Leaders: Born or Made?
The issue of birth or making of leadership remains to be the most frequently asked question within the field of leadership. Despite the frequency of asking of asking the questions, the most out coming answer are the making of leadership. Several research studies conducted so far reveal that leadership is one-third born while the other two-thirds come from the making perspective. For example, the task of leading an organization, a country, military organization and doing the same in an effective manner is indeed very complex in nature. In this regard, to have an expectation of an individual being born will all the required tools of leadership may not, in fact, be sensible on the knowledge of the social sets and processes complexities altogether.
In his article Leadership effectiveness, leadership style and employee readiness, Chen & Silverthorne, (2005) note that the fact majority of leadership trends revolving on the making being a good news for the participants indeed signifies that there is a possibility in the development of leadership. However, there is still in existence of some raw facts or the cases of inborn characteristics of leadership from people that in his case put them in a position of becoming leaders. The only question that lies unanswered here then is what exactly constitutes the qualities of leadership. On the other hand, Chen & Silverthorne, (2005) identify that it is possible to explain soft skills but not for the case of their implantation. For example, the extent by which and individual may share his or her vision entails a lot of complexities when taken into comparison with a presentation involving PowerPoint and also the instances of crisp words placed on a bunch of 4×6 cards. In this regard, it then is then agreeable that it is much easy to learn the aspect of leadership by making use of basic skills, though, for the cases of awful leadership, it becomes complex in teaching them. In some situations, some individuals may perform well in the lessons, but some of them may find themselves not posting good results altogether.
According to Singh, (2004) in his research study on Are leaders born or are they made? The case of Alexander the Great, he concurs that there is indeed consistency in the extra versions that have the relationship with the manner of accessing to positions in leadership and also the effectiveness of it. On top of this, he also adds that there exists part of evidence agreeing on the aspect of boldness, assertiveness or even the aspect of risk admission as possible advantageous qualities associated with those aspiring to be leaders. At the same time, leaders themselves have the challenge of being smart in the analysis of certain situations plus also deciding on what course of actions to take all together. In this regard, the aspect of intelligence has then an association with leadership but on some occasions not at its fullness on IQ. However, for the case of social intelligence such as knowledge of the social circumstances and processes, all remain to be great components of leadership about the intelligence part altogether. Singh (2004) also does not forget to mention the aspect of empathy or the aspect of familiarity with followers that according to him remains as well to be advantageous to leaders as much as much of it is got acquired from learning the process. For instance, it becomes the responsibility of a leader in being familiar with his or her followers, know their needs, the time they need them and also what bars the followers from accessing their needs.
Pinnington, (2011) in his study on Leadership development: Applying the same leadership theories and development practices to different contexts, reiterates that leadership comes from birth while not from the making. In this regard he mentions the Great Man Theory and Trait theories in which stresses that both these theories had a common belief that all people tend to inherit some qualities and traits that them in a position of being good leaders. However, he proceeds to caution that leaders were failing or unable in entering the world with superior endowments is indeed an implication of the same people who penetrate the same world with same capabilities. That said Pinnington, (2011) identifies some cases of inborn characteristics responsible for predisposing people into emerging as leaders. In this case, he mentions the notable cases of variations between the aspect of learning a particular skill and also the mastery the other in a similar manner to the way other people are given birth with instances of amazing gifts or football, music or talents in athletics. Based on this perspective, these people have the opportunity of excelling in these fields though for those persons who may wish to harness other talents not born with them may find themselves struggling in fulfilling them. In another consideration,Pinnington, (2011) notes that one may be a leader, but the same person may be exercising his or her leadership where he or she does not have talents in or at all together. In this regard, the discussions concerned with leadership need to have the inclusion of the location and also the environment of exercising the leadership. The instance here includes the major performers whether born or made in upcoming organizations such as industries, societal setups, a country or the entire world. In any case, where the fear of assuming the leadership task precedes the willingness in assuming the responsibilities, then, in this case, an individual becomes a follower. However, it is not possible to each and everyone to become a leader the same way it also not possible for every person to become an actor. For example, some of these persons will lack the aspect with them while the other lots will have the latent capability and as the result being possible to teach on matters concerning leadership thus being able to lead in the future. In this case, it is very clear that all books classroom teachings and elements of training cannot in any way lead into a follower emerging into becoming a good leader.
