What to do with trait theory when it comes to leadership and negotiation?

For quite some time the most common thinking about effective leadership hinged on Trait Theory. Trait Theory in general is about the characteristics of leaders and has been traditionally used to predict leadership effectiveness. Those traits are then used to gauge the likelihood that people will succeed as leaders. Similarly, various scholars have applied to idea of Trait Theory to negotiation as well, citing such traits as the ability to listen, think quickly on one's feet, be assertive, and empathic.

The question this blog is examining is whether it is helpful to use Trait Theory to conduct such an assessment and if the theory really helps identify successful leaders and negotiators.  In other words, what are the benefits and limits of such a theory and what can be concluded about this idea.        


The benefits of Trait Theory are:

1.  It is a relatively straight-forward concept.  If you possess the traits of an effective leader and negotiator than you have a high likelihood of being successful.  If you don't, well, you can either try to learn them (which the theory says is very hard to do) or you are out of luck and should try another endeavor.  
2.  Trait Theory provides a very clear way to analyze and assesses effective leadership and negotiation.  It sets forth benchmarks that can be measured.   
3.  Traits do matter in certain ways to help understand successful leadership.  Like anything, this can be taken too far, but the contribution is there nonetheless.  
4.  There is ample research to support the concept to varying degrees.  

The limits of the Trait Theory are:

1.  If taken too literally the theory is very limiting as to who can be a successful leader.  Because many people believe traits are something you are born with you cannot learn to adopt them.  The conclusion, therefore, is only certain people are cut out to be leaders or negotiators.     
2.  The theory, while it strives for objective measures, is inherently subjective in how it is applied.  
3.  There is not exact agreement on what the key traits are (there are many that have been identified) and there is disagreement over which are the most important.         

So what does all this mean and what can we conclude about trait theory:

There is little question that trait theory has given those interested in leadership and negotiation quite a bit to think about.  It helps those within an organization, for example, to know what to look for when scouting for the next generation of leaders and negotiators.  It can also help instill confidence in individuals should they possess these traits.  

That stated, it seems that trait theory may be a necessary, but not sufficient condition for leadership and negotiation success.  The fundamental question in my mind is related to how people acquire these traits.  The theory seems much less helpful and interesting if the conclusion is that we are simply born with these traits and they cannot be learned.  There is little question we are born with certain physical traits, but far less clear when this issue relates to cognition.  In fact, most of the things that make people successful leaders and negotiators emerge from success and failure loops where learning is a core part of what helps us grow.      

TGIF Quotation related to Primal Leadership

"When I say manage emotions, I only mean the really distressing, incapacitating emotions.  Feeling emotions is what makes life rich.  You need your passions."

Daniel Goleman

What is the connection between leadership approach and negotiation? Part 4: Primal leadership...and primal negotiation

Primal leadership sounds rather frightening at first blush.  It conjures up notions of Hobbes' conception of nature being red tooth and claw. However, authors Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee, in their book Primal Leadership, mean something quite different.  To borrow their words, Primal Leadership means to "prime good feelings in those we lead."  Put differently, the primary job of leaders is an emotional one.

Goleman and colleagues have spent many years researching the role of emotions in leadership.  To be more precise, the scientific evidence they gathered strongly indicated that a leader's emotional competencies have a significant impact on their overall leadership ability and ultimate success.  So what are they competencies they have identified?  There are four categories with upwards of 27 competencies involved.  The categories are:

1. Self awareness: comprised of the ability to be attuned to one's emotional self and the signals you give to others, an accurate self assessment (not over or under inflated), and a level of self assurance that puts people at ease.

2. Self management: comprised of a number of competencies including self control, transparency, adaptability to fluid and changing situations, taking initiative when needed and a healthy level of optimism. 

3. Social awareness: comprised of empathy, organizational awareness, and a strong commitment to service.  

4. Relationship management: comprised of a number of competencies, including inspiration, the ability to influence, helping to develop others, being a catalyst for change, dealing with conflict effectively, and building effective teams.  

As you can visualize, there is a lot that goes into effective primal leadership and only the very few are truly proficient at most of these.  And what about all of this and how it relates to negotiation?

The history of emotions in negotiation is an interesting one.  Back in the 1950s, when scholarly work really began about negotiation, theorists primarily came from an Economics background and worked off of a Rational Actor model.  The prevailing sentiment was that emotions should be kept out of negotiation.  However, that all changed as a myriad of voices from varied disciplines started pointing out that keeping emotions out of negotiation was essentially impossible (for a great read see Beyond Rationality by Fisher and Shapiro).  So how does all of this fit with the notion of primal leadership?

