The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

Characteristics
Characteristics associated with associated with
CEO success: perceptions of CEO success
CEOs and their staff
213
John Wood and Tricia Vilkinas
International Centre for Management and Organisational Effectiveness, Received December 2004
University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia Revised January 2006
Accepted March 2006

Abstract
Purpose The paper seeks to identify the characteristics that successful CEOs possess and
demonstrate, as perceived by both the CEOs and their staff.
Design/methodology/approach Twenty CEOs and 38 staff members who reported directly to
them were involved. There were two parts to the research questionnaire and interviews. The
leadership questionnaire was completed by both groups, who were then interviewed to further explore
the characteristics these successful CEOs did possess and demonstrated.
Findings Characteristics identified as important for success were a humanistic approach,
achievement orientation, a positive outlook, a sense of integrity, inclusiveness and learning and
self-awareness. Both the CEOs and their staff agreed that the CEOs did possess all these
characteristics, some to a greater extent than others. They also agreed that the six characteristics were
effectively demonstrated by the CEOs.
Research limitations/implications To date, research on the characteristics that CEOs need to
possess has been very limited. This study was the first to take a comprehensive approach to identify
the characteristics CEOs need to possess and did demonstrate. It is also one of the few studies that has
involved both CEOs and their staff. As this was an exploratory study, it is important that it be
replicated in a larger population of CEOs.
Practical implications The characteristics identified in this paper can be used to select and
develop CEOs.
Originality/value The paper would be of value to future CEOs and to those charged with the
responsibility for the selection and development of CEOs.
Keywords Leadership, Perception, Management development
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
CEOs play an important role in the performance of their organisations (Grude et al.,
2002). Knowledge of the characteristics of successful CEOs is important if
organisations are going to select and develop appropriate individuals for high-level
leadership positions (Wood and Vilkinas, 2004, 2005). Yet to date, this executive group
remains unexplored, unchallenged and to a great extent ignored in the research
literature.
There have been only a few recent studies seeking to identify the characteristics of
successful CEOs and using a CEO population (see Table I). Much management Journal of Management Development
Vol. 26 No. 3, 2007
pp. 213-227
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
This paper is based on the doctoral research undertaken by John Wood. Once again Barbara 0262-1711
Brougham has been outstanding with her editorial assistance. DOI 10.1108/02621710710732128

Table I.
associated with success
Characteristics of CEOs
Characteristics
Achievement orientation
(Achieves results and displays
energy, passion and tenacity)
Humanistic approach
(Believes in the potential and growth Humanistic approach (Bennis, 1996b;
of others and good communicator) Russell, 2001a, b; Ruderman and
Positive outlook
(Takes responsibility for own
thinking, thinks creatively and
challenges others thinking)
Inclusive
Participative and empowering style
26,3
214
JMD
References (empirical)
References (theoretical) CEO perceptions Staff perceptions
Sense of purpose, visionary Drive and ambition (Tait, 1996) Visionary, sense of mission,
(Bennis, 1996b; Bennis, 1997; Visionary (Tait, 1996) determination (Waldman et al., 2001)
Goffee and Jones, 2000) Envisioning, energising, designing Achievement (Sarros and
Bias toward action (Bennis, 1996b) and controlling and tenacity (Kets de Butchatsky, 1996)
Energy (Goffee and Jones, 2000; Vries and Florent-Treacy, 2002)
Conger, 1998) Achievement (Sarros and
Butchatsky, 1996)
Communication skills (Bennis, 1997) Interpersonal skills (Tait, 1996) Satisfy staff needs, relationship with
staff (Waldman et al., 2001; Bennis
and OToole, 2000; Russell, 2001a)
Ohlott, 2000; Fairholm and Fairholm, Individualised consideration
2000; McGill and Slocum, 1998; (Bass et al., 1996)
Kouzes and Posner, 1993; Boyd and
Taylor, 1998; Russell and Stone,
2002; Ruderman et al., 2001;
Lowe et al., 1996; Bass et al., 1996;
Brower et al., 2000)
Positivism (Bennis, 1996b; Fondas Positivism (Waterman, 1994;
and Wiersems, 1997; Murphy, 1996) Boone et al., 1996)
Empowering style (Bennis, 1996a), Empowering, rewarding and giving Emotional intelligencea (Barling
including empathy (Goffee and feedback, and team building (Kets de et al., 2000; Kets de Vries and
Jones, 2000) Vries and Florent-Treacy, 2002) Florent-Treacy, 2002)
Inspires trust (Rogers, 1995a,b)
Emotional intelligencea (Goleman,
1998; Goleman, 2000)
(continued)
 References (empirical)
Characteristics References (theoretical) CEO perceptions Staff perceptions

