Traits and Demeanor Approaches of Headship

This study explores the traits and demeanor approaches of headship, focusing on the trait, behavioral, and situational theories. It discusses the qualities and behaviors that contribute to effective leadership and examines the strengths and weaknesses of each approach. The findings support an integrated model of leadership effectiveness.

Running head: TRAITS AND DEMEANOR APPROACHES OF HEADSHIP 1
Traits and Demeanor Approaches of Headship
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

TRAITS AND DEMEANOR APPROACHES OF HEADSHIP 2
Traits and Demeanor Approaches of Headship
Headship is the process of directing, controlling, and operating individuals at a particular
level, to achieve the desired objective. Typically, there are three primary headship perspectives;
trait, behavioral, and situational theories. Quirk approach focuses on personal characteristics,
which present naturally in an individual. The method comprises a set of qualities that if a person
possesses, then he or she may become an influential and great leader. These qualities may
include emotional stability, pleasant personality, acceptance, honesty, and integrity. Contrary, the
behavioral theory illustrates how etiquette influences an employee to achieve the required
results; these qualities may be technical, and conceptual. Notably, the framework needs the
figurehead to have excellent communication skills, good interpersonal connections at work, and
motivating its employees to objectives. Thus, a leader with excellent conduct skills is capable of
being a great head. The trait and demeanor theories enable “leadership effectiveness,” and the
way an individual handles several situations. Derue, Nahrgang, Wellman, and Humphrey, (2011)
suggests, “This article reviews and integrates the literature on leader traits and behaviors, and
takes the first step toward an integrative theory of how leader traits and behaviors influence
leadership effectiveness” (p.9).
Directorship potency relies on task performance, relational and active criteria, and
general judgments of effectiveness, which encompass both relational and task factors. Thus, the
analysis level corresponds to if ascendancy virtue is conceptualized at a personal, organizational,
or group level (Derue et al., 2011). The designation of the appropriate “leadership effectiveness”
approach depends on the merits and goals of the individual molding the evaluation. Hence, it is
fundamental to select various criteria when the study’s on the appropriate premiership efficacy.

TRAITS AND DEMEANOR APPROACHES OF HEADSHIP 3
These criteria may include personal “leader effectiveness,” satisfaction of follower job,
satisfaction of follower with leader, and performance of the group.
An Integrated Leader Behavior and Trait Model
Despite previous research indicating that directorship potency if affected by both
moderator conducts and foibles, it is unclear from Derue et al. (2011) research how head
behaviors and peculiarities supplement or complement each other. Additionally, the latter’s
research does not make it clear how the traits and deportments of an overseer can be assimilated
into a more consolidative replica of headship efficacy. Derue et al. (2011) mention that the
majority of figurehead traits are organized into three significant categories; characteristics
connected to task competence, demographics, and interpersonal attributes. In contrast, head
etiquettes occasionally are assessed in terms of if the conduct is oriented towards relational
dynamics, task procedures, and change.
In connection with convener attribute, Derue et al. (2011) focus on intelligence, gender,
and the “Big Five personality traits.” Generally, these oddities span the task competence,
demographic, and interpersonal dimensions. On superintendent conduct, the research focuses on
the transformational directorship, particular dimensions of transactional headship, consideration,
and initiating strategy. Also, head behaviors connect to “passive leadership” such as “laissez-
faire” and operation by “exception-passive (MBEP).”
Leader Trait Approach
The theory defines the ability, personality, and motivation that a head has to achieve
effectiveness in his or her directorship. The trait is an inherent characteristic that an individual
naturally has. For instance, David McClelland presents this perspective that tries to explain and