Naturally born leaders according to Olivares, (2011), in his studies on The formative capacity of momentous events and leadership development finds that leaders are indeed not the same with the artificial leaders. In this case, he adds that all cases of remarkable leaders indeed have also remarkable histories associated with them and in this manner proceed to add that these people were just but leaders from the beginning of their journey. What remains to be questionable based on this perspective is then if leadership is through birth then why other people should study what constitutes the aspect of leadership and management. For this reason, Olivares (2011) stresses that birth remains to be, but just a natural process and consequently does not need to associate itself with the aspect of leadership. Meanwhile, Olivares (2011) supports the fact that the aspect of leadership being an art while not a science as others may put it. The reason is that it constitutes various traits that are refined and also in perfection based on time about education, training and also experience. Added to the same, there exists another scenario of being found in the desired place and also at the best suited time. For instance, one may be a leader, but it is also of essence or important to take into consideration of whether the same person is in the position where his or talents falls so that he or she can fulfill the leadership task or obligations before him or her. In one way or the other, Olivares (2011) insists that one needs formal training for him or her to a leader in a structured form of environment. The reason behind this because various persons find it easy in learning the aspect of management very well as the plus also the way to initiate a business, project management because the aspect of good management relies on rules that were also requiring learning and the also the art of mastery altogether.
Hotho & Dowling, (2010) in their study onRevisiting leadership development: the participant perspective, both support the notion that leadership emerges from the making of a person while not from birth. In this regard, they support this fact about Behavioral Theories that have a belief that it is possible for an individual to become a leader based on the processes such as teaching, learning and also instances of observation. The reason here is because the aspect of leadership remains all the time to be a constituent of skills that are only possible to learn based on training, perceptions, practice and also experience developed as time progresses. Also, being that the aspect of leadership remaining to be a lifetime activity, Hotho & Dowling, (2010) adds that very good leaders will always be at the frontline in seeking for development opportunities that stand a chance in enabling them to acquire new skills. A good example here is the military case that always embraces this doctrine as seen in most of their programs concerned training on leadership. However, that then needs clarification is then whether enrollment in a program concerned with management and leadership will indeed lead to an individual being a leader after finishing the program. The same also applies to whether it is possible to teach the elements of charisma, integrity, influence and the capability to develop inspiration. Not forgetting, it is also worth to evaluate on whether awarding an individual certificate and some letters will indeed lead to him or her being a leader. Meanwhile, Hotho & Dowling, (2010), also wonders whether the introverts, those individuals with fair rates of intelligence or even the case of those persons who lack empathy have a chance of becoming good leaders. Indeed, it is not possible as Olivares concludes in his review. The reason is that majority of the world leaders as at present are because of making while not by birth.
Chen, J. & Silverthorne, C. (2005). Leadership effectiveness, leadership style and employee readiness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 26(4), 280-288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437730510600652
Hotho, S. & Dowling, M. (2010). Revisiting leadership development: the participant perspective. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31(7), 609-629. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437731011079655
Olivares, O. (2011). The formative capacity of momentous events and leadership development. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(8), 837-853. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437731111183766
Pinnington, A. (2011). Leadership development: Applying the same leadership theories and
development practices to different contexts?. Leadership, 7(3), 335-365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1742715011407388
Singh, B. (2004). Are leaders born or are they made? The case of Alexander the was Great. Aust
NZ J Psychiatry, 38(11-12), 981-982. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/j.1440-1614.2004.01492.x