Personality Traits and Leadership: A Comparative Study Review
This paper compares and contrasts three empirical studies on personality and leadership: Judge, Bono, Ilies, and Gerhardt's (2002) meta-analytic review of trait theory; O'Connor and Jackson's (2010) psychobiological model of emergent leadership; and Bligh et al.'s (2007) investigation of follower responses to aversive leadership. The paper examines each study's research questions, sample populations, and results, then synthesizes their conclusions. Collectively, the studies suggest that personality traits—especially extraversion—are meaningfully linked to leadership, that situational variables matter but are secondary to stable traits, and that follower perceptions represent a distinct and important lens through which leadership should be studied.
- Introduction and Overview: Frames and compares all three leadership studies
- Research Questions: Distinct hypotheses across the three studies
- Sample Populations: Contrasting sampling methods and subject groups
- Results: Key findings on traits, emergence, and aversive leadership
- Conclusion: Limitations, implications, and future research directions
- Literature Review: Structural organization of sources and shared themes
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper uses a consistent comparative structure—moving through research questions, samples, and results—that allows readers to track similarities and differences across all three studies simultaneously.
- The author clearly distinguishes between causal-variable studies (Judge et al.; O'Connor & Jackson) and an effects-focused study (Bligh et al.), demonstrating analytical discernment rather than simple summary.
- The conclusion extends beyond the three reviewed studies by integrating additional sources (McClelland & Burnham; Ou et al.; Bobbio et al.) to situate findings in a broader leadership research conversation.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative synthesis across multiple empirical studies. Rather than summarizing each study in isolation, the author consistently juxtaposes methodological choices, sample designs, and results to highlight convergences and divergences—a technique central to literature review and research critique at the graduate level.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a thematic introduction that frames all three studies, then proceeds through discrete sections on research questions, sample populations, and results. A conclusion evaluates limitations and implications, and a final literature review section addresses the structural organization of each source. References are formatted in APA style throughout.
Introduction and Overview
In Personality and Leadership: A Qualitative and Quantitative Review, Judge, Bono, Ilies, and Gerhardt (2002) focus on the trait theory of leadership. In Applying a Psychobiological Model of Personality to the Study of Leadership, O'Connor and Jackson (2010) study the relationship between personality and emergent leadership. In When the Romance Is Over: Follower Perspectives of Aversive Leadership, Bligh et al. (2007) explore what the researchers call the "dark side" of leadership. Whereas the Judge et al. (2002) and O'Connor and Jackson (2010) research centers on personality traits and leadership in a straightforward way—focusing on the leader—Bligh et al. (2007) instead take into account follower perspectives on aversive leadership.
Although Judge et al. (2002) and O'Connor and Jackson (2010) are both interested in trait theory, O'Connor and Jackson (2010) study alternatives to the Big Five model as well as the Big Five model itself, while Judge et al. (2002) are primarily concerned with the Big Five traits. All of the authors build a strong case, but Bligh et al. (2007) offer a more unique point of view on leadership by stressing the perspectives of followers rather than examining leadership from the leader's perspective. Thus, Bligh et al. (2007) are interested in the effects of leadership, whereas the other two studies focus more on causal variables.
Judge et al. (2002) describe the purpose of their research as providing insight into what traits cause people to become leaders in the first place, as well as offering an overview of the literature on trait theory. The purpose of the Bligh et al. (2007) study is to elucidate the negative consequences of romanticizing leaders and leadership. These three research studies are similar in that they all help to explain and refine our understanding of leadership, and they each approach the topic from a different perspective.
References
Bligh, M. C., et al. (2007). When the romance is over. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 56(4), 528–557.
Bobbio, A., Dierendonck, D. V., & Manganelli, A. M. (2012). Servant leadership in Italy and its relation to organizational variables. Leadership, 8(3), 229–243.
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765–780.
McClelland, D. C., & Burnham, D. H. (2003). Power is the great motivator. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2003/01/power-is-the-great-motivator
O'Connor, P. J., & Jackson, C. J. (2010). Applying a psychobiological model of personality to the study of leadership. Journal of Individual Differences, 31(4), 185–197.
Ou, A. Y., et al. (2014). Humble chief executive officers, connections to top management team integration and middle managers' responses. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(1), 34–72.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.