Leadership is a result of complementing one's intelligence with some fundamental personality traits and influencing others by them. The success in leadership has been linked to increased levels of openness and conscientiousness. In the same way, extraversion has proved to result into a robust speculative soundness of leadership after one qualifies from a job interview (Lussier & Achua, 2016) . Strong leaders, therefore, are responsible for the success of any organization. They demonstrate high ethical standards that would be followed by the subordinates in implementing practice. The aspects of theory X and theory Y plays a part in the success of a leader. This paper explores the five models of personality as it applies to effective leaders Vis a Vis the ineffective ones, considering directly the leadership of James N. Mattis and Mark T. Esper.
The Five Models of Personality and Traits of Effective Leaders
The Five Models of Personality are fundamental for an effective leader and they include conscientiousness, agreeableness, Surgency, openness to experience and adjustment (Lussier & Achua, 2016) . Conscientiousness is about self-discipline that the leader has, especially under demanding circumstances where responsibility and dependability is fundamental. The leader delegates tasks and ensures that they are done, with the results of the decisions channeled towards one entity (Campion & Wang, 2019) . The social concerns within are offered a focused approach for a solution. Dependability also incorporates intelligence on the issues that are being tackled. The leader has relevant information about the issue at hand and communicates a general vision in mind.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Openness to experience is significant as the leader spearhead a team in the process of a continuously developing issue. When there is an issue and there is need to make a quick decision to counter it, the leader come up with that executive decision that solves it. Handel (2003) elaborates that even some minute concerns can be unfair to the running of an organization, and thus the need for new approaches through creative thinking (Lussier & Achua, 2016) . Therefore, the leader is flexible to eliminate any frustrations and be creative to eliminate any unexpected problems. The leader is open-minded and inventive to aggressively source information about an issue and offer a quick solution.
Agreeableness is a personality trait that incorporates traits like trust, kindness, love, and other pro-social attributes. A leader that is high in agreeableness is more cooperative as opposed to being competitive or even manipulative to the group members. Campion and Wang (2019) emphasized that t he leader takes care of others and show concerns to them. They take pleasure in whatever make the members happy. On the other hand, neuroticism includes traits such as moodiness, pessimistic, sadness, and being unstable emotionally. The leaders in this category are characterized by great stress, shifts in their moods and they feel irritated by several things (Lussier & Achua, 2016) . They have many anxieties about issues and the running of the team they are leading.
Surgency is linked with leaders who are dominant and take charge in everything they do. They also portray extraversion, which comes in handy for any strong team leader as it speaks to one’s self-confidence, certainty, and motivated nature that hugely affects every team member. Successful leaders should also be adjustable to daily activities and changing work environments. Leaders who possess surgency are also linked with high levels of energy and determination. They should be emotionally stable and confident. Confidence becomes contagious to members so that none of them doubts himself. Good decision-making skills that are complemented with confidence resulting into several answers and offering direction for team members with low confidence (Handel, 2003) . The leader will be confidently reassuring every member to be focused while determining whether he or she is in the right direction. Through Surgency and adjustment, the leader will influence the entire team even with foundational social interactions since each member will feel that they are doing things together.
The Personalities and Traits of My Leaders
James N. Mattis has been recognized as a very respected and successful leader who is presently the US Secretary of Defense. He is recognized for his intellect, candor and humbleness. He has demonstrated compassion to his subordinates and mentoring them to be more like him (Campion & Wang, 2019) . Mattis led by example through surgency, even in his high position of power. He also showed up whenever the team members needed support or direction (Miller & O'Hanlon, 2019) . He showed empathy to his subordinates and encouraged them when they were worried. He simply supported the subordinates even after they made errors, without intimidation. This was an aspect of strong extraversion.
Mattis as a leader was emotionally intelligent. He put much emphasis on education, which enabled his professional development. As such, the organization, which he led, could not stagnate as he could make quick assessments and offer solutions to matters that arose. He also motivated the subordinates to think outside the box (Miller & O'Hanlon, 2019) . His social awareness traits were quite dominant since he was able to understand others and consolidate various views for the best decision, a sign of sensitivity (Lussier & Achua, 2016) . Most of the time, he brought out his agreeability personality dimension through taking an active role in the progress of the organization. He could also motivated his employees to counter risks and learn through their experiences, so that they ended up being more confident and made good decisions.
