristics are related to good leadership and which can be identified in theories and models of leadership such as

trait theory, transformational and charismatic leadership as well as authentic and servant leadership. Finally, there will be a brief discussion regarding

interpersonal characteristics such as emotional intelligence and communication skills.

Theories and Models of Leadership

Trait Theories

Trait theories of leadership proposed that successful leaders possessed distinctive traits or characteristics that differentiated them from unsuccessful

leaders and subordinates. As Northouse (2013, p.7) mentions there are common phrases in use in society such as ‘ he was born to be a leader’ or ‘she is a natural leader’ which suggest that people tend to think good leaders are born

and not trained. The concept of leaders having certain characteristics dominated research prior to the Second World War. It was thought that individuals

could be selected for leadership positions if they showed the appropriate characteristics or alternatively that traits could be taught to leaders (Furnham,

2005, p.571). Popular books, such as Stephen Covey’s book, The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, propose that certain traits or

characteristics can be learned. Covey (2004, p.46) states that ‘our character, basically, is a composite of our habits.’ Covey continues saying

that habits are consistent, can be learned or unlearned and express an individual’s character and how effective or ineffective they are (Covey, 2004,

p.46). Covey suggests that effective people are proactive, have a clarity regarding their life-goals, manage themselves, value and respect other people,

are empathic and encourage positive teamwork (Covey, 2004, p.65). The seventh habit involves taking time to ‘sharpen the saw’ which Covey

translates as meaning time to refresh physical, spiritual, psychological and socio-emotional dimensions of a person’s character (Covey, 2004,


A number of characteristics and traits related to good leaders have been identified; for example, Smith and Foti (1998, p.147) undertook a study

investigating the characteristics of emergent leaders and found that the traits of dominance, intelligence and self-efficacy were significantly higher in

emergent leaders than other individuals who were not classified as emergent leaders. According to Furnham (2005, p.572), good leaders usually possess

characteristics such as persistence, innovation and a willingness to take responsibility for their actions. Yukl (2013, p.146) similarly identifies certain

characteristics related to good leaders which include a high tolerance of stress, emotional maturity, personal integrity, motivation and self-confidence.

However, Furnham (2005, p.574) suggests that although there are numerous traits, there appears to be little agreement regarding which characteristics

contribute to a leader being effective.

According to Zaccaro, (2007, p.6) trait theories are not able to explain how leaders’ characteristics adapt to different situations and contexts and

thus a major criticism of trait theories is that they do not consider the wider context of culture, society or the interactions with the characteristics of

subordinates (Zaccaro, 2007, p.7). Examining the characteristics of good leaders implies that leaders innately possess certain personality traits although

it could be suggested that some good leaders can learn through experience (Bryman, Collinson, Grint, Jackson and Uhl-Bien, 2011, p.78). The notion that

good leaders can learn skills through a dynamic learning experience is supported by other researchers; for example, Rodd (2006, p.13) proposes that

practitioners within the Early Years profession can become leaders through ‘demonstrating increasing competence’ and by developing the personal

skills necessary to become a leader. Daly and Byers (2004, p.7) suggest that good leaders will also ensure that employees have the opportunity for training

and professional development which in turn may help them to become good leaders. Kolb (1984, p.25) similarly supports the idea of learning leadership

skills through experience and suggests that learning involves a constant change of ideas, perspectives and opinions which are not fixed and thoughts are

‘formed and reformed through experience’ and ‘continually modified by experience’. The importance of having a flexible approach is

emphasised by Daly and Byers (2004, p.187) ensuring that the leader is adaptable and can implement new ideas or procedures when necessary. Even early

theorists such as Taylor (1911, p.7) argued that good leaders are not born and required systematic training instead of being reliant on ‘some unusual

or extraordinary man’.

It is further argued by Zaccaro (2007, p.10) that because being a good leader is complex there is probably an interaction of the leader’s

characteristics as well as an interaction with the variables present in different situations and contexts. Theories such as Fiedler’s contingency

theory (Fiedler 1967, cited in Northouse, 2013, pp.123-125) were developed primarily with leaders in the military and focused on how compatible the

characteristics and style of the leader were with a specific situation. Thus, ‘effective leadership is contingent on matching a leader’s style

to the right setting (Northouse, 2013, p.123). A problem with both trait theories and contingency theories is that they appear to focus on the

characteristics of the leader and do not consider the characteristics of, the interactions with, or the role of, subordinates. Contingency theory does not

explain why some leaders are better in certain situations than other leaders and also how organisations deal with a mismatch between leaders and certain

situations (Northouse, 2013, p.129).

