Information for criminal justice practitioners, students and academics.

There seem to be two broad schools of thought – Trait Theories and Behavioral Theories.  The trait theories tell us that there are people are born with certain characteristics that make them good leaders.  A typical example you see is some kind of sports characteristic – a very tall person has a natural advantage in basketball.  On the other hand, behavior theories tend to look at leader behaviors and find that successful behaviors can be learned. 

 

I figure its not so simple.  First, it is difficult to ignore that people are born with different talents, and some of those talents (or traits) give them an edge.  However, not everyone with an edge actually does apply themselves – the edge is dormant.  Second, and perhaps more importantly, you can learn to do anything better.  Return to the basketball example – I don’t play well enough to be on a professional team (far from it), but I can learn to play better by emulating behaviors (how to dribble, pass and shoot).  There are actual physical behaviors that can make you better.  Presume I decide to play one-on-one with a very tall person (6-6, I am 5-10).  Also presume that the person hates basketball, never plays or practices.  And, that I love it (I actually don’t) so I explore the behaviors of successful play and I practice, practice, practice.  It is a good bet that I will win because the dedicated learning and practicing of behaviors will usually when out over natural advantage.

 

I also think that it is a rather two dimensional question.  Is it traits, behaviors, or does space and time, and social connection have some significant role.  You see Thomas (Stonewall) Jackson was a marginally crazy (or eccentric if you prefer) math teacher before the civil war.  Without the war, whatever made him a stellar battlefield leader was dormant, useless.  He had to be in the right place and time to become a leader.     At that same time in history, Ulysses S. Grant had failed at just about everything he tried.  Again, the war put him into a leadership position…where he could initially lose pretty big.  But, if he didn’t have the social support network, like his biggest cheerleader, Sherman, his early failures may have prevented him from assuming command of the Grand Army of the Potomac.  And, in addition to the timing of the war in general, Grant could not have been successful if it weren’t for Lincoln go through leaders who “just didn’t understand the math.” 

 

Developing leadership skills is a multi-dimensional task.  Even if you have natural traits a leader must study and practice the behaviors that tend to make other leaders successful.  And, a good leader must continually be looking for times and places to apply their leadership.  As Chester Barnard noted in the Function of the Executive, scanning and interpreting the environment is a vital leadership task.  Finally, nobody goes it alone.  Leaders must develop social support networks within and without their organizations.  People to support them, cheer them on, provide them with honest feedback and help them interpret the environment.

 

Its neither nature nor nurture – its much more complex.

 

You can discuss leadership in Criminal Justice at the Criminal Justice Online forum.