Integrity Self-esteem (Bennis, 1997; Sarros and Integrity (Tait, 1996) Integrity (Parry and
(Clearly articulated values that Butchatsky, 1996) Proctor-Thomson, 2002; Sarros and
translate into behaviour; congruent) Ethical (Bass and Steidlmeier, 1999; Butchatsky, 1996)
Messick and Bazerman, 1996)
Integrity (Bass and Steidlmeier,
1999; London, 1999; Simons, 1999)
Moral courage (Peak, 1997;
Scarnati, 1999)

Balanced approach Balance in their lives (Bennis, 1996b) Life balance (Kets de Vries and
(Balances all aspects of life including Florent-Treacy, 2002)
work and non-work priorities)

Learning and self awareness Self-awareness (Goffee and Jones, Reflective learner (Farkas and Emotional intelligenceb (Barling
(Aware of strengths and limitations, 2000; Conger et al., 2000; Conger and Wetaufer, 1996) et al., 2000; Kets de Vries and
learns from experience and makes Zin, 2000) Resilience to stress (Kets de Vries Florent-Treacy, 2002)
decisions beyond self interest) Emotional intelligenceb (Goleman, and Florent-Treacy, 2002)
1998; Goleman, 2000)
Intuitive (Goffee and Jones, 2000)
Notes: aRefers to the relationship side of emotional intelligence; brefers to the self-awareness side of emotional intelligence; references prior to 1996 were
not included
Characteristics

CEO success

215
associated with

Table I.
JMD research has focussed on other levels of managers, such as the studies involving
26,3 executives (Howard, 1996), middle managers (Krishnan, 2001) and supervisors
(Atwater et al., 2000). CEOs operate in a different organisational context from other
senior level executives and middle managers, however, and they may have undergone
completely different developmental pathways that shaped their thinking (Conger et al.,
1999).
216 The mindset that leads to success as a CEO is characterised, then, by elements that
appear to be a combination of personal traits and attitudes that are formed by
experience. Much of the recent published work on CEOs, which tends to be theoretical,
has argued that CEOs need to possess the range of characteristics outlined in Table I if
they are to be successful. The characteristics of CEOs as nominated by the theorists are
not unlike those postulated by the CEOs themselves. Both groups argue that CEOs
need to demonstrate an achievement orientation, a humanistic approach, have a
positive outlook, a willingness to be inclusive, to have integrity, to learn and exhibit
self-awareness.
In addition to those studies involving CEOs themselves, there have been a handful
of studies asking staff who report to the CEO to identify the characteristics they feel a
CEO needs to possess in order to successfully manage an organisation (see Table I).
Characteristics identified by the staff are similar to those identified by the CEOs
with the addition of positive outlook and a balanced approach. The perceptions of the
staff also support the theoretical work.

Purpose of the study

Previous research has taken a limited approach with most authors identifying one or
two characteristics rather then a range of characteristics that successful CEOs need to
possess and actually demonstrate. Most of the previous researchers have focused on
either the perceptions of the CEO or their staff, but not on both. The current study was
designed to take a more comprehensive view and to include both CEOs and their staff
simultaneously. The purpose was to identify the characteristics considered important
for successful management by both CEOs and their staff, and to determine the level of
correlation in each groups opinion of the characteristics of successful CEOs.

Method
Selection of participants
Twenty successful CEOs and 38 staff who reported directly to them participated in the
study.

