Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (2)
Document Type
- Article (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- leadership (2) (remove)
Institute
Objective
Leaders differ in their personalities from non-leaders. However, when do these differences emerge? Are leaders "born to be leaders" or does their personality change in preparation for a leadership role and due to increasing leadership experience?
Method
Using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel Study, we examined personality differences between leaders (N = 2683 leaders, women: n = 967; 36.04%) and non-leaders (N = 33,663) as well as personality changes before and after becoming a leader.
Results
Already in the years before starting a leadership position, leaders-to-be were more extraverted, open, emotionally stable, conscientious, and willing to take risks, felt to have greater control, and trusted others more than non-leaders. Moreover, personality changed in emergent leaders: While approaching a leadership position, leaders-to-be (especially men) became gradually more extraverted, open, and willing to take risks and felt to have more control over their life. After becoming a leader, they became less extraverted, less willing to take risks, and less conscientious but gained self-esteem.
Conclusions
Our findings suggest that people are not simply "born to be leaders" but that their personalities change considerably in preparation for a leadership role and due to leadership experience. Some changes are transient, but others last for a long time.
Reacting, fast and slow
(2021)
The COVID-19 pandemic created extraordinary challenges for governments to safeguard the well-being of their people. To what extent has leaders' reliance on scientific advice shaped government responses to the COVID-19 outbreak? We argue that leaders who tend to orient themselves on expert advice realized the extent of the crisis earlier. Consequently, these governments would adopt containment measures relatively quickly, despite the high uncertainty they faced. Over time, differences in government responses based on the use of science would dissipate due to herding effects. We test our argument on data combining 163 government responses to the pandemic with national- and individual-level characteristics. Consistent with our argument, we find that countries governed by politicians with a stronger technocratic mentality, approximated by holding a PhD, adopted restrictive containment measures faster in the early, but not in the later, stages of the crisis. This importance of expert-based leadership plausibly extends to other large-scale societal crises.