Transactional and Transformational Leaders

Furnham (2005, p.588) suggests that transactional leadership can be defined as a contract between the leader and a worker where the leader achieves what

they want by offering some sort of reward which is desired by the employee. There is typically a limited relationship between the leader as in certain

situations (for example in the military) transactional leadership is necessary as certain actions need to be undertaken without subordinates questioning or

debating issues (Bass and Bass, 2008, p.41; Bryman et al. 2011, p.55). Transactional leadership does not appear to be concerned with the

characteristics of leaders and is more concerned with creating structures and systems which allow the sharing of information (Bryman et al. 2011,

p.61). Transactional leadership depends on contingency reinforcement which means the subordinate understands that a reward will be received when

performance goals are achieved (Bass and Riggio, 2006, p.8).

Transformational leadership developed from the foundations of transactional leadership with four further characteristics namely; charisma and idealised

influence which indicates that the leader is admired, respected, and trusted; inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and

consideration towards individual workers (Bass, Avolio, Jung and Berson, 2003, p.208; McKenna, 2005, p.411). By showing an interest in the personal

development of followers there can be a subsequent increase in performance and productivity as well as creativity and innovation subordinates can often be

creative which can then have an impact on the competitive advantage of the company (Bass, et al 2003,p.208). Bass and Bass (2006, p.41) also

suggest that transformational leaders usually believe and support the goals of the organisation and are able to articulate the goals to subordinates and

engage their support and commitment. Other characteristics identified in transformational leaders is that they show consistent behaviour and tend to have a

strong focus on integrity, ethical principles and values together with being flexible and able to adapt to change (Judge and Piccolo, 2004, p.755). McKenna

(2005, p.408) states that transformational leaders have characteristics such as vision and are able to motivate and inspire subordinates to share their

vision. As Sir John Harvey-Jones, MBE, who was the chairman of Imperial Chemical Industries from 1982 to 1987 and has recently helped failing business

shown in a BBC television programme called Troubleshooter states:-

‘The vision is absolutely key to getting your troops together. It has to be qualitative, daring and grab the imagination. The test of it should be how

quickly people will latch on to where you are going……’ (cited in Mullins, 2008, p.261).

The characteristics of transformational leaders are important in an organisation because they are viewed as a more effective leadership style than

transactional leadership for example. Bass and Riggio (2008, p.10) suggest that many subordinates are very loyal to transformational leaders and are

committed to the organisation so productivity increases and improves which Bass and Riggio (2008, p.10) suggest is one way of demonstrating the efficiency

of the leader. The characteristics of transactional and transformational leaders are not mutually exclusive and there may be occasions when a leader has to

show transactional characteristics as well as transformational characteristics. An example is cited by Bass and Bass (2008, p.51) which states that famous

leaders such as John F. Kennedy and Abraham Lincoln displayed characteristics of both transactional and transformational leaders. Transactional leadership,

for example, has been found to be more effective in a well-ordered, stable environment whereas transformational leadership is suitable in organisations

that are changing rapidly such as in times of financial upheaval (McKenna, 2006, p.418).

Characteristics of Charismatic Leaders

As discussed previously, one characteristic of transformational leaders is charisma (Bass, et al. 2003, p.216) although there are some leaders who

are characterised as being so charismatic that they are referred to as charismatic leaders. Chio (2006, p.24) defines charismatic leaders as

having three additional, core characteristics which are an ability to predict future trends and be visionary; being a creative thinker, and showing empathy

and empowering colleagues. According to House, 1977, (cited in McKenna, 2006, p.411) charismatic leaders can motivate subordinates to perform effectively

without having to invoke their position of power; they have a vision and the ability to convince subordinates to support that vision. Further

characteristics include determination, energy, self-confidence and ability; in addition they are not afraid to be unconventional (McKenna, 2006, p.411).

Although charismatic leaders are unusual and exceptional in the business world, Hellriegel and Slocum (2007, p.240) use as an example Richard Branson who

demonstrates the characteristic of both a transformational and a charismatic leader. Branson is characterised as someone who is prepared to follow his

instincts and take risks, venturing into new territories (Boje and Smith, 2010, p.308). Branson has a flair for being slightly eccentric and is not afraid

of being unconventional which Choi, as discussed previously, describes as a characteristic of charismatic leadership. Branson makes a clear statement about

his company, Virgin, as being ‘different, colourful, iconoclastic and fun-loving’ (Crainer and Dearlove, 2008, p.43). Branson’s character

appears to reflect the character of his company; for example, he appeared dressed as a Virgin bride and also abseiled down a skyscraper to promote his

company (Business Pundit, 2011, n/p).