Quite well actually -- to the point where the primal concept applies equally to negotiation. Starting at the highest of levels, effective negotiators understand the importance of their counterparts coming away from a negotiation feeling primed about the process and ultimate outcome.  We see this time and again where one successful negotiation sets up the next process.

The four categories mentioned in primal leadership are essential for negotiators as well.  Taking them one at a time, self awareness in negotiation is fundamentally important since we communicate a significant amount through our non verbal behaviors and our ability to put others at ease.

Self awareness leads to self management and knowing how to control ourselves, when to share different kinds of information, and having the ability to adapt to different situations that emerge during what is an often unpredictable process. Since much of negotiation is about managing oneself in the face of the other, this category is critical for success.

Social awareness and knowing when to empathize, how to deal with the organizational challenges that might be part of any negotiation, and the desire to serve others all come into play in different negotiation processes.  If I empathize well, for example, the other negotiator comes away feeling as if I truly understand their needs and interests.

Finally, effective negotiation requires inspiration and the ability to influence others.  In fact, there may be no more important skillset than that combination.  These skills also help negotiators to address conflicts as they come up and to work with a broad array of people and teams constructively.

In summary, primal leadership connects directly with primal negotiation.  A negotiator's job is, in large part, an emotional one. While negotiators may not be leading people in the traditional sense, many of the abilities discussed are critical for effective negotiation.  Having both parties leave a negotiation satisfied to a large degree is the objective of most negotiations and being primal leads us clearly in that direction.    
            

What is the connection between leadership approach and negotiation? Part 3: The leader without authority

We often associate leadership with a role and with some form of authority.  Think the president of a country or company, a supervisor or boss, etc...  You get the idea.  However, there is quite a bit of interesting work that has been done on leading WITHOUT authority.  The common themes of this work, and the guidance given, is as follows:

1.  Meet the needs and interests of the people you want to follow you

When you try to lead without authority you must find and unearth the needs and interests of those who you would like to follow you.  If you meet those needs and interests people will naturally have many reasons to do what you are asking.  Put differently, people will move in the direction you would like because they see the value in what you are proposing.    

2.  Use persuasion that speaks to those around you

Coercion is not an option when trying to lead without authority.  Therefore one must possess the ability to persuade.  That means thinking about things from the other people's perspective.  A common mistake people make is trying to persuade others, but with arguments that make sense to persuader, not the persuadee.      

3.  Ask thought provoking questions

A leader who lacks authority has a best friend -- a thought provoking question.  A well placed provocative question, that gives people pause to think deeply, can be the best way to frame a problem or a challenge.  This type of question is also a great way to subtly shift people's thinking.  

4.  Be humble, yet enthusiastic

A leader without authority has to find a way to resonate with people and get them to believe in what they are saying and doing.  Part of the answer to doing this is exhibiting humility.  Being humble is something people want in a peer and a leader.  The other part of the answer is being enthusiastic.  People need to be energized by a leader's passion for the issue or challenge in front of them.  Enthusiasm is contagious and inspires quiet confidence.    

5.  Take responsibility when needed and give credit to others    

Taking responsibility is one way to exhibit leadership to others.  It is not easy to take responsibility in difficult times, but it conveys a level of commitment to a situation that people often want to see.  Furthermore, when credit is due to the team a leader can gain confidence and trust by bestowing that credit on others.  Most often that credit is due to their efforts in any case, with the leader gently guiding them along.

All of this guidance fits very well with effective negotiation.  In fact, in most negotiations we have to use the very same principles leaders without authority employ.  For example:

• Meeting interests and needs is a fundamental principle of all negotiations.  Unless those interests and needs are met negotiators will not say yes to what is being put in front of them.  
• The ability to persuade others is a core tool of any negotiator.  If one does not possess this ability they will fall short when met with resistance.     
• The best negotiators I know are not the smoothest talkers, but rather they ask the best questions and listen carefully for the information coming back to them. 
• Humility in negotiation is a disarming quality that can keep the other negotiator in the right frame of mind.  Coupling this with enthusiasm, and a never ending quest for a creative solution, is an infectious quality of a master negotiator.
• Finally, taking responsibility during a negotiation can help the other negotiator move past certain sticking points.  Giving credit to the other negotiator for the success you both achieve is an important way to build the relationship over the longer term.