The researchers argue that the closer this proximity, the greater we may be able to predict the success of a transformational process. Accordingly, the researchers tells that "a key role of all business leaders is defining strategic goals for their organizations and aligning the efforts of all organization members with these goals (e.g., Messick, 2005). Strategic leadership theory suggests that the values, experiences, and knowledge of leaders in the upper echelons of organizations impact the strategic decisions made by these leaders, ultimately influencing organizational performance." (Colbert et al., 82)
In many ways, this strikes the reader as a direct counterpoint to that which is intended by trait-based leadership assessments. Colbert et al. do not make specific reference to a set of preferred traits nor do they attempt to put forth the argument that any specific sets of leadership qualities may be used to predict organizational success. The more operative issue, in their perspective, is the relative harmony between the expectations and decisions of those at the top levels of leadership and the shared belief in these expectations and decisions as channeled through those management leaders who must ultimately execute them. For Colbert et al., this is especially true during the transformational process, in which management is asked to implement sweeping and culture-changing change plans. The inherency of internal resistance, the likelihood of encountering unexpected setbacks and the long-term vision which are all required during a process of transformation are best facilitated by a unified front at differing levels of leadership.
That said, there is an argument to be made that the two theories examined in this discussion are not actually mutually exclusive. Though Colbert et al. do not make direct consideration of trait-based leadership, they do not discount the relevance of individual...
This allows us to build the argument according to Zaccaro's perspective that some compatibility may actually be established. To this end, Zaccaro refutes the idea that trait-based leadership should be viewed as totally distinct from transformational models. The author argues that in the 1980s, "models of charismatic and transformational leadership rose to prominence in the leadership literature. These models, while recognizing the important role of the situation in leadership, pointed once again to the extraordinary qualities of individuals as determinants of their effectiveness." (Zaccaro, 6)
This demonstrates Zaccaro's declared intent at the outset of his research, which was to improve the focus of the trait-based model for leadership by framing it according to the variable needs of the modern organization. Given the high state of flux in today's relatively unstable economy, even optimal principles for leadership must be channeled through a more realistic expectation that organizations contain both highly entrenched leadership cultures and sometimes dramatic needs for change. A convergence of the two theories examined in our discussion suggests that the most effective leader will be one with personality traits that will enable him to balance these sometimes oppositional interests. This demonstrates above all else the need for pragmatism in considering leadership models, denoting that these tend to provide the greatest clarity and illumination when assessed in relativity to one another.
Works Cited:
Colbert, A.E.; Kristof-Brown, A.L.; Bradley, B.H. & Barrick, M.R. (2008). CEO Transformational Leadership: The Role of Goal Importance Congruence in Top Management Teams. Academy of Management Journal, 81(1), 81-96.
Zaccaro, S.J. (2007). Trait-Based Perspectives on Leadership. American Psychologist, 62(1), 6-16.
