Stanford psychiatrist says personality and chance limit what leadership training can achieve

Doctor Elias Abujade, a clinical professor in the department of psychiatry at Stanford University and director of the impulse control disorders clinic, told a Federal Judicial Center podcast that organizations have overestimated the ability of training and coaching to create leaders.

"We have turned it into a $50,000,000,000 industrial complex," Abujade said, criticizing what he called the commercialization of leadership development and saying it has moved the field away from psychology, personality and character.

Abujade said scientific evidence supports the importance of traits such as emotional intelligence and charisma to leadership emergence and success, but he said those traits are often “sticky” and not easily produced by short courses, acronyms or boot camps. He argued that many coaching programs attempt to teach deep psychological traits they are not equipped to change.

"There’s nothing wrong with coaching to improve nonverbal cues or posture," Abujade said, but added that problems arise when coaching is treated as psychotherapy without the necessary psychological training. He recommended skepticism toward programs that promise predictable leadership outcomes.

Abujade also emphasized the role of chance in who becomes a leader. He noted that serendipity — being in the right place at the right time — has propelled figures such as Winston Churchill into leadership, and that current “recipe” approaches to leadership underplay that element.

The podcast included discussion of tools and tests commonly used to screen for leadership potential. Abujade described the leadership potential indicator and similar instruments as vulnerable to coaching and gaming; he urged organizations to allow people to pursue roles aligned with their personalities rather than pressuring all employees into leadership tracks.

He warned about the interaction of technology and personality: social media, he said, can amplify narcissistic traits and make attention-seeking behavior more rewarding, which in turn can favor applicants with those traits for leadership roles. "One personality trait ... that unfortunately is very common among leaders is narcissism," Abujade said, noting research that narcissistic applicants are more likely to apply for and win leadership positions.

Abujade singled out the judiciary as a context where choosing the wrong leader can have magnified consequences. He said the judicial branch should be particularly attentive to psychological fit when rewarding or selecting leaders.

The interview covered specific, named tools Abujade finds useful or worth scrutinizing (the FIAO framework and the "wedge of awareness" were mentioned) and cited research findings referenced by the host: a coaching-intervention study that the host said reported improvements of roughly 20–30% in certain leadership competencies.

Abujade said organizations should reduce reliance on one-size-fits-all leadership programs, make more room for serendipity, and avoid pressuring staff into leadership roles that do not match their personalities. He recommended restoring emphasis on liberal-arts disciplines that cultivate critical thinking and creativity as part of long-term leadership development.

On the podcast, guest host Jane McCracken, deputy chief of the Court Services Office at the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, asked about lessons for public-sector and judicial leaders; Abujade replied that many of the psychological dynamics at play in business also affect nonprofit, academic and government sectors.

He closed by pointing listeners to his book, A Leader’s Destiny: Why Psychology, Personality and Character Make All the Difference, and other resources he has compiled.

The episode was produced by the Federal Judicial Center; production and distribution details were provided at the episode’s close.