Selection of CEOs
The main criterion for selection of the CEOs was their organisations performance.
Because the participants were CEOs, their performance as individuals was deemed
likely to be directly related to the performance successful or otherwise of their
organisations. In this case, all managed highly successful organisations. While some
researchers have questioned this criterion and suggested that the organisation and
general business context might affect the performance of a CEO (Bryman et al., 1996),
others have argued that successful CEOs shape their environment and context to create
success (Grude et al., 2002, Havaleschka, 1999, Waldman et al., 2001, Waldman and
Yammarino, 1999). The current study took the point of view that, on the whole, a CEOs
success will be a reflection of not just the general business context, but of the skills and Characteristics
attitudes he or she brings to that context. associated with
A second criterion was length of time in the position. The participant CEO must
have occupied their role for at least two years. Performance against the two criteria CEO success
was clarified at the time of initial contact, by telephone, and then again during the
interview.
The list of potential participants was chosen from a variety of sources including 217
business magazines, newspaper articles, and lists of businesses nominated for or
receiving CEO awards. Four CEOs were selected due to individual or organisation
based awards. Five CEOs each managed an organisation that was an example of one of
the largest or fastest growing organisations of its type in Australia. Four CEOs had
successfully started their own businesses that grew to meet the performance criteria.
As CEO interviews proceeded, participants were asked to identify other CEOs they
considered to be successful. If three or more participants nominated the same CEO, that
person was approached for inclusion in the research provided they met the
performance criteria. A total of seven CEOs were identified using this approach.
The final sample included 16 men and four women, with five from the public sector
and 15 from the private sector. Businesses included manufacturing (food, automotive,
technology, health goods). financial services, real estate, entertainment, retail, social
services and business services. The average age of the CEOs was 47 years, and 12 had
tertiary education with six having at least two degrees. Four of the sample had not
completed secondary schooling and had left school before the age of 17.

Selection of staff
Staff participants were limited to individuals who reported directly to the successful
CEOs. There was a total of 38 staff commenting on the 20 CEOs. In 18 cases a single
CEO was observed by two staff. In the remaining two cases there was only one staff
member commenting on each CEO.
Three guidelines were used for the selection of the staff. Firstly, they needed to
report to one of the successful CEOs. Secondly, those nominated had to be directly
responsible (i.e. a direct line of report) to the CEO. Thirdly, there had to have been a
reporting relationship for at least two years. The CEOs were consulted to ensure that
the nominated staff knew them well and had broad responsibilities in the organisation.
Therefore, those chosen to participate saw the CEO in action and were exposed to
others who had a similarly close relationship. This approach was seen as appropriate
for the selection of staff (Waldman et al., 2001).
The final sample included 28 men and ten women, with ten from the public sector
and 28 from the private sector. The average age of the staff was 42.2 years, and 24 had
a tertiary education.

Data collection
There were two parts to the data collection a questionnaire and interviews. The
CEOs and their staff were approached by telephone to ascertain their interest in
participating in the study. The objectives of the study were explained and an interview
time was made. The interview format, confidentiality and other logistics were
discussed and confirmed by letter. The participants were also informed that there
JMD would be a short questionnaire which would be sent prior to being interviewed and the
26,3 researcher would collect it during the interview.
Questionnaire. The leadership questionnaire (Wood, 2004) was developed to
identify the characteristics associated with successful CEOs. The characteristics
measured are shown in Table II. The questionnaire was divided into two parts. Part A
was developed to determine what characteristics successful CEOs should possess.
218 CEOs and staff were asked to rate the importance of the behaviour to success in the job.
A three-point Likert scale was used, anchored by 1 (not important) and 3 (critical). The
same items were used for Part B of the questionnaire to determine the degree to which
this behaviour was effectively demonstrated by the CEO. A three-point Likert scale
was used, anchored by 1 (sometimes) and 3 (always).
The alpha coefficients for all the characteristics in Part A were acceptable as they
were greater than 0.60. In Part B all the scales except for integrity with an alpha
coefficient of 0.50, were also within the acceptable limits (Nunnally, 1978; Streiner,
2003). Given that interviews were also used to measure integrity and the alpha
coefficient in Part A was acceptable, this characteristic was not excluded.
Interviews. The purpose of the interview was to allow participants to comment on
the personal characteristics they felt contributed to the success of the CEO. The results
of these interviews have been published previously (Wood and Vilkinas, 2004, 2005).
The semi-structured interviews (Berg, 1998) were conducted in their office and notes
were taken and recorded on an interview control sheet. The questions asked were:
.
Question 1: What characteristics do you/he/she possess that have helped
you/him/her to become a successful CEO?
.
Question 2: Prioritise these characteristics according to which are the three most
important for your/their success.

