16th Mar 2010

Are leaders born or made?

  • Evidence please for both


  • Today I ran across a great quote about leadership. This is attributed to the great French diplomat Talleyrand: "I am more afraid of an army of 100 sheep led by a lion than an army of 100 lions led by a sheep."


  • If leaders are selected based on 'blood line' (as in British Royalty), then the leaders are obviously 'born'. If the leaders are selected on any basis other than family, they are obviously 'made'. The real question is whether 'made' leaders tend to be 'made' more often because of inherited attributes, which gets us into the thorny issues of eugenics and racial worth, because if intelligence and beauty and wisdom or other socially-desirable 'leadership qualities' are highly heritable, then they can be selected for and tend to predominate in certain genetically-related subpopulations. But even without getting into those more controversial areas, yes, 'made' leaders have genetic characteristics which enhance the liklihood of them becoming leaders. For example, all U.S. presidents are male, most are taller than average, and most relatively attractive. If you were born a short ugly girl, let's face it, you are unlikely to become president, even in America where leaders are supposedly 'made', not 'born'.


  • Granted that a leader neeeds to have a minimum level of intelligence and good health, but people who argued that leaders are born ignore the fact that what make us leaders is because of the choices we have made along the way. Many individuals who are gifted (physically) are not leaders because they often choose the paths of least resistence and therefore lack the self discipline, self esteem, self confidence and self respect to be considered real leaders. Leaders are born and made. Why this argument about either or ? Why black and white thinking?


