I don't understand where the study he sites leads to the conclusion that good corporate leaders should be dull. He mentions: "The traits that correlated most po

I don't understand where the study he sites leads to the conclusion that good corporate leaders should be dull. He mentions: "The traits that correlated most powerfully with success were attention to detail, persistence, efficiency, analytic thoroughness and the ability to work long hours." That doesn't mean someone is dull. They could be funny, engaging and thoughtful and still be detail-oriented and hard working. Brooks is just playing off of stereotypes to reach his conclusion.