TRAITS AND DEMEANOR APPROACHES OF HEADSHIP 4
forecast performance and behavior based on an individual’s want for capability, affiliation, and
achievement. The latter created his “Achievement Motivation Theory” in the 1940s, and he
believes that everybody has wanted, and that the needs motivate a person to satisfy them. Thus,
people’s behaviors are motivated by their needs. McClelland further asserts that wants are based
on personality, and are created when people interact with their various environments. University
of Pretoria (2012) suggests, “All people experience the need for achievement, power, and
affiliation, but to different degrees. One of these three needs (achievement, power, and
affiliations) tend to be dominant in each of us, and motivates our behavior.”
Strengths of Leader Trait Approach
The technique has numerous advantages as it uses three primary elements; task
competence, demographic, and interpersonal dimensions. The task competence helps a leader in
determining how he or she executes and performs their task. The strength of this superintendent
trait factor is that it utilizes four necessary singularities; emotional stability, conscientiousness,
intelligence, and “Openness to Experience.” The four traits assist help a leader to determine how
one handles and reacts to a particular task. For example, intelligence assists the convener in
reflecting on an overall element of cognitive abilities connected to a person’s verbal and
reasoning capabilities, which makes it a primary factor for assessing task performance.
Importantly, interpersonal attributes and task competence determine “leadership
effectiveness.” This is another strength as head traits determine the degree of execution of four
traits. Conscientiousness determines the extent to which an individual is dependable, and it
assists a leader to deliberate on a plan. Thus, high conscientious and intelligent figureheads will
help them in ensuring that their employees have adequate role clarity, and objectives that
influence task performance (Derue et al., 2011). Alternatively, a head with “Openness to

TRAITS AND DEMEANOR APPROACHES OF HEADSHIP 5
Experience” quirk is often imaginative and open-minded, which enables them to devise new
approaches of working, which he can share with his follower; this will assist the workers in
improving their performance.
Weaknesses of Convener Foible Approach
One of the primary limitations of the trait leadership method is that it may ignore a
situational specificity. The approach suffers from barriers of certifying the traits, which
constitute “leadership effectiveness.” For example, when an individual is high on an openness
and extraversion metric, he or she may not be considered adequate. Sacher, and Kanodia (2016)
argue that figurehead traits have numerous studies, which are typically conflicting. For instance,
Derue et al. (2011) notes:
Highly intelligent and conscientious leaders, for example, will be especially adept at
ensuring their followers have sufficient role clarity, structure, and goals to help facilitate
task performance. In contrast, to the degree leadership effectiveness criteria focus on
affective and relational elements, we expect that the interpersonal attributes of leaders,
namely Extraversion and Agreeableness, will be necessary (p.14).
The method also does not explain how much of a particular eccentricity one requires to cope best
in a harsh and different situation.
Behavioral Leadership Approach
Deure et al. (2011) attempt to uncover the deportments that conveners engage, instead of
what traits the latter possesses. The theory utilizes four categories to demonstrate its strengths in
facilitating headship potency; “task-oriented behaviors,” “change-oriented behaviors,”
“relational-oriented behaviors,” and “passive leadership.” In spite of this fact, Deure et al.
(2011) focus on two theories that illustrate head behaviors; “transformational-transactional,” and
“structure-consideration.”

TRAITS AND DEMEANOR APPROACHES OF HEADSHIP 6
Strengths of the Figurehead Behavior Technique
Etiquette enables a task-oriented head to ensure his or her employees have a particular
objective and that they establish a clear group strategy, which has transparent measures on which
they can juxtapose their accomplishment. Thus, goal-oriented convener deportments should
facilitate higher task output in group and worker execution. Consequently, “change-oriented
leader behaviors” demonstrate the strength of leader by developing a vision for the future, and
challenging his or her employees to not be comfortable for on their status quo; this will motivate
the workers to improve on their task productivity. Therefore, “leadership efficacy depends on
how “change-oriented” and “task-oriented” figurehead conducts will influence the degree of task
performance and execution.
Conveners who participate in “relational-oriented behaviors” are skilled and empathetic
at discerning the wants of their employees. This is a vital strength as such moderators
demonstrate their concern for others, which may plead to their workers’ sentiments. In addition,
heads with such behaviors invoke strong interpersonal relations with their workers, which highly
impacts on employees’ satisfaction. Another strength of the theory is the “change-oriented
behaviors” that enhance the satisfaction and attitude of the figurehead’s employees. Hence,
“change-oriented leader behaviors” enhance workers’ feelings of development and growth,
which determine the level of directorship potency. Derue et al. (2011), “Task-, relational-, and
change-oriented leader behaviors will be positively related to overall leader effectiveness and
more so than passive leader behaviors.”
Weaknesses of Leader Deportment Method
The most significant limitation of the demeanor theory is that just because employees
learn the behaviors and practices does not mean that they can implement the argument correctly.