Comparably, Mark T. Esper is a typical example of an ineffective leader. He has demonstrated conflicts of interest over the past by affiliating with defense contractors, which was contrary to the constitution. He operates under convenience not on principle, because he wants to make the overall boss happy, which is a characteristic of a leader who is not confident in whatever he or she does. Mark T. Esper portrayed a lack of adjustment to the needs of his subordinates. He frequently utilized a bullying style such that the subordinates felt intimidated, their trust betrayed and that their boss was self-centered. In terms of the Big Five Model of Personality, Esper scored low in conscientiousness as he was less dependable and compromised his integrity. He compromised the ethical standards by being a lobbyist for Raytheon and refusing to extend a two-year commitment that he had made as an Army secretary so that he could dodge answering concerns raised by their company at that time (Miller & O'Hanlon, 2019) . These aspects qualified him as an ineffective leader who could not led by example, but one who favored himself and friends at the expense of others.
Leader's Theory X and Theory Y
Both Mark Esper and James Mattis used theory Y techniques more dominantly. They created a good work environment whereby the employees had the opportunity to take initiative and offer directions in areas of great concern. James Mattis specifically, committed to doing things together with the employees and offering them an opportunity to make decisions for the wellbeing of the organization together (Handel, 2003). Thus, this was an aspect of Theory Y because of the encouragement of participative decision making involving all members of the team (Miller & O'Hanlon, 2019) . Unfortunately, Mark Esper demonstrated a more dictatorial style of leadership particularly when he lobbied for Raytheon, which falls in the description of attitudes in theory X. He occasionally used threats and sacked people quickly with the notion that they disliked work (Lussier & Achua, 2016) . The negative attitude has discouraged some employees under Esper’s leadership, which has been evident in their reduced performances.
Leader Ethics
James N. Mattis ensured that he demonstrated some type of individual code of ethics. As much as this could be a mixture of his moral beliefs, religion and wisdom, he has demonstrated by example the ethical standards that the subordinates need to adhere to. He has endeavored to lead his organization ethically by ensuring that employees follow a code of ethics (Miller & O'Hanlon, 2019) . Mattis has encouraged ethical behavior in the organization he led by creating a transparent work culture and he was willing to listen and encouraged their employees even amidst failures. Good personalities of the leader should be directed towards earning the best interests of the organization and not for personal gain (Lussier & Achua, 2016) . Such can be achieved only by displaying positive attitude to ethical standards as expressed in the leadership of Mattis, as opposed to Esper's leadership.
Mark T. Esper would only comply with the law as long it favored him and friends. He demonstrated a corrupt move when he became a lobbyist for Raytheon. He is one who does not lead by example, and as such would miss the best talents who could not be attracted to the organization as a result. (Miller & O'Hanlon, 2019) A good leader is supposed to set a model on how things need to be implemented ethically (Campion & Wang, 2019) . He is seen as one who does not promote a good work environment of open communication. This encourages trust and respect from the subordinates.
Conclusion
For organizations to be successful, they should possess leaders that are able to anticipate problems and offer solutions to them. The leaders should be aggressive to make quick assessments and offer solutions to issues that arise within the organization. A good leader ought to encourage his or her subordinates to think outside the box and be involved in decision-making process. The leader should also employ theory Y techniques more dominantly and take an active role in the progress of the organization.
References
Campion, L. L., & Wang, C. X. (2019). Collectivism and Individualism: the Differentiation of Leadership. TechTrends , 63 (3), 353-356.
Handel, M. J. (Ed.). (2003). The sociology of organizations: Classic, contemporary, and critical readings . Sage. https://books.google.co.ke/books?hl=en&lr=&id=zuZ3HEi4dXIC&oi=fnd&pg=PA108&dq=the+human+side+of+enterprise&ots=vExhLn1AFL&sig=Kill4nFSGI-9Q8xaLulVn6MWZw8&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=the%20human%20side%20of%20enterprise&f=false
Lussier, R. N., & Achua, C. F. (2016). Leadership: Theory Application and Skill Development . USA: Cengage Learning.
Miller, J. N., & O'Hanlon, M. (2019). Quality Over Quantity: US Military Strategy and Spending in the Trump Years . Brookings Institution. http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/mcgregor/