  • What a meaty question! I am reminded of one of my favorite quotes from Shakespeare: "Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them." As you requested, I've gathered material discussing both viewpoints. ============================ LEADERS ARE BORN, NOT MADE ============================ "We might not like it, but leaders are born and not made. To lead, you need the following traits: * a spirit of adventure - the urge to explore, break new ground, challenge the status quo, stand up for what you believe, risk rejection, rebel against authority, innovate. * an ability to influence - by example, logical argument, enthusiasm, persistence or painting a visionary picture. * an appropriate level of intelligence. * You can modify your style of influencing a bit, but not totally. A quietly persuasive leader will have difficulty ever being charismatic - some in-born traits here. * But it's hard to shift your spirit of adventure very much if you are strongly cautious, conservative or motivated to be accepted by others rather than risk rejection. * We are either born with a strong rebellious streak or acquire it early in life. * The same is true of intelligence. *Earlier theories of leadership rejected the idea that leaders are born because they identified leadership with ability to influence, noting rightly that there are widely differing styles of influence and that people can improve their influencing skills. But the critical leadership trait is the spirit of adventure - a bit like creativity, you might have it in small, rather than large, doses, but you either have it or you don't." LeadersDirect http://www.leadersdirect.com/bornlead.html "Leaders are born, not made. You either have it or you don't. The leadership gene should be mapped somewhere in the genome so we can develop a simple blood test early on and save tons of money and tons of anguish on those that try to lead, but fail miserably at it... Critical pieces of leadership are really core parts of your personality. You either have charisma or you don't. You were born with a love for hard work or you are lazy. You have self-confidence oozing from your pores or you have self-loathing. You can take intense scrutiny, divorcing attacks and criticism of your work from personal attacks, or you are defensive and easily upset. You are intuitive, with tons of common sense, or you are impatient and impulsive. And most importantly, you are honest with yourself and can see where your faults lie." BC Technology http://www.bctechnology.com/statics/bh-may2104.html "The assumption is often made that those who lead, do so naturally out of an inborn set of attributes which hardly leave a choice. Leaders are 'born,' not 'made.' A parallel with the musical talent is often drawn - some people very early are known to be able to sing a tune, learn to play an instrument, or even compose original music with apparently very little effort. That leadership is a gift, like music, may be obvious, but perhaps the analogy should be pressed a little further. When it is acknowledged that a young person is gifted with musical talent, they are encouraged, sometimes even forced to submit to training so that the gift may be developed for the benefit of all who will listen. At first, only parents and grand-parents delight to hear the fumbling, discordant attempts of the child to play the instrument. However, as skill develops, the audience broadens. Much the same should be applied to the development of leadership. The inborn talent is there, but effectiveness in leading waits for the development of needed skill... 'Born to Lead' is a correct assessment, let's just make sure the new-born are well nourished." Webedelic http://www.webedelic.com/church/bornlead.htm "One of the first ways of conceiving of leadership was the idea that it was an inborn ability-- and all you had to do was to look at Royal families and other forms of authority lineage in various societies and see how authority was passed down. Supporting these assertions at the time were the beliefs that many leaders, especially monarchs, were deified (god-like). Even Aristotle suggested that 'some men are born to lead, and others to be led.' European monarchies passed on their authority and leadership by this means, often involving intermarriage among an elite ruling class... There were even some early scientific efforts at exploring whether the great person was justified. Galton's 1869 study of heritary backgrounds of great men showed mixed results. Wood's 1913 study of leaders in 14 nations over 5-10 centuries found that the quality of the reign was related to the monarch's abilities. With growing interest in Darwinian theory, Wiggam (1936) proposed the 'survival of the fittest' and intermarriage of 'brighter' (educated) people among the upper classes produced better leaders. The problem with the great person approach was that not all inherited leaders were capable. In other cases, their leadership was due to charisma or halo effect, not real skill. But while such people held those positions of authority, were they really 'good' or effective leaders? Perhaps it wasn't just being born into such a position, but it was the traits one possessed. Thus, the Great Person theory was modified into the Trait theory of leadership-- traits being certain inborn characteristics that ensured leader potential." College of St. Scholastica http://www.css.edu/users/dswenson/web/LEAD/GreatTrait.html "In 1910 the first research on leadership was conducted which gave rise to the notion that certain individuals have been born with traits to make them leaders, natural born leaders, and others were not born with those traits. Much research was conducted after 1910 to determine the validity of this idea. Currently, Max Weber has identified Charismatic Leadership as a new and emerging theory. Charisma is defined by Websters Dictionary as someone that has 'personal magnetism or charge.' Weber essentially stated that those individuals with charm and that are able to attract others to them are leaders. Former President Bill Clinton was a spokesperson for the Charismatic Leadership theory, people would be drawn to his voice and actions at all time and he used his charm to attract supporters." Norris University Center / Northwestern University http://www.norris.northwestern.edu/csi_wildcat.php ============================ LEADERS ARE MADE, NOT BORN ============================ "Anyone-absolutely anyone-can be an effective leader. When people generate a compelling challenge for themselves and others-one that points toward a future not previously considered possible-a new kind of leadership becomes achievable. Rather than being a product of the right characteristics, leadership becomes a product of being passionately committed to fulfilling that challenge and that future.... When the opportunity to make a difference is sufficiently compelling, people willingly risk stepping forward as a leader. Whether mundane or profound, everyone can recall a similar instance. Leadership, therefore, might be ordinary people with extraordinary commitments who are willing to relentlessly take the necessary actions to deliver. When people believe passionately in what they are doing, and why they are doing it, they become unstoppable. JPT Online: April 2004 http://www.spe.org/spe/jpt/jsp/jptmonthlysection/0,2440,1104_11038_2354946_2367995,00.html "Great leaders exhibit nine different kinds of behaviors that enable them to bring out the best in their people. Some of the nine behaviors of leadership listed below involve building participatory teams, some involve using situational management strategies, while others enhance personal resources. Listed separately, the nine behaviors include: Developing people. Being able to influence others. Encouraging teamwork. Empowering people. Using multiple options thinking. Taking intelligent risks. Being passionate