Discussion on the ways in which the Personality of a Leader Might Affect Employee Turnover

Discussion on the ways in which the Personality of a Leader Might Affect Employee Turnover

Personality has been considered as an imperative factor in the identity-related studies particularly in the prediction of employee performance. It is a behavior which distinguishes one individual from another (Beer & Brooks 2011) and gives insight whether an individual will do some particular activity, in contrast with others (Sackett et al. 2002). Working with the contributions of Beer and Brooks (2011) and Sackett et al (2002), it is clear that behavioral traits impact decisions to engage in a given activity with a given group and not another. For that matter, the personality of a leader or manager defines the achievement employee retention and performance of an organization. The determination of their personality on employee turnover can be envisaged through decision making, communication, interaction with employees, conscientiousness, the approach of leadership, teamwork, and many more (Andersen 2006). The development of this paper was enhanced by the probable correlation between employees that leave over a period of time and leader personality. Therefore, it critically explores how the leader personality impacts employee turnover.

The ability to relate openly to one’s environment alongside a positive attitude enhances employee satisfaction with the job leads to high turnover. A leader who is outgoing, confident, companionable, gregarious and generally an extrovert attitude, is effective in analyzing job performance and social relations (Berry, Ones & Sackett 2007). According to Carl Jung’s (2016) theory on extroverts and introverts, the unpredicted behavior defines the varied ways that people opt to make use of their mental capacities. Therefore, the extrovert leader is able to understand the world of his employees based on their open mind thus, involving their ideas in decision making and reducing employee turnover. In Maggie Farrel’s experiment (2017) on the effectiveness of extrovert leaders, it was revealed that they have the capability to work well with others and stakeholders. The extroversion enables an organization to have increased expectations by engaging the workforce in the accomplishment of company goals. The Gucci Clothing Line can adopt extrovert managers since they are engaged in global sales of their products. The leaders will have a social interaction with clients from varied locales and understand their demands, tastes, and preferences as well as areas of improvement to enable the company to maintain its high sales. Other than the clients, they interact openly with the employees, retaining their skilled personnel until their time to retire. However, organizations ought to keep in mind that introversion is not a weakness of leadership (Carman, Leland & Wilson 2010).

The ability of the leader to meet the requirements of the employees and not only inspiring them to facilitate efficiency helps in achievement of company objectives as well as their retention. It is based on meeting requirements that Richards & Engle (1986) considered leadership to be all about the establishment of values, visions, and building of a work-conducive environment. The personality model of 1930s is founded on innate leadership qualities which are not likely to be in others for it ignores the psychological concept. The perspective of Maslow Hierarchy (1943) expresses a structure that can be employed by leaders to gratify workforce demands and decrease turnover as well as losses in both innate and psychological levels. Research carried out by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) in 2004 demonstrated that huge salaries and wages contribute a sum of 20% to employee retention. Hence the need for a framework of motivating factors for work engagement. In the competing global economy, many companies are defining ways to satisfy their personnel on extrinsic (financial level) and intrinsic (psychological level). There is a need for the Huawei Company in Shenzhen-China needs to adopt the system of satisfying employees holistically to exceed its present state and build a better future. The company competes for a number of mobile providers and its retention of employees will help in keeping the organization secret on production and sale structures (Demirtas & Akdogan 2015).

The value of teamwork and collaboration is a feature of employee turnover. The personnel always appreciate when leaders accord support for their collaboration with one another. In many companies, employees believe in assistance of co-workers in times of need or together problem-solving methods (Hogan & Kaiser 2005).  According to the Belbin Team Inventory Theory (1970), the behavior of a person is tested to define a preference for teamwork. In relation to leadership personality and employee turnover, the Belbin believes that the team leader has to embrace teamwork to earn efficiency, reducing turnover rates. The reason being personality does not equate to teamwork and so as a team, the weaker personalities are built by the strong personalities unlike when employees work in solitude (Aritzeta, Swailes & Senior 2007). A case study by Tarricone et al (2017) demonstrated that through teamwork, the employees are committed to achieving success as they embrace interpersonal skills. Additionally, the study demonstrated that through teamwork the organizations are in a position to commit the leaders and make them accountable for every action. It is critical for Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to embrace teamwork since they work across and along multi-disciplinary lines as well as multi-cultures to understand the concept of diseases. The varied facets of the CDC team are likely to merge their ideas and get along without disciplinary conflicts or unnecessary turnover of the employees (Hogan & Kaiser 2008).