TRAITS AND DEMEANOR APPROACHES OF HEADSHIP 7
Notably, it is quite easy to learn how and why to undertake the conducts, but understanding when
to behave in a particular way may be a challenging task. Conversely, there is limited knowledge
of how the approach is utilized in multiple cultural situations.
Method
Deure et al. (2011) examine the hypotheses of the research using past published “meta-
analytic estimates.” Deure et al. (2011) assert, “We created a comprehensive list of codes for the
variables reported across all studies. The studies were divided among the authors who then coded
the meta-analytic estimates for the variables of interest from each study.” Importantly, the
researchers of the case study utilized the “Schmidt-Hunter psychometric meta-analysis
technique.” Therefore, the study corrected the main estimates for the metric error in criterion and
predictor scores.
Strengths of “Meta-analytic Estimates”
The procedure utilizes the epsilon, which is an effective way of evaluating the relative
importance when predictors are correlated. The approximate obtained from the epsilon
occasionally labeled relative weights; “sum to the model R2.” Hence, the relative weights assist
in representing the proportionate contribution each predictor provides to R2, considering the
direct effect of predictors, and its effect when put together with other predictors. Deure et al.
(2011) assert that the procedure assists researchers to calculate the R2 percentage; the latter
further insinuates, “Each predictor explains this by dividing the relative weight of each predictor
by the total R2. Because of these attributes, epsilon is the preferred statistic for relative
computing importance” (p.27). Therefore, the strength of the method is the use of epsilon
statistic, which assesses the relative validity of convener comportment and quirks.

TRAITS AND DEMEANOR APPROACHES OF HEADSHIP 8
Researchers have logded that “positive moderator affect” strengthens the correspondence
between the convener and workers, which influences better headship ratings. For instance,
positive affect portrayed by a head can convey ethics, credence, and sincerity that render a
follower’s attributes to leadership behaviors, and “leadership effectiveness.” Joseph, Dhanani,
Shen, McHugh, and McCord (2015, p.560), “In addition to these follower attributions, positive
affect displayed a leader has also been related to liking of and attraction to the head as well as
perceptions of similarity between leader and follower, which may also result in higher
transformational leadership, and leadership effectiveness ratings.”
Deure et al. (2011) suggest that to achieve headship efficacy, the convener oddities are
conscientiousness and extraversion. These traits span across interpersonal attributes and task
competence, which positively connected to account and effectiveness for 28 percent and 35
percent of total described R2 respectively. In contrast, the most vital figurehead deportment for
estimating group performance is the initiating strategy that links positively to group account and
performance for 33 percent of total elaborated R2.
Weaknesses of “Meta-analytic Estimates”
The primary limitation of the method utilized is that it focuses on the connection between
directorship and positive affect, while undermining the relationship between headship and
negative affect. Deure et al. (2011) mention that’s some research chose inclusion of reported
effects in statistics instead of correlations; the latter further asserts, “In these cases, we took the
uncorrected meta-analytic estimate and corrected for measurement error based on existing
reliability data.”
Findings