about work. Having a strong clear vision. Stretching one's personal creativity. While many people think leaders are unique, even born to that state of excellence, I have found just the opposite. With proper experiential training, it is possible for people to learn these leadership behaviors. In other words, leaders can be developed." TrainingForum http://www.trainingforum.com/020597rb.html "There are no 'born' leaders, however we are all born with unique strengths that help us in our leadership journeys - they are within us, and with most people, they stay within. The notion that leaders are born, and others therefore will never be leaders, is illogical, depressing and seriously limiting to every human being. The idea suggests that the moment babies are born they either have the genetics to be a leader, or they do not. This argument would be fine if the definition of leadership, and leaders, had been constant for the past 50 years, but it is not. Indeed, more has been discovered about leadership and human behaviour in the last 20 years than in the previous 1,000. Furthermore, the 'born' argument does not take into account the effect that experience and learning has on our personalities, behaviours and on our inner selves. Leadership is a skill and a habit. Like most skills and habits, one that improves with practice. As we become more skilled - the habit takes over - we worry less about the mechanics of doing it and focus more on the outcomes to be achieved. And so it is with personality, much of personality is a set of responses that have become habits. Often these were developed with little forethought or awareness in school or at home. Presented with a challenge we try a response, if it works we remember it and use it again. If it works often enough, we use it without too much thought and it becomes a habit. Take any set of habits, mix and stir, and we create our own unique approach to life. But like any habit, we can choose to change." Silicon.com http://comment.silicon.com/0,39024711,11034471,00.htm "Fran oise Morissette and fellow consultant Amal Henein have interviewed 200 leaders from across Canada: executives, entrepreneurs, politicians, civil servants, fundraisers, activists, artists, journalists, athletes, coaches... One of the most interesting finding is that only one-third of interviewees feel they were 'born to lead' and have an innate interest or ability in leadership. By contrast, two-thirds claim that leadership was 'thrust upon them'... This breakdown has profound implications on how we view leadership and its development. It certainly flies in the face of the old adage that 'leaders are born, not made.' Instead of focusing on how to identify 'born' leaders -- which is easy enough to do -- the question becomes: how do we create conditions so that more people will take on leadership roles? If the majority of people do not initially see themselves as leaders, then development is key: 'Nurture' primes over 'Nature'. Moreover, even the innate leaders stress the importance of development, which enables them to grow in skill and confidence and enhances their ability to adapt to a variety of situations. Both the 'accidental' and the 'born' leaders agree that leadership development is essentially an organic process. Although a certain amount of planning and goal setting exists, being alert to opportunities and seizing them is paramount because stretching out of one?s comfort zone promotes growth like nothing else." Industrial Relations Centre http://www.industrialrelationscentre.com/infobank/articles/ "For years, academics have debated whether leaders are born or made, whether a person who lacks charisma can become a leader, and what makes leaders fail... Generally, researchers have found that you can't explain leadership by way of intelligence, birth order, family wealth or stability, level of education, ethnicity, race, or gender. From one leader to the next, there's enormous variance in every one of those factors. The authors' research led to a new and telling discovery: that every leader, regardless of age, had undergone at least one intense, transformational experience--what the authors call a 'crucible.' These events can either make you or break you. For emerging leaders, they do more making than breaking, providing key lessons to help a person move ahead confidently... If a crucible helps a person to become a leader, there are four essential qualities that allow someone to remain one, according to the authors. They are: an 'adaptive capacity' that lets people not only survive inevitable setbacks, heartbreaks, and difficulties but also learn from them; an ability to engage others through shared meaning or a common vision; a distinctive and compelling voice that communicates one's conviction and desire to do the right thing; and a sense of integrity that allows a leader to distinguish between good and evil." Business Week: February 17, 2003 http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_07/b3820038_mz005.htm If you have the time to investigate a book on the subject of leadership, you may be interested in "The Leadership Challenge," by James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner: "In the 1980s and again in the '90s, James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner published The Leadership Challenge to address issues they uncovered in research on ordinary people achieving 'individual leadership standards of excellence.' The keys they identified--model the way, inspire a shared vision, challenge the process, enable others to act, encourage the heart--have now been reexamined in the context of the post-millennium world and updated in a third edition.... After explaining their concept and methodology, the authors detail the five essentials noted above in a pair of chapters apiece that bring clarity to their theories with case studies and recommended actions. The specificity of each (motivating through 'the meaningfulness of the challenge, not the material rewards of success,' for example, and being able to 'accept the mistakes that result from experimentation') is enhanced by advice on sustaining the commitment and making leadership skills accessible to all." Amazon: "The Leadership Challenge" http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0787968331 ====================================================================== My Google search strategy: Google Web Search: leadership study OR research OR theory ://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=leadership+study+OR+research+OR+theory Google Web Search: "born to lead" OR "leaders are born" OR "leaders are made" ://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22born+to+lead%22+OR+%22leaders+are+born%22+OR+%22leaders+are+made%22 ====================================================================== I'd like to close with an anecdote that has stayed with me for many years. In the early 1970s I attended a leadership seminar in which the matter of whether leaders are born or made was debated endlessly. One speaker, an elderly woman who was a retired Professor of Business Administration, gave a passionate defense of the belief that leadership is largely a matter of training and the learning of behavioral patterns. A young, rather hot-headed businessman challenged this theory, ending his oration with the old proverb "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear." The elderly professor paused for a moment and said softly "No, but you might be able to make a stunning pigskin wallet!" I hope this is helpful! Please request clarification if needed. Best regards, pinkfreud







  • #If you have any other info about this subject , Please add it free.#
    Your name:
    E-mail:
    Telphone:

    Your comments:


    If you have any other info about Are leaders born or made? , Please add it free.

    Posted by wktd under toyotataa.com |


    RSS