The CIPD (2008, p.8) report that there is some dislike for the ‘celebrity-like focus’ on so-called charismatic leaders. In the US a study

investigated fifty-nine CEOs of Fortune 500 companies and investigated the link between charisma and performance over a ten year period and found there was

no relationship (Tosi et al. 2004, cited in CIPD, 2008 p.8). A criticism made by Alvesson and Spicer (2010, p.9) claims that by endowing leaders

with characteristics such as charisma, gives them a heroic and unselfish quality which enables them to persuade followers to pursue goals almost

unquestioningly. Furthermore, Alvesson and Spicer (2010, p.64) maintain that some transformational leaders can be perceived as ‘saint-like’.

Chio (2006, p.37) claims that frequently the positive aspects of charismatic leadership are emphasised and dysfunctional characteristics, such as the abuse

of power, are often minimised. Chio (2006, p.36) reports that there can be very strong emotional bonds between a charismatic leader and their subordinates

and in certain situations individuals may ‘sacrifice themselves for the sake of the group to maintain harmonious relationships with others’

(Triandis, 1995, cited in Chio, 2006, p.36). Thus charismatic leaders can use their influence malignantly; for example, there have been reports of

charismatic leaders of religious sects who are able to persuade followers to commit mass suicide.

The CIPD (2008, p.8) also report on the ‘dark-side’ of charisma and suggest that although some leaders may superficially appear charismatic

they hide undesirable characteristics such as dishonesty and greed. By the time such characteristics are discovered the organisation and employees may have

suffered irreparable harm. Research undertaken by Collins (2001, cited in CIPD, 2008, p.8) investigated common characteristics in US companies quoted on

the Stock Exchange whose performance was ‘outstanding’. The findings indicated that common characteristics included an unshakable belief in

their company and also a ‘deep personal humility’. These CEOs were not at all charismatic and appeared to be quite unassuming. Collins also

noted that failing companies had a CEO ‘with a gargantuan ego’ causing the company to fail (Collins 2001, cited in CIPD, 2008, p.8).

Interpersonal Characteristics of Leaders.

Characteristics of Authentic Leaders

As discussed in the previous sections there have been concerns regarding unscrupulous leaders; for example, although they may appear to be charismatic they

may in fact have ‘exploitative’ motives (Bass and Riggio, 2008, p.5). Consequently there is a desire for leaders who are genuine and authentic

(Bass and Riggio, 2008, p.xii). There appears to be some parallels between authentic leaders and servant leaders although currently there is limited

research in this area according to Northouse (2013, p.235). Servant leadership focuses on the empathic characteristics of a leader towards subordinates and

nurturing each employee’s talents and potential which is beneficial for the organisation (Northouse, 2013, p.233). Servant leadership proposes that

leaders want to serve others and emphasises the altruistic characteristics of leaders who are focused on the needs of their subordinates (Greenleaf, 1977,

cited in Northouse, 2013, p.219). The characteristic of the servant leader are numerous and the underlying principles involve the way in which the leader

treats subordinates in terms of honesty and treating them fairly. A successful relationship between the servant leader and followers is a two-way process

and followers must be accepting of the principles of empowerment and the opportunity to grow.

A characteristic of leaders which seems to be related to good leadership is emotional intelligence. Goleman (1998, p.317) defines emotional intelligence as

‘the capacity for recognising our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves and for managing emotions in ourselves and in our

relationships’. Emotional intelligence involves five key factors; self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy and social skills (Goleman,

1998, p.9). It is argued that emotional intelligence is of benefit to leaders as it contributes to an awareness of their own emotions and how to regulate

them as well as recognising emotions in others and having the social skills necessary to deal with other people’s emotions (Goleman, Boyatzis and

McKee, 2001, n/p).

Guirdham (2002, p.545) suggests that there are certain qualities that followers look for in leaders and that a leader does not automatically gain the

respect from subordinates. However, such qualities vary with different situations and the type of subordinates who are expected to follow. Gaining

acceptance as a leader is also more difficult where there is prejudice concerning gender, race and ethnic group, and disability. Guirdham (2002, p.545)

states that in general to be accepted by subordinates the characteristics of the leader need to include knowledge, competence, status, identification with

the group, motivation, being proactive in promoting the group’s goals and good communication skills. As Sir John Harvey says:-

‘You only get a company going where you want it to by leadership by example and by honest and endless communication’ (cited in Mullins

2008, p.261).

Communication appears to be a very important characteristic of a good leader together with interpersonal relationships which is also related to emotional

intelligence as discussed previously. It has been found that directive, coherent and positive communication is an effective style for leaders (Guirdham,

2002, p.550). However, other characteristics are also necessary such as trust, the way in which leaders try to persuade or influence followers and the way

in which subordinates are encouraged to participate in decision making.