TRAITS AND DEMEANOR APPROACHES OF HEADSHIP 9
The findings of the Deure et al. (2011) research offer aid for an amalgamated “trait-
behavioral” replica of headship potency. Generally, head traits connected with task competence
linked to “task-oriented” convener behaviors that enhance performance-connected captaincy
outputs. Contrary, figurehead’s “interpersonal attributes” were connected with “relational-
oriented behaviors,” which enhance affective basis such as employees’ gratification with the
convener. As expected, both “interpersonal attributes” and “task competence” forecasted
premiers’ “change-oriented behaviors.”
Strengths of the Findings
The research revealed that many supposedly unique directorship behaviors and
characteristics overlap empirically and theoretically. Deure et al. (2011, p.38) mention, “Our
findings indicate that certain leader attributes and behaviors lose much of their predictive validity
when considered in conjunction with other leadership foibles and behaviors.” Therefore, the
findings resonate the focus of the study as both head behaviors, and traits have corporate
relations that enable the leader a group to be directorship efficacy. Conversely, the findings
indicate that specific peculiarities can predispose people to particular behaviors, which is the
most significant estimator of headship effectiveness.
Weaknesses of the Findings
The findings of the study offer some corroboration, which the captaincy belles-lettres
aches from escalation construct. The acceptance bar of “new” leadership approach needs to be
raised, which would enable “new” headship proponents to be compared and contrasted, which
will determine the effectiveness of the strategy. From the findings, researchers are encouraged to

TRAITS AND DEMEANOR APPROACHES OF HEADSHIP 10
create new or revise existing metrics of head conducts, which will capture the conceptual
difference among the behaviors of leaders.
Limitations
The research of Deure et al. (2011) has many defects, which need to be identified as some
key studies required to procure a “meta-analytic estimate”; the research was hindered by the
existing body of captaincy study. Thus, the researchers were impotent to test every component in
their conceptual model as they lacked studies on particular leader attributional, traits, and
deportment processes. For instance, researchers were forced to remove behavioral ascendancy
approaches like ethical headship, empowering governorship, and servant premiership.
Consequently, the Deure et al. (2011) depended on a hierarchic and leader-centered view of
directorship as the majority of current studies assume that headship is strategized as a
hierarchical procedure. Finally, the researchers of the study were unable to traverse boundary
situations, which may appeal to their “integrated trait-behavioral model.” Hence, they
acknowledged that there might be conditional elements, which regulate the effect of behaviors
and traits on several “leadership effectiveness” outputs.
Conclusion
The research integrates known behavioral and trait headship perspectives, and evaluates
how strengths and weaknesses of both approaches. Also, the study focuses on how the
techniques predict “leadership effectiveness.” The researchers examined the hypotheses of the
research using past published “meta-analytic estimates.” Alternatively, the task competence
assists a header in determining how he or she executes and performs their task. Contrary, the

TRAITS AND DEMEANOR APPROACHES OF HEADSHIP 11
researchers in the study try to expose the conducts, which conveners participate, instead of what
characteristics the latter possesses.

TRAITS AND DEMEANOR APPROACHES OF HEADSHIP 12
References
Derue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., Wellman, N. E. D., & Humphrey, S. E. (2011). Trait and
behavioral theories of leadership: An integration and meta‐analytic test of their relative
validity. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), 7-52.
Joseph, D.L., Dhanani, L.Y., Shen, W., McHugh, B.C., & McCord, M.A. (2015). Is a happy
leader a good leader? A meta-analytic investigation of leader trait affect and leadership.
Elsevier. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/15152349/Is_a_happy_leader_a_good_leader_A_meta-
analytic_investigation_of_leader_trait_affect_and_leadership
Sacher, A., & Kanodia, R. (2016). Traits theories of leadership. 6th International Conference on
Science, Technology, and Management. Retrieved from
http://data.conferenceworld.in/ICSTM6/P141-153.pdf
University of Pretoria. (2012). Leadership theories and models. University of Pretoria. Available
from https://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/25691/04chapter4.pdf?
sequence=5