Data analysis
Two tailed t-tests were conducted to determine the significance of any variation in
the rating given to each characteristic recorded on the questionnaire when
compared to the pooled mean for CEOs and then staff. This was done for Parts A
and B of the questionnaire. This analysis would determine if CEOs and their staff
identified any characteristic as significantly more important to possess or
significantly more effectively demonstrated than any other characteristic. The
analysis also determined if the CEOs and their staff differed in the characteristics
they identified.
When examining the results of the interviews, content analysis was used to code the
data obtained from Question 1 in order to develop the inferred categories (Insch et al.,

Characteristic Part A alpha Mean SD Part B alpha Mean SD

Table II. Achievement orientation 0.64 2.76 0.43 0.67 2.54 0.57
Alpha coefficients, mean Humanistic approach 0.84 2.58 0.48 0.83 2.17 0.56
and standard deviations Integrity 0.63 2.75 0.42 0.50 2.48 0.52
for the leadership Inclusivity 0.85 2.60 0.49 0.75 2.20 0.57
questionnaire (Parts A Learning and self awareness 0.70 2.58 0.47 0.64 2.17 0.58
and B) (n 55) Positive outlook 0.72 2.61 0.51 0.72 2.24 0.61
1997). Two external raters with leadership and management experience were used to Characteristics
validate the coding. Raters reviewed the categories, as well as reviewing the allocation associated with
to each category of words and phrases taken from the interview. Each characteristic
identified by the participants was allocated to a category and the frequency for that CEO success
category calculated. The percentage of occurrence for each category was also
calculated.
Content analysis was not conducted for Question 2 since the categories had already 219
been analysed and developed from Question 1. As for Question 1, the three most
important characteristics were allocated to a category and the frequency of responses
was calculated, as were the percentages.
The results from the leadership questionnaire Part B were compared to the results
of interview Question 2. Both sources of data identified the characteristics actually
demonstrated by the sample of successful CEOs.

Results
Questionnaire
When the CEOs and their staff were asked to rate 52 items with respect to their
importance for leadership success, scores were obtained as outlined in Table III.
Results for the combined analysis indicated that there were no significant differences,
that is, all characteristics were rated as equally important for success. In addition, five
of the six characteristics had a mean score in excess of 2.50 indicating that the
characteristic was critical for success. While the overall rating for learning and
self-awareness was lower and important for success, it was not significantly different
from the other characteristics.. The high scores and the lack of significant differences
suggest therefore that achievement orientation, integrity, inclusivity, positive outlook,
humanistic approach and learning and self-awareness are all critical for success as a
CEO.
When the mean scores on each characteristic for CEOs were compared with the
staff mean scores, there were no significant differences.
Part B of the questionnaire required CEOs and their staff to rate the degree to which
the sample of successful CEOs effectively demonstrated the characteristics considered
important for success. Combined data results indicated that there were no significant
differences in the ratings attributed to the six characteristics, as indicated in Table IV.
However, two of the characteristics achievement orientation and integrity were
reported as being effectively demonstrated always and four were demonstrated

Characteristic Mean Pooled SD t Pooled df Significance

Achievement orientation 2.69 0.23 0.38 8 NS Table III.

Integrity 2.65 0.20 0.27 10 NS Pooled t-test analysis of
Inclusivity 2.58 0.15 0.03 15 NS combined CEO and staff
Positive outlook 2.56 0.16 0.03 15 NS ratings of characteristics
Humanistic approach 2.51 0.12 0.24 21 NS most important for
Learning and self-awareness 2.43 0.16 0.53 14 NS success questionnaire
Pooled mean of characteristic 2.57 0.21 Part A (n 54)
JMD under most circumstances positive outlook, humanistic approach, inclusivity, and
26,3 learning and self-awareness.
The high scores and lack of significant differences indicate that all six
characteristics are effectively demonstrated. When the mean scores on each
characteristic for CEOs were compared to those of their staff, there were no
significant differences. Therefore, CEOs and their staff agreed on the degree to which
220 successful CEOs effectively demonstrated characteristics associated with success.

Interviews
The CEOs and their staff described characteristics associated with the CEOs success.
Interview Question 1, What characteristics do you possess (does your CEO possess)
that have helped you (them) become a successful leader?, required participants to
describe the characteristics. Interview Question 2, Prioritise these characteristics,
provided an opportunity to choose the top three characteristics associated with
success.
The content analysis of Question 1 was based on combined responses totalling 389
comments from both groups. This analysis led to the identification of seven categories
or characteristics associated with leadership success. The most frequently reported
characteristics were humanistic approach, achievement orientation, and positive
outlook, which combined accounted for 79 percent of the total response, as indicated in
Table V. Integrity fell in the mid range, with 11.1 percent of the total response. The
least reported characteristics were inclusivity, balance and learning and
self-awareness, which combined accounted for 10.1 percent of the total response.
When asked to prioritise these characteristics, the most important characteristics
for success were humanistic approach, achievement orientation and positive outlook,