It can be seen from the evidence presented that identifying the characteristics of a good manager is a complex task as there are many different traits or

personality characteristics involved. Additionally characteristics cannot be identified in isolation and the situation or context must also be considered.

Early research, for example trait theories, focused on the leader and did not consider the role or characteristics of the subordinates. This would appear

to be relevant in contemporary society as employees are more empowered than they were in the past and are therefore less likely to blindly follow a leader.

Transformational and charismatic theories of leadership identify many positive qualities in leaders; however, there is the issue identified by many

researchers of deceitful leaders who can cause a company to collapse as in the case of Enron and other similar examples. The characteristics of a leader

need to be genuine and authentic and the theoretical perspective of servant leadership emphasises the caring aspect of leaders towards their followers.

Typically servant leaders are altruistic and are concerned about the well-being of others. There are a number of characteristics which appear to be more

important than others although it is difficult to isolate only a few. However, one characteristic that does seem to be high on the list for good leaders is

good communication and interpersonal skills (Guirdham, 2002, p.550).


Alvesson, M. and Spicer, A. (2010). Metaphors we Lead by: Understanding Leadership in the Real World. London: Routledge.

Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J., Jung, D.I. and Berson, Y. (2003). Predicting unit performance by assessing Transformational and Transactional leadership, Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 ,207-218.

Bass, B.M. and Bass, R. (2008). The Bass Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications (4th Ed) New York, NY: Free Press.

Bass, B.M. and Riggio, R.E. (2006). Transformational Leadership (2nd Ed), Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., New Jersey.

Boje, D. and Smith, R. (2010). Re-storying and visualising the changing entrepreneurial identities of Bill Gates and Richard Branson, Culture and Organisation,16(4), 307-331

Bono, J.E. and Judge, T.E. (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 89(5) 901–910

Bryman,A., Collinson, D., Grint, K., Jackson, B. and Uhl-Bien, M. (2011). The Sage Handbook of Leadership. London: Sage.

Business Pundit (2011). Retrieved on 10/10/2014 from:

Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD, 2008). Engaging Leadership: Creating Organisations that Maximize the Potential of their People.

London, CIPD.

Choi, J. (2006) A Motivational Theory of Charismatic Leadership: EnvisioningEmpathy, and Empowerment, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 13, 24-43.

Covey, S.R. (2004). The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People: Powerful Lessons in Personal Change. New York: Simon and Schuster Inc.

Crainer, S. and Dearlove, D. (2008). The heart of leadership, Business Strategy Review, The London Business School, (Autumn), 41-45.

Daly, M., Byers, E. and Taylor, W. (2004). Early Years Management in Practice: A Handbook for Early Years Managers. Oxford Heinmann Education.

Furnham, A. (2005). The Psychology of Behaviour at Work. East Sussex UK: Psychology Press.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. and McKee, A. (2001). Primal Leadership: The Hidden Driver of Great Performance. Harvard Business Review, 44-51

retrieved on 9/10/2014 from:

Goleman, D. (1998). Working with Emotional Intelligence. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Guirdham, M. (2002) Interactive Behaviour at Work (3rd Edition) Essex UK: Financial Times/Prentice Hall.

Hellriegel, D. and Slocum, J.W. (2007) Organisational Behaviour (11th edition) Thomson South-Western.

House, R.J. and Aditya, R.N. (1997). The Social Scientific Study of Leadership: Quo Vadis? Journal of Management, 23(3), 409-473.

Judge, T.A. and Piccolo, R.F. (2004) Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity Journal of Applied Psychology 89(5) 755-768

Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

McKenna, E. (2006) Business Psychology and Organisational Behaviour, 4th edition New York: Psychology Press.

Mullins, L.J. (2008). Essentials of Organisational Behaviour. (2nd edition). Essex, UK: Prentice Hall.

Northouse, G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. London: Sage.

Rodd, J. (2006). Leadership in Early Childhood, 3rd Edition. Maidenhead, Berkshire: Open University Press.

Sarayrah, Y.K. (2004). Servant leadership in the Bedouin-Arab culture. Global Virtual Ethics Review, 5(3), 58-79.

Smith, J.A. and Foti, R.J. (1998). A pattern approach to the study of leader emergence. The Leadership Quarterly, 9(2), 147-160

Taylor, F.W. (1911). Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers.

Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in Organizations (8th edition). London: Pearson Education

Zaccaro, S.J. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist, 62, 6-16.


Leave a Comment