Trait based theory and great man theory have become outdated in their thought processes. These theories were founded years ago in hopes to theoretically pinpoint specific traits great leaders had or needed to have in order to be effective. These researchers discovered and are still learning today that there is not one specific combination of traits that an effective leader has or needs to have in order to be successful.

Great man theory is the idea that started when men who were nobility became leaders purely because they were born into the position. In the article, “ Leadership: do traits matter?” Kirkpatrick and Locke define Great Man leadership as “leadership qualities that were inherited, especially by people from the upper class.” These upper class men did not have specific traits, qualities, or action logic to prove they were meant to be in a leadership position but instead whom their families were decided if they were fit for the position. Furthermore, women at this time did not hold leadership positions allowing the “great men” to take over. Trait based theory is similar to great man theory because of the common belief that you inherited the traits. In the common example of nature vs. nurture, great man theory and trait-based theory are perfect examples of nature because of how they are decided based on their bloodline and no skill or performance are needed to be awarded the position.

In my opinion there are no pros of either theory, only cons. I find that thinking that leadership is innate is unrealistic. Leadership is grown through experiences, and validated through learning. Leadership is not something we inherit from our families but molded into us through situations, education, relationships, motivations, and opportunities.