Characteristic Mean Pooled SD t Pooled df Significance

Table IV.
Pooled t-tests analysis of Achievement orientation 2.60 0.24 0.86 9 NS
combined CEO and direct Integrity 2.50 0.21 0.61 11 NS
report ratings of Positive outlook 2.30 0.19 0.01 15 NS
characteristics effectively Learning and self-awareness 2.18 0.18 0.37 15 NS
demonstrated Humanistic approach 2.13 0.16 0.57 21 NS
questionnaire part B Inclusivity 2.09 0.20 0.65 15 NS
(n 54) Pooled mean of characteristic 2.30 0.25

Characteristic f Percentage of combined total

1. Humanistic approach 124 31.9

2. Achievement orientation 98 25.2
3. Positive outlook 85 21.9
4. Integrity 43 11.1
Table V. 5. Inclusivity 17 4.4
Characteristics necessary 6. Balance 12 3.1
for success: frequency 7. Learning and self-awareness 10 2.6
table (n 54) Total 389 100.0
which combined accounted for 85.1 percent of the total response (Table VI). Integrity Characteristics
again fell in the mid range, with 9.4 percent of the total response. The least important associated with
characteristics were inclusivity, balance and learning and self-awareness, which
combined accounted for 5.71 percent of the total response. CEO success
The CEOs and their staff were basically in agreement (see Figure 1). That is, they
agreed that the most important characteristics were having a humanistic approach
(31.7 percent of CEOs, 32.7 percent of staff), being achievement oriented (31.7 percent of 221
CEOs, 26.5 percent of staff), and having a positive outlook (18.3 percent of CEOs and
27.5 percent of staff). They also agreed that having integrity (6.7 percent of CEOs, 11.2
percent of staff), being inclusive (8.3 percent of CEOs, 1.0 percent of staff), exhibiting a
balanced approach (3.3 percent of CEOs, 3.0 percent of staff) and learning through
reflection and self-awareness (0 percent of CEOs, 1.0 percent of staff) were of far less
importance.
The results from the questionnaire (Part B) were compared to the interview results
obtained from Question 2, and are displayed in Table VII. There were similarities from
the two data collection methods especially for achievement orientation, positive
outlook and learning and self-awareness.
Similar characteristics were identified by the CEOs and their staff using both
methods of data collection, except for balance, which was added during the interviews.

Discussion
The results from the interviews and questionnaire identified six characteristics that
successful CEOs need to possess. The six were:

Characteristic f Percentage of combined total

1. Humanistic approach 51 31.9

2. Achievement orientation 47 29.4
3. Positive outlook 38 23.8
4. Integrity 15 9.4 Table VI.
5. Inclusivity 6 3.8 The most important
6. Balance 2 1.3 characteristics necessary
7. Learning and self-awareness 1 0.6 for success: frequency
Total 160 100 table (n 54)

Figure 1.
Characteristics most
important to possess
comparison of CEOs and
staff (n 54)
JMD (1) humanistic approach;
26,3 (2) achievement orientation;
(3) a positive outlook;
(4) a sense of integrity;
(5) inclusiveness; and
222 (6) learning and self-awareness.

In addition, the questionnaire results indicated that the CEOs did effectively
demonstrate each of these characteristics. The interview results identified a seventh
characteristic balance. Three of the characteristics humanistic approach,
achievement orientation and positive outlook were ranked as more important than
the other four. There were no differences in the perceptions of the CEOs and their staff.
Both the CEOs and their staff members indicated that being humanistic was critical
to the CEOs success and was effectively demonstrated. This result is consistent with
previous findings (see Table I). The findings support the theoretical writings and
suggestions of authors advocating that individuals in leadership positions at all levels
adopt specific humanistic characteristics to ensure success (see Table I).
Having an achievement orientation was also identified by the CEOs and their staff
as critical for the CEOs success. The CEOs effectively demonstrated this
characteristic, which was identified as the second most important characteristic.
This finding is consistent with previous research into management effectiveness (see
Table I). The findings also support the theories and suggestions of writers who argue
its importance for CEO success (see Table I).
The third most important characteristic identified by the CEOs and their staff was
positive outlook. Both groups said this characteristic was critical for the CEOs success,
but not as important as having a humanistic approach and an achievement orientation.
The CEOs were also reported to effectively demonstrate being positive. This finding
supports the earlier work of Boone et al. (1996) and Waterman (1994) and leadership
writers claiming the importance of this characteristic for CEO success (see Table I).
Four other characteristics were identified as important for CEO success, but they
were not considered as important as the three characteristics already considered.
Having integrity was one such characteristic which the CEOs did demonstrate. Parry