In the relationship between leader personality and employee turnover, the concept of communication is key. Whether a leader has one or all of the 1930s models of personality, effective communication is essential for the attainment of employee performance and reduced turnover. To attain personnel detainment, open communication channels that allow free sharing of information is mandatory. It allows the workforce to share ideas and learn from one another and issue feedback in a constructive and positive manner (Hom & Griffeth 1995). The philosophy of B.F. Skinner (1938), demonstrates the need for communication and response to reflexes. If an organization has well-defined communication structures, then the employees will engage freely and get the right information to execute their activities and attain organizational goals. However, if communication is not well developed, then the team is likely to get another organization that will enhance effective communication for goal achievements.  The study by Johnson et al (2017) in Pakistan reveals that employee turnover is essential to manage in telecommunication companies to prevent loss of experts and skilled personnel. The scholars believe that if communication channels are not well developed, then much potential personnel are likely to be lost to rival organizations. A good example is the tech startups that need to embrace proper communication channels with employees in order to retain the best that will work towards company goals. If the situation is otherwise, the competing companies are likely to offer them efficiency in communication and they opt out (Judge et al 2002).

A leader whose personality is geared towards observing of moral codes of conduct is likely to retain a number of employees unless their time to retire is due. A retainable workforce wishes to be in an organization that has an emphasis on integrity, ethics, and honesty, one that operates on the values it espouses. According to the systems theory by Von Bertalanffy (1968), the connectedness of an organization enables it to enhance transparency and adherence to moral laws. In the maintenance of integrity, the employees are in a position to trust their leaders and build efforts to overcome challenges facing the organizations. Emphasis on moral adherence to the management of employee turnover by organization managers is evident in the work of Sapovadia and Patel (2013) as the emphasis on the essence of ethical observation to reduce employee turnover. The authors consider low ethical organizations to lose business to their rivals who observe high ethical adherence. In order for McDonald Fast Food Restaurants, to maintain its profits above the competitors, it essential that it considers high ethical observation to retain their employees as well as their business ideas. Failure to observe this, will lead to loss of their experts to their rivals and sell out of their business ideologies (Kendall 1975).

The desire of every employee in organizations is to have a positive future; a firm that provides the innovative environment and openness alongside a positive attitude towards the future. In other words, the companies ought to provide a general environment that gears to improvement and opportunity to learn from each other for the good of the organization (Nystedt 1997). According to the theory of diffusion and innovation (Rodgers 2010), the organizations need to diffuse past, present and future ideologies to get the right direction in which it can operate to retain its employees. The diffusion of the three levels builds a challenging opportunity for employees as well as the room to have improved skills. A study by Kendall (1975) demonstrates the link between creativity and employee retention. The author reports that the employees find it secure in an environment that guarantees innovative future that one that has no direction. It is critical for the Ford Auto motives to provide a promising future to their employees. The employees need to feel secure about their position and so work efficiently as they plan for the guaranteed future.

One of the best reasons workforce would leave their present place of employment is because of leadership issues. An association between the employee and the manager is a standout amongst the most critical parts to work satisfaction. An awful supervisor can make even the most patient employees hopeless (Smith & Canger, 2004; Hargrove 1966). Nobody needs to remain in an awkward workplace. People crave structure, responsibility, and consistency. In the event that a leader isn’t giving these, it’s likely to be an issue. A decent leader motivates and makes an environment of innovativeness and cooperation. A right leader gives devices and assets to representatives so they can better carry out their activity. If a leader does not create but neglects to make a situation that supports efficiency and prizes achievement, you got cases. A worker’s devotion to the organization and its main goal originates from leadership, and if this is missing, representatives have no motivation to remain (Hom & Kinicki 2001).

For that reason, organization employees need a leader they can trust. It’s up to the initial group to set up a field of common regard. In the event that they don’t, you can bet they will search for an exit plan. Therefore, the leadership format of an organization is essential for its success. One can observe how it trickles down to the organization personnel. On the off chance that management is terrible, workers quit at high rates, and a company spends pointless monies to contract and prepare new individuals. Basically, awful leaders are at fault for high employee turnover, as well as for the hit to your main concern from hiring and provide skills to extra workers (Hom & Griffeth 1995). In regard to approaches to guide the relationship, the systems theory is the best as it connects every sector of the organization to one another enhancing openness, teamwork, collective decision making and many factors that enhance employee retention.

