Personality psychologist Robert Hogan had an insight every leader must grapple with. Poor leadership is not about lacking some essential quality, but rather it is the excess of an undesirable one. Leaders are derailed by their profound weaknesses more than by missing strengths. These counterproductive weaknesses loom even larger in times of stress and complacency. In Hogan’s view, understanding those personality traits that derail a leader can enable them to work at making them minor weaknesses rather than potentially career-limiting qualities.
Here is a link to an HBR Article that provides a great overview of the Hogan Development Survey by Thomas Chamorro-Premuzic. It it probably the best quick reference resource I've come across on this assessment - https://hbr.org/2017/09/could-your-personality-derail-your-career
What a great premise. Having a life long bias of thinking about leadership as having the right qualities, I've never looked at derailed leadership through the lens of excess of undesirable traits. Definitely doing some reflection on it now.
My answer to today's post is High Dutiful. On the plus side, I am seen by others as being someone who follows the rules and is a loyal/committed partner (pretty good traits for an HR Professional), but on the minus side, I can come across as ingratiating (people pleaser) and someone who avoids conflict and hesitant to voice my opinion. Knowing this helps me manage my behavior when I'm faced with new/novel situations or find myself in uncharted waters. Also, when I'm stressed out or having a bad day. I've come to the realization that I will always be like this, that their is no cure for it, but that through practice and self-reflection, I am able manage it so it doesn't get in my way of getting along with other people or advancing in my career.
Good reflection. Your self awareness gives you the opportunity to flex your leadership style. We generally despise the opposite approach which settles for “Well, that’s just who I am!”
Fascinating. Really interested in this. I have a research interest in self-aware leadership. Any extremes of behaviour seem to make us undesirable to followers
I spoke to Dan Pontefract on my podcast and he talked about consistency: a bandwidth of predictability. Operate outside that and people don’t know if they can trust you.
What an interesting concept. Excitability is certainly one that hits home. While we should always aspire to be passionate about our work. We all know (the experienced and psychologically healthy workers, leaders, and/or managers) the non-negotiables can often be mundane or downright unpleasant/irritating. Hence, often with age, a balanced approach to everything is necessary. It brings to mind the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tze. It encourages compassion, frugality, and self-efficacy as a leader. As an individual it encourages being "like the uncarved block."
Kind of goes against everything our society and school (depending on where you go in academia) are trying to tell us..
Our primary work and research isn’t in the evaluation of personality traits. We actually think there isn’t much power in the time spent there. But it is worth mentioning in a single daily entry like this at least once.
Our research has always been focused on behaviors and not principles or traits. Our experience has showed us that behaviors is where the power lies in both relationships and results. We typically don’t discuss our core work in these daily Field Notes, but if you’re interested in the totality of our opinion on the matter you can find it at admiredleadership.com
I think what you are driving at can easily reframed as values and behaviors. Frankly, whatever my personality or inclinations or biases or foibles or whatever—the inner stuff—matters not a jot outside of myself. What matters are my behaviors and the best behaviors are intentional and values based. I loved this post because leadership advice so often avoids what not to be in order to focus on what is, which is why I address “negative paradigms” so much in my writing.
I think we are on the same page… but it is worth saying that the best leadership behaviors are agnostic to values. The behaviors we have seen that are common among the admired cohort we’ve studied are themselves universal and practical and timeless.
That being said, many of the admired leaders would probably have a large overlapping set of values they personally and professionally hold to, but identifying those values in the leaders we studied was not a requirement for inclusion.
I think it all starts with a commitment to human decency informing behavior. I don’t see leadership ascending without that. One could call that commitment a value or not—I do—but the enterprise of leadership sinks without that foundation.
Here is a link to an HBR Article that provides a great overview of the Hogan Development Survey by Thomas Chamorro-Premuzic. It it probably the best quick reference resource I've come across on this assessment - https://hbr.org/2017/09/could-your-personality-derail-your-career
What a great premise. Having a life long bias of thinking about leadership as having the right qualities, I've never looked at derailed leadership through the lens of excess of undesirable traits. Definitely doing some reflection on it now.
My answer to today's post is High Dutiful. On the plus side, I am seen by others as being someone who follows the rules and is a loyal/committed partner (pretty good traits for an HR Professional), but on the minus side, I can come across as ingratiating (people pleaser) and someone who avoids conflict and hesitant to voice my opinion. Knowing this helps me manage my behavior when I'm faced with new/novel situations or find myself in uncharted waters. Also, when I'm stressed out or having a bad day. I've come to the realization that I will always be like this, that their is no cure for it, but that through practice and self-reflection, I am able manage it so it doesn't get in my way of getting along with other people or advancing in my career.
Good reflection. Your self awareness gives you the opportunity to flex your leadership style. We generally despise the opposite approach which settles for “Well, that’s just who I am!”
Fascinating. Really interested in this. I have a research interest in self-aware leadership. Any extremes of behaviour seem to make us undesirable to followers
I spoke to Dan Pontefract on my podcast and he talked about consistency: a bandwidth of predictability. Operate outside that and people don’t know if they can trust you.
Definitely aligns with what you’re saying here
Please share a link to that audio when you have the chance, Dr. Nia!
Of course. Here you go: https://podcast.knowingselfknowingothers.co.uk/2031015/13226885-29-from-mid-management-to-senior-leadership-with-dan-pontefract
Good morning,
What an interesting concept. Excitability is certainly one that hits home. While we should always aspire to be passionate about our work. We all know (the experienced and psychologically healthy workers, leaders, and/or managers) the non-negotiables can often be mundane or downright unpleasant/irritating. Hence, often with age, a balanced approach to everything is necessary. It brings to mind the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tze. It encourages compassion, frugality, and self-efficacy as a leader. As an individual it encourages being "like the uncarved block."
Kind of goes against everything our society and school (depending on where you go in academia) are trying to tell us..
Thanks for your time.
Hi Patrick
Sorry to hear you went thru a derailment.
Our primary work and research isn’t in the evaluation of personality traits. We actually think there isn’t much power in the time spent there. But it is worth mentioning in a single daily entry like this at least once.
Our research has always been focused on behaviors and not principles or traits. Our experience has showed us that behaviors is where the power lies in both relationships and results. We typically don’t discuss our core work in these daily Field Notes, but if you’re interested in the totality of our opinion on the matter you can find it at admiredleadership.com
I think what you are driving at can easily reframed as values and behaviors. Frankly, whatever my personality or inclinations or biases or foibles or whatever—the inner stuff—matters not a jot outside of myself. What matters are my behaviors and the best behaviors are intentional and values based. I loved this post because leadership advice so often avoids what not to be in order to focus on what is, which is why I address “negative paradigms” so much in my writing.
I think we are on the same page… but it is worth saying that the best leadership behaviors are agnostic to values. The behaviors we have seen that are common among the admired cohort we’ve studied are themselves universal and practical and timeless.
That being said, many of the admired leaders would probably have a large overlapping set of values they personally and professionally hold to, but identifying those values in the leaders we studied was not a requirement for inclusion.
I think it all starts with a commitment to human decency informing behavior. I don’t see leadership ascending without that. One could call that commitment a value or not—I do—but the enterprise of leadership sinks without that foundation.