Interview data (Q3) Questionnaire data (Part B)

f (percentage of total) Characteristic Characteristic Mean (SD)

51 (31.9) Humanistic approach

47 (29.4) Achievement orientation Achievement orientation 2.60 (0.24)
Integrity 2.50 (0.21)
38 (23.8) Positive outlook Positive outlook 2.30 (0.19)
Table VII. 15 (9.4) Integrity
Comparison of 6 (3.8) Inclusivity
characteristics important 2 (1.3) Balance
to possess questionnaire 1 (0.6) Learning and self-awareness Learning and self-awareness 2.18 (0.18)
and interview results Humanistic approach 2.13 (0.16)
(n 54) Inclusivity 2.09 (0.20)
and Proctor-Thompson (2002), Tait (1996) and Sarros and Butchatsky (1996) have Characteristics
previously identified this as an important characteristic, and many other writers have associated with
also argued for the importance of this trait (see Table I).
Considered of less importance for success, but observed in the CEOs, was their CEO success
willingness to be inclusive. Previous research (Kets de Vries and Florent-Treacy, 2002,
Barling et al., 2000) also identified this characteristic, and its importance has been
argued for by earlier writers (see Table I). 223
Similarly, learning and self-awareness, while not regarded as critical, were also
effectively demonstrated and have been identified as associated with success as a CEO
(see Table I). Of particular note, therefore, is the lack of importance placed on learning
and self-awareness in the opinions of the CEOs and the staff members involved in this
study. Such results are surprising given the research supporting the need to learn from
experience (see Table I).
The final characteristic identified by both the CEOs and their staff was having a
balanced approach, supporting the research of Kets de Vries and Florent-Treacy (2002).
It has been argued by Bennis (1996b) that CEOs need to balance their lives. This
characteristic was considered of little importance for CEO success, however.

Strengths of this study

The current study took a very different approach to most previous research by asking
CEOs and their staff to describe the characteristics the successful CEOs possessed
without reference to a pre-existing model. To use such models as the basis for the data
collection would have limited the characteristics to be investigated to those
characteristics identified in the model.
A significant difference between the present study and previous research was that
both the CEOs and their staff were involved in the study. Many of the earlier works
only asked for the opinions of either the CEO or their staff. This study found that the
perceptions of the CEOs and their staff were similar.
Another strength of the study was that both the CEOs and their staff were
specifically asked to identify the three most important characteristics of their CEOs.
This resulted in the elimination or reduction in importance of some of the
characteristics identified in earlier research, such as integrity, inclusivity, learning and
self-awareness and balanced approach.
One of the most interesting features that emerged from the two forms of data
collection was that each produced a similar range of characteristics with the exception
of balance. While the extra characteristic of balance was added from the interview data
analysis following content analysis, it did not have a high frequency of response and
was not considered important for success.

Limitations of the study

The sample size in this study deserves some comment. The CEO selection process was
difficult for two reasons. First, it was difficult to achieve a truly representative sample
(that is, public and private sector balanced approach, gender, age and industry type) in
a population of 1.2 million. Second, there were a number of rejections from well known,
successful and experienced CEOs in industry sectors not represented, such as mining,
health, education and telecommunications. The numbers of CEOs involved also
determined the number of staff reporting to them that could be involved.
JMD Future research and practice
26,3 The current findings have implications for future research and practice. The results of
this study suggest that future research aimed at understanding the link between CEOs
characteristics and their success is warranted. It would obviously be important to
obtain larger samples than in the present study so that the generalisability of the
research findings could be improved.
224 On a more practical note, the findings have implications for the selection and
development of CEOs. From a selection perspective, it may be that CEOs can be
assessed using a 360-degree feedback process based on the use of questionnaires to
measure the presence of each of the characteristics identified in the present study. The
presence of these characteristics would be an initial indication of a CEOs potential for
success. Such a process would provide organisations with a means for selecting their
top executives.
With respect to the development of potential CEOs, future researchers need to
determine which of the characteristics identified can be developed and which are
hard-wired. Once this information is available, then individuals who possess the
requisite inherent characteristics can be developed to possess any other characteristics
that they may not initially display.