In conclusion, the connection between leadership personality and employee turnover is two sides of the coin. The personality of a leader influences their ability to make decisions, embrace teamwork, adhere to ethics, provide employee requirement, and create an innovative environment in the organization. The impact on the aforementioned factors, influence employee turnover in both positive and negative ways.  In positive situations, the employee is permitted to leave due to retirement or incoherent behavior while in negative states, the employees quit due to poor management. If leaders embrace a good leadership that allows participation or employees, the turnover rates will be managed. It is necessary for organizations to employ leaders and offer them skills on management to avoid employee turnover except in necessary times. Additionally, companies need to address another contributing factor to turnover besides leadership.


Andersen, J.A., 2006. Leadership, personality and effectiveness. The journal of socio-       economics35(6), pp.1078-1091.

Aritzeta, A., Swailes, S. and Senior, B., 2007. Belbin’s team role model: Development, validity    and applications for team building. Journal of Management Studies44(1), pp.96-118.

Beer, A. and Brooks, C., 2011. Information quality in personality judgment: The value of             personal disclosure. Journal of Research in Personality45(2), pp.175-185.

Berry, C.M., Ones, D.S. and Sackett, P.R., 2007. Interpersonal deviance, organizational    deviance, and their common correlates: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of applied             psychology92(2), p.410.

Carman, J.G., Leland, S.M. and Wilson, A.J., 2010. Crisis in leadership or failure to          plan?. Nonprofit Management and Leadership21(1), pp.93-111.

Demirtas, O. and Akdogan, A.A., 2015. The effect of ethical leadership behavior on ethical          climate, turnover intention, and affective commitment. Journal of Business     Ethics130(1), pp.59-67.

Farrell, M., 2017. Leadership Reflections: Extrovert and Introvert Leaders. Journal of Library             Administration57(4), pp.436-443.

Gebrim Doria, N., Pereira Coelho, D.E., Tarricone Garcia, M., Wada Watanabe, H.A. and Maria Bógus, C., 2017. The experience of an agroecological school garden as an interactive and      creative health promotion strategy. Demetra: Food, Nutrition & Health/Alimentação,   Nutrição & Saúde12(1).

Hargrove, E.C., 1966. Presidential leadership; personality and political style. Macmillan.

Hogan, R. and Kaiser, R.B., 2005. What we know about leadership. Review of general      psychology9(2), p.169.

Hogan, R. and Kaiser, R.B., 2008. Quality control: Why leaders need to understand          personality. Leadership in Action28(5), pp.3-7.

Hom, P.W. and Griffeth, R.W., 1995. Employee turnover. South-Western Pub.

Hom, P.W. and Kinicki, A.J., 2001. Toward a greater understanding of how dissatisfaction          drives employee turnover. Academy of Management journal44(5), pp.975-987.

Johnson, M.A., Thompson, D.S., Leatherdale, C.A., Stradinger, J.J., Breedlove, E.L.,        Solomonson, S.D., Braun, R.M., Schaffer, K.R., Zhang, P. and Rule, J.D., 3M Innovative       Properties Co, 2017. Protective display film. U.S. Patent 9,780,318.

Judge, T.A., Bono, J.E., Ilies, R. and Gerhardt, M.W., 2002. Personality and leadership: a             qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of applied psychology87(4), p.765.

Jung, C., 2016. Psychological types. Taylor & Francis.

Kendall, K., 1975. Thin-film peeling-the elastic term. Journal of Physics D: Applied           Physics8(13), p.1449.

Maslow, A.H., 1943. A theory of human motivation. Psychological review50(4), p.370.

Nystedt, L., 1997. Who should rule? Does personality matter?. European Journal of          Personality11(1), pp.1-14.

Richards, D. and Engle, S., 1986. After the vision: Suggestions to corporate visionaries and          vision champions. Transforming leadership199, p.214.

Rogers, E.M., 2010. Diffusion of innovations. Simon and Schuster.

Sapovadia, V. and Patel, A., 2013. What Works for Workers’ Cooperatives? An Empirical            Research on Success & Failure of Indian Workers’ Cooperatives.

Skinner, B.F., 1938. The behavior of organisms: an experimental analysis. Appleton-          Century. New York.

Smith, M.A. and Canger, J.M., 2004. Effects of supervisor “big five” personality on subordinate attitudes. Journal of business and psychology18(4), pp.465-481.

Von Bertalanffy, L., 1968. General system theory. New York41973(1968), p.40.