Conclusion
Past research has taken a piecemeal approach in the identification of characteristics
that successful CEOs need to possess. Few researchers have adopted the broad
approach used in the present study. Furthermore, it is rare for a research methodology
to ask senior executives and their staff what they believe to be important for their
success and ask them to rank these characteristics. This study addressed these issues.
The present exploratory study interviewed 20 successful CEOs and 38 of their staff
in order to identify the characteristics the CEOs possessed. The dominant
characteristics were achievement orientation, humanistic approach and positive
outlook. While this is an exploratory study, it does allow for future research to be based
on these findings in an area where little empirical work has been undertaken.

References
Atwater, L., Waldman, D., Atwater, D. and Cartier, P. (2000), An upward feedback field
experiment: supervisors cynicism, reactions and commitment to subordinates, Personnel
Psychology, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 275-98.
Barling, J., Siater, F. and Kelloway, E. (2000), Transformational leadership and emotional
intelligence: an exploratory study, Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 157-61.
Bass, B. and Steidlmeier, P. (1999), Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership
behaviour, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 181-217.
Bass, B., Avolio, B. and Atwater, L. (1996), The transformational and transactional leadership
for men and women, Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 5-34.
Bennis, W. (1996a), Leaders as transformers, Executive Excellence, October, pp. 15-16.
Bennis, W. (1996b), The leadership crisis, Executive Excellence, July, pp. 3-4.
Bennis, W. (1997), Leaders of leaders, Executive Excellence, September, pp. 3-4.
Bennis, W. and OToole, J. (2000), Dont hire the wrong CEO, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78 Characteristics
No. 3, pp. 170-7.
Berg, B. (1998), Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences, Allyn and Bacon, Boston,
associated with
MA. CEO success
Boone, C., DeBrabander, B. and Van Witteloostuijn, A. (1996), CEO locus of control and small
firm performance: an integrative framework and empirical test, Journal of Management
Studies, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 667-99. 225
Boyd, N. and Taylor, R. (1998), A developmental approach to the examination of friendship in
leader-follower relationships, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 1-25.
Brower, H., Schoorman, F. and Tan, H. (2000), A model of relational leadership: the integration
of trust and leader-member exchange, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 227-50.
Bryman, A., Stephens, M. and Campo, C. (1996), The importance of context: qualitative research
and the study of leadership, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 353-70.
Conger, J. (1998), The necessary art of persuasion, Harvard Business Review, May/June,
pp. 84-95.
Conger, J. and Zin, K. (2000), Executive education in the twenty-first century, Management
Education, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 73-101.
Conger, J., Kanungo, R. and Menon, S. (2000), Charismatic leadership and follower effects,
Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 21, pp. 747-67.
Conger, J., Spreitzer, G. and Lawler, E. (1999), The Leaders Change Handbook, Jossey-Bass,
San Francisco, CA.
Fairholm, M. and Fairholm, G. (2000), Leadership amid constraints of trust, Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 102-9.
Farkas, C. and Wetaufer, S. (1996), The ways chief executives officers lead, Harvard Business
Review, May/June, pp. 110-22.
Fondas, N. and Wiersems, M. (1997), Changing the guard, Journal of Management Studies,
Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 561-84.
Goffee, R. and Jones, G. (2000), Why should anyone be led by you?, Harvard Business Review,
September/October, pp. 63-70.
Goleman, D. (1998), What makes a leader?, Harvard Business Review, November/December,
pp. 93-102.
Goleman, D. (2000), Leadership that gets results, Harvard Business Review, March/April,
pp. 78-90.
Grude, J., Bell, D., Dodd, G. and Parker, O. (2002), Leadership: the critical key to financial
success, Drake Business Review, Vol. 1, p. 1.
Havaleschka, F. (1999), Personality and leadership: a benchmark study of success and failure,
Leadership & Organisation Development Journal, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 114-32.
Howard, A. (1996), High-involvement leadership: moving form talk to action, Career
Development Journal, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 6-10.
Insch, G., Moore, J. and Murphy, L. (1997), Content analysis in leadership research: examples,
procedures, and suggestions for future use, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 1-25.
Kets de Vries, M. and Florent-Treacy, E. (2002), The global leadership life inventory:
development and psychometric properties of a 360-degree feedback instrument,
unpublished manuscript, INSEAD, Fontainebleau.
Kouzes, J. and Posner, B.Z. (1993), Hope precedes creative work, Executive Excellence,
September, pp. 8-9.
JMD Krishnan, V. (2001), Value system of transformational leaders, Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 126-32.
26,3
London, M. (1999), Principled leadership and business diplomacy: a practical, values-based
direction for management development, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 18
No. 2, pp. 170-92.
Lowe, K.B., Kroeck, K.G. and Sivasuramaniam, N. (1996), Effectiveness correlates of
226 transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic review of the MLQ
literature, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 385-425.
McGill, M. and Slocum, J. (1998), A little leadership, please?, Organisational Dynamics, Vol. 26
No. 3, pp. 39-49.
Messick, D. and Bazerman, M. (1996), Ethical leadership and the psychology of decision
making, Sloan Management Review, Vol. Winter, pp. 9-22.
Murphy, E. (1996), Leadership IQ: A Personal Development Process Based on a Scientific Study of
a New Generation of Leaders, Wiley, New York, NY.
Nunnally, J. (1967), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Parry, K. and Proctor-Thomson, S. (2002), Dialogue. CEOS with rose tinted specs, The New
Zealand Herald, 10 April.
Peak, M. (1997), Todays management flavor: plain vanilla, American Management
Association, July/August, pp. 26-9.
Rogers, R. (1995a), The psychological contract of trust Part 2, Executive Development, Vol. 8
No. 2, pp. 7-15.
Rogers, R. (1995b), The psychological contract of trust Part 1, Executive Development, Vol. 8
No. 1, pp. 15-19.
Ruderman, M. and Ohlott, P. (2000), Putting some life into your leadership, Leadership in
Action, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 6-10.
Ruderman, M., Hannum, K., Lesile, J. and Steed, J. (2001), Making the connection: leadership
skills and emotional intelligence, Leadership in Action, Vol. 21 No. 5.
Russell, C.J. (2001a), A longitudinal study of top level executive performance, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 86 No. 4, pp. 560-73.
Russell, R. (2001b), The role of values in servant leadership, Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 76-83.
Russell, R. and Stone, A. (2002), A review of servant leadership attributes: developing a practical
model, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 145-57.
Sarros, J. and Butchatsky, O. (1996), Leadership: Australias top CEOs: Finding out what Makes
Them Best, Harper Collins Australia, Pymble.
Scarnati, J. (1999), Beyond technical competence: the art of leadership, Career Development
Journal, Vol. 4 No. 6, pp. 325-35.
Simons, T. (1999), Behavioural integrity as a critical ingredient for transformational leadership,
Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 89-105.
Streiner, D. (2003), Starting at the beginning: an introduction to coefficient alpha and internal
consistency, Journal of Personality Assessment, Vol. 80 No. 1, pp. 99-103.
Tait, R. (1996), The attributes of leadership, Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 27-31.
Waldman, D. and Yammarino, F. (1999), CEO charismatic leadership: levels-of-management
and levels-of-analysis effects, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 266-85.
Waldman, D., Ramirez, G., House, R. and Puranam, P. (2001), Does leadership matter? CEO Characteristics
leadership attributes and profitability under conditions of perceived environmental
uncertainty, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 134-43. associated with
Waterman, R. (1994), Frontiers of Excellence: The Journey Towards Success, Allen and Unwin CEO success
Australia, St Leonards.
Wood, J. (2004), Qualities of successful CEO, unpublished doctoral manuscript, University of
South Australia, Adelaide. 227
Wood, J. and Vilkinas, T. (2004), Characteristics of chief executive officers, views of their staff,
Journal of Management Development, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 469-78.
Wood, J. and Vilkinas, T. (2005), Characteristics associated with success: CEOs perspectives,
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 186-96.

Further reading
Argyris, C. (1995), Action science and organizational learning, Journal of Managerial
Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 20-6.
Argyris, C. (1995), Communication that blocks learning, World Executives Digest, August,
pp. 44-6.
Bennis, W. (2003), Substance over style, CIO Insight, Vol. 23, pp. 21-3.
Judge, T. and Bono, J. (2001), Relationship of core self-evaluations traits self-esteem,
generalised self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability with job satisfaction
and job performance: a meta analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86 No. 1,
pp. 80-92.
Judge, T., Cable, D., Boudreau, J. and Bretz, R. (1995), An empirical investigation of the
predictors of executive career success, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 485-519.
Kets de Vries, M. (1999), Managing puzzling personalities: navigating between live volcanoes
and dead fish, European Management Journal, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 8-19.
Vilkinas, T. and Cartan, G. (2001), The behavioural control room for managers: the integrator
role, Leadership and Organisation Development Journal, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 175-85.

Corresponding author
Tricia Vilkinas can be contacted at: Tricia.Vilkinas@ unisa.edu.au

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints