27 leaders born or made

“Are Leaders Born?
P R E S E N T S
or
Are They Made?”

®
We asked the question:
“Are Leaders Born? Or Are They Made? Or Both”
Many think that "Leaders" are simply born with the DNA to lead.
Many others think that "Leadership" can be learned and grown with
proper education and experience.
Some others think that it is a combination of the two that breeds the
greatest leaders... What is your take?

“Are Leaders Born? Or Are They Made? Or Both?”
G. Clarke wrote:
We are, for the most part born the
same. Carbon based organisms.
Ten fingers. Ten toes. Excluding
birth defects and trauma, we have
the same faculties to exploit.
So, I am a believer that it has to do
in large part with environmental
factors that affect the individual.
M. Wierzgac wrote:
Leaders are made.
Leaders become leaders in 1 of 3 ways:
1 - a crisis or event pushes them into leadership
2 - their personality leads them into it
3 - they choose to be a leader.
If they choose to become a leader, they also
choose the depth of their training (some deep,
some shallow).

G. Krstulovic wrote:
They are born to be made.
Let me clarify it this way – Leadership is a set of skills that can be learned by
practice over time. This is true of literally any skill. However, you need some
in-born talent or “pre-determination” to master the skill. There is a
significant difference between “learning the skill” and mastering one.
I love basketball, but no matter how hard I practice, I won’t be able to play it
like Michael Jordan. I hope you see where I am coming from.

O. Ballesta wrote:
Leadership is a quality that can be improved by training and experience.
In short, passion, communicational abilities, innovative mindset, abilities to
negotiate, humility, courage, self-determination and empowerment are a mix
of personality traits with learned skills that being most of them innate and
inherent to the emotional profile and personality of an individual can be
perfectly enhanced, expanded and improved by proper training, successive
and diverse experience in the workplace, mentoring and behavioural
coaching.

S. Chapple wrote:
The old 'nature' versus 'nurture' question!
I am an advocate that leadership can be developed over
time. It is essentially about understanding other people
and, more importantly, understanding yourself.
Of course, there will always be those individuals who have a
natural talent for leadership far above the majority!

D. Prasad wrote: To me it's neither; they are self made with will and vision
S. Hazra wrote:
Everyone comes into this world by virtue of birth and so do the Leaders!!
Leadership is a skill and like any other skill can be acquired over a period of time by
practicing it. Some people are talented and are born with good leadership qualities. But
like any other 'skill,' one has to hone it over a period of periods and has to remain
dynamic. Not all of the leaders are born with the same, it is through your upbringing
and training of your mind, perseverance, ability & aptitude to learn can only make a
good leader. There are certain traits but as a Leadership has Application dimension,
hence, simply knowing the traits will not make a good leader.

A. Chaplin wrote:
Leadership is learned.
As a certified facilitator of The Leadership Challenge by Jim Kouzes & Barry Posner, I cite their
findings based on more than 25 years of research:
"It's nonsense to assume that leadership is genetic. There's no hard evidence to support that
assumption... The truth is that leadership is an observable set of skills and abilities...and any skill
can be strengthened, honed, and enhanced if we have the motivation and desire, the practice and
feedback, the role models and coaching, and the support and recognition."
For more information, I highly recommend adding Jim & Barry's fourth edition of The Leadership
Challenge to your leadership library. Live, learn, and lead!

J.M. Koenig wrote:
I was born.
J.M. Koenig later wrote:
I'm curious about something. How do coaches and
trainers actually make money. I'm mean in real life.
Money to pay bills etc.
Do people actually pay you money to tell them how
to live and is that money enough to survive on? I
just find the whole profession puzzling and it seems
that almost everyone on this site is either a coach or
a recruiter.

K. LaVine wrote:
In order to answer this question an even more basic one must be asked first (I
believe); What is a Leader?
By my definition a true leader is one who encourages and ALLOWS those they lead to
be the best they can be and in doing so facilitates advancement in a positive direction.
By this definition leaders may be found in all areas of our lives (not just in the board
rooms of high powered companies, in the military, or in the political arena). We are
all capable of leading (Born) to the degree that we are willing to learn (Made) to bring
people together and allow each individuals strengths to contribute to a common goal.

J.S. Webster wrote:
I think that anyone can
learn leadership skills, but
the ability to inspire is what
separates a person with
'leadership training' and a
person who is a 'leader.'
B. Sanders wrote:
There are those who are born
and those who are taken out
by there own troops.

G. Bernier wrote:
That question is right up there with the nature or nurture debate over personality. As some the answers that have posted
indicate there has been a great deal of research on the subject, books have been written, and many people make a lot of
money selling 'leadership training'.
Personally (and I've been around quite a while) I believe leadership is like athletic ability. Nearly anyone can learn the
skills necessary to play a sport reasonably well. Depending on how much effort and time they are willing to devote to
learning the tools of the trade will directly affect their level of expertise. However, regardless of effort there will always be
very few Michael Jordan's or Tiger Woods'.
The mechanics of leadership can be effectively learned. The vision and passion that makes really great leaders comes
from somewhere else. (I don't believe the somewhere else is totally genetic - it has to do with personality and that is a
complex combination of factors.)

R. Bowker wrote:
Many tend to agree that true leadership qualities are threaded into our DNA and it just takes proper
training/events for those qualities to come out. After spending 11 years in the Navy, I have seen many
good and many bad leaders. I, myself never thought I could be a leader early in my career until I was
“thrown” into a leadership role. Looking back on it, I feel that I always had those qualities in me, but
never knew they were there until I had no choice but to either lead or give up. Now, I can also say that I
have seen other individuals faced with the same challenge fail. I, for one, do believe that there are
leaders and then there are followers. For any society, military, or organization to thrive, it must have
both. All the training, education, books, and classes cannot turn a follower into a leader. You may make
the follower more educated in leadership methodologies, but that person will never be able to put use it
to the full potential. Henry Kissinger said, “If you do not know where you are going, every road will get
you nowhere." A leader knows where they are going and it is hard wired into their thinking. A follower
only knows how to get somewhere by reading a map or following someone else.

S.M. Diamond wrote:
Perhaps you should
specify if you want a
serious answer, or a
humorous one - both can
apply - equally . . . :-)
I. Babelli wrote:
Leaders are made, by someone who gives them a chance.
Almost every leader has had a person who entrusted him/her with an
opportunity that was bigger than his/her ability/skill set/knowledge/etc
at the time of the opportunity, so s/he took it upon him/her-self to learn
and advance and become a leader.
I cannot, for the life of me, come up with an example to counter the
above argument except in the jungle (or similar sittings) where the
dominant male fights his way up to leadership.

R. Iyer wrote:
I presume you are asking in the context of a business organisation.
Some take to leadership naturally, by learning and observing.
Others can learn / or be taught this skill, if they wish to!
In either case, the will to lead must come from within.

O. Lawrence wrote:
The truly gifted leaders are born with certain supporting traits like patience,
perseverance, creative thoughtfulness and ability to change. They have the
required traits more than the ordinary or average. They become honed
through adversity which everyone encounters and rather than simply
surviving, they are thriving.
Most leaders are born without those qualities and are simply trained to
behave as leaders and receive respect from the leadership appointed status.
One can easily spot them since they are the gatekeepers surrounded by
mediocrity who prevent the talent to rise.

T. Modeste wrote:
The problem with great leaders is that they are too few and far between. So waiting
around or searching for a great leader can soon run afoul of the law of diminishing
returns. Because, in the meantime, we’ve got an organization to run and simply
cannot afford to wait around until the next great leader deigns to walk through the
door. Besides, we probably couldn’t afford him/her and he/she would probably have
better things in mind than fooling around with our organization.
Luckily for us, in our everyday work, we can get along very well without great
leadership. And we'd be highly inefficient if we waited around for a great leader every
time we needed to fill a leadership slot.
Therefore, what we do is that we take the people we have and work with them to
make them into the kind of leaders we need to get the job done. Experience shows
that as a rule, such leaders do a good enough job at the level needed. In fact, some of
them even turn out to be superb leaders.

A. Bose wrote:
Leaders are born.
Not everyone can be a Leader. I would rather say Leaders are synonymous to
"Great Communicators who have an aggressive attitude to win". Whether you
motivate people, lead a team, or possess great negotiation skills, you should
be a good communicator first.
A leader should command and vision for their team, or organisation, and
most importantly, the people in his team. They give a strategic direction to the
people of his team and set goals with an objective to achieve with optimum
utilization of resources. The best part about the leaders are they are able to
motivate their team and they take the team along with them. They just don't
lead a team but also teach them how to lead and make them responsible.

K. Rao wrote:
I think i depends on your perspective - Leadership as a
science or as an art..
Leadership is like, say... Painting. You can go to a painting
school and learn the techniques; though one in a million is da
Vinci or Michelangelo. One in a million is a Jack Welch or a
Lee Iacocca!
In my opinion, leadership is an inherent birth trait that, at
most, can be influenced by training in situations faced, but
not created by them.

N. Vassudhev wrote:
That leaders are born is Maya
believed to be true by
Politicians.
It's the circumstances that affect
the individual, upbringing,
education and the developed
attitude that makes a Leader.
C. Braverman wrote:
Leaders have found their place.
Whether it is a physical place
or an idea, they bring their
passion and motivation to that
place.
Many have just not found their
passion yet.

D. Burns wrote:
Born and Made...but most importantly, leaders need to
give birth to themselves at some point in their journey.
Parents give you life, but you have to make a decision to
give meaning and life to your life.

A. Lockhart wrote:
I believe that Leaders are born of the situations that they are thrust in. Those
that step up and do the things that are necessary to be done because it is the
right thing to do. They do this, not because they have to, but because no one
else can or will. I am not talking about in an everyday situation, I am talking
about when adversity comes and people who should be leading you are off
hiding some where under a desk.
'Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust
upon them.' -Shakespeare”

T. Cunniff wrote:
In my experience, the answer is both and -- more often than should be for anyone's good -- neither.
Some "leaders" in business are more like Chauncey Gardener than George Washington. They arrive at
their position through corporate happenstance rather than through exceptional merit.
Some Chauncey's recognize their luck and work hard to fill their gaps with leadership training and
surrounding themselves with first-rate talent. The lesser Chauncey's risk making themselves (and their
employers and investors) miserable.
I believe no matter how good a leader you are, you can always become better.

M. Mitra wrote:
Twins growing in the same environment among same friends have different
personalities.
Are Leaders born that way?
Well, I believe that there are traits that some people possess, by birth, which may
help them become very good leaders, but their actions and implementation of them
ultimately decides if they grow up to become good leaders.
Having leadership trait and being a leader are two different things, I think.

A. Bhatnagar wrote:
Well, NONE of “Born Vs Made”. It works in combinations of following
complex stages.
1. Grooming (of Inherited OR Acquired Syndrome) =>Produces=> Charisma
2. Charisma (applied to identically attributed People) =>Produces=> Value
Creator (Disposable)
3. Value Creator (If brings diversified attributed people TOGETHER)
=>Produces=> A Mass Leader

A. Mittal wrote:
I would say a men is made of circumstances. It all depends
what kind of circumstances a men has lived in his life. I
think leadership is a skill and like many other skills in some
people it is by birth and they refine it further but some are
not born with this skill but they are brought up in such
environment where they learn these skills and refine it with
the time & practice.
Hope it helps. Please let me know.

R. Miller wrote:
I think in most cases the spark for
leadership resides in many of us.
In most cases the circumstances do
not inspire people to act on it.
Under trying circumstances the
opportunity arises for people to rise
to the challenge.
S. Balakrishnan wrote:
From my personal view, it is 80:20
(The Pareto principle.)
80% is made and 20% is born.

J. Parsons wrote:
While some leaders definitely have a genetic advantage on leadership, and may find it
easier and more intuitive, I think all of us can learn to improve our leadership and no
good leader is strictly intuitive - all were mentored by good leaders. I don't think it is
unlike athleticism. Some people are going to naturally excel at sports, but others might
struggle to get to the same point. However, as much of it is about heart and passion as
natural talent. The ones who are born with the most natural ability, if not carefully
crafted, may fail in the end. While some people may lack enough natural abilities that
lend themselves to leadership (and thus can't ever hope to learn enough to prevail), I
think that group is small. Often, it is our own egos of not wanting to learn (and
assuming that we know best) that keeps even naturally gifted leaders from being able to
prevail.
At the end of the day, I think leadership is not about the leader at all. It is about the
team!!

R. Bhan wrote:
Nice question - great answers.
Reminds me of something my father wrote to me when I was entering high school.
"Be Deaf to people who say you can't do it. A school teacher scolded a boy for not
paying attention to his mathematics and for not being able to solve simple
problems. She told him that you would not become anybody in life. The boy was
Albert Einstein"
Does that answer?

F. Hayashi, PMP wrote:
Each leader isborn with his own
signature but.......
He MUST also learn how to be a
efficient leader.
R. Torres wrote:
They are neither born or made, but
rather "fabricated."

L.T. de Carvalho wrote:
I think that leaders that think they're leaders because of some
skill, an experience, a connection, or whatever, will show
weaknesses in the future. Weakness that will surely put at risk
one or more objectives of the team.
True leaders aren't born; but rather they're forged on the heat of
a situation where initiative, inspired views, and experience
converge and set the new born leader in motion.

S. Otterson wrote:
Both.
Some of the qualities of a leader are learned, others are part of one's personality.
For example, a good leader can't be an introvert. Most likely those people who choose to
a be leader already possess some of the character traits that they will need: courage,
strength, flexibility, ambition, etc.
Did they learn these, or were they "born" with them? Who is to say?

M. Ingle wrote:
It can be said leaders are born and will always be successful but there is also an
aspect of being in the right place in the right time.
Leading some businesses is also a matter of being in the business within which one
excels not just leading. If you get a gifted individual he or she may never lead given
the circumstances.
So I firmly believe it is not as simple as being a "born leader" but also a matter of
whether or not you are in the position within which your natural talents as a leader
can come to fruition

T. Willette wrote:
As an individual develops, their abilities develop. Attitudes, personality, beliefs, behaviors,
motivations all come into play when defining who an individual is. When an individual takes
everything that they are and invests that into what they have a burning desire to achieve, they become
leaders. Now, everyone is living for something right? So why is it that we aren't all leaders?
Confidence.
Confidence in personal abilities is what sets one person apart from another. So now we get into the
issue of confidence and how to build it. To build confidence in personal ability, an individual must
have two things, knowledge and experience. So can a leader be made? Yes, so long as they have
knowledge, experience, and motivation. Can a leader be born? No, because all of the qualities needed
to be a leader must be developed.

J.H. Brondum wrote:
We are all born. So guess the answer is yes. However, leadership is mainly based on personality - and
of course the knowledge, skills and attitude can be improved. But as with so many other things in life
you will only excel at what you are good at. You can struggle your whole life to improve areas where
you lack - but most likely you will best case arrive at good.
Excellent leaders are already potential leaders when they are born. The rest are trying to catch up -
and mostly for the wrong reason and with mediocre results.
That being said – I believe that most people can learn to manage well, since good management is
based on rules - rules that can be learned and mastered - leadership has no common rules. It is a gift.

D. Grossu wrote:
Leaders are born but they
also learn how to become
successful; each leader has
its own challenges but they
know how to bring success
regardless of how different
people are, and that is an
art that not everybody has it
in its genetic print.
C. Braverman wrote:
Leader....Desire......
M. Krasnyansky wrote:
Let's go to the basic: Encyclopedia Britannica
"Leadership: Exercising of influence over others
on behalf of the leader's purposes, aims or goals.“
I think 80/20 rule works here as well: 80% born
with individual, and 20% by training.

M. Herbert wrote:
Leadership is earned, it is a gift from those who are willing to trust you and follow your direction. I
am a believer in the Marcus Buckingham school of leadership in that the most important task of a
leader is to create clarity of purpose.
I have seen any people with attributes that we mistakenly label as leadership- they were charismatic,
or visionary, or very smart. Perhaps it is overly simplistic, but to me the most important element of
leadership is trust. Do I believe you have my interests and the interests of the organization in mind
when you make decisions?
The time to measure an effective leader is at the end of the journey. We can all be effective at leading
a project or a task- true leadership endures the test of time.
If you want to be a true leader then you have to be willing to put the interests of the organization
above your own interests and demonstrate that consistently.

M. Parkyn wrote:
The answer is yes...
Yes, they are born; but if their talents are not developed, their chances of leading are much lower.
Yes, they are "made." Marines are trained from day one to walk the walk of leaders. Thanks to Marine
Corps Recruiting Command, a substantial number of Marine recruits and officer candidate enter our
ranks having already made the commitment to lead.
Others, however, make the decision when they experience their defining moment, when they
confront their weaknesses and fears with core values that become their own.

A. Campbell wrote:
Leaders are bred like thoroughbred racing horses. But, even the most genetically endowed
thoroughbred is no more guaranteed to win than a common plow horse; it must work to become a
recognized champion; because by all practical accounts they are physically the same. Likewise we are
very similar to each other, we each possess potential, but it is our training, experience and socialization
that evoke leadership.
Time and again the “dark horse” has come from behind, conquered all odds and shattered stereotypes,
this is because effective leadership results are the sum of personal talents, and experiences based upon
the development and application of innate traits. One cannot effectively lead others if their personal
abilities are so limited that they easily become overwhelmed with personal challenges. They must first
have the capability to manage themselves followed with the capacity to then turn outward and influence
others. This requisite for leadership is not a physical breeding like animals rather it is based upon
conjoining experience with natural abilities which then produces a leader.

A. Tupan wrote:
A good discussion with some very interesting points
being made. For the statistics of this question my take is
that leaders are born and then made.
Leadership thus is 40% innate and the rest is a matter
of developing the talent.

S. Subramanian wrote:
"DNA to lead"? - I don't think so.
I think what makes good leaders is that 'fire in the belly' to reach there, “never die”
attitude and the continuous process of being in good company and the positive
environment (it is a choice, again!)
All of this, coupled with good education (not to be confused with schooling,) teachers
& mentors can make a person a 'leader stuff' - To be a leader or not, it is a choice of
that individual again!
In simple words, the mold in which the individual chose to be molded in!

M. Shyam wrote:
Not everyone can be a leader just like not everyone can become an actor. People have different skills, talents and nature.
Some people inherit that from parents and some people learn as they grow.
A person who is shy, afraid to speak in public cannot be trained to be a leader. A person who is concerned about the
society, well being of others and want to have authority over others can be trained. Such person will need formal training
to be a leader of an organization but that training will only help if the person has a desire to have authority or command
others to get the work done.
A person can be a very good actor. But he/she still would needs to learn how to appear in front of a camera, do make up
and become familiar with the stage before going for a movie shooting. The same applies to a leader. Mahatma Gandhi is a
good example of a person who had no formal training but became a leader. He did not inherit leadership skills from his
parents or ancestors but became a leader since he had a great passion to serve his motherland.
However, to be a leader in a structured environment, one needs some formal training besides having passion for
leadership.

M. Krasnyansky wrote:
Let's go to the basic Encyclopedia Britannica: "Leadership-exercising of
influence over others on behalf of the leader's purposes, aims or goals".
I think 80/20 rule works here as well, 80% born with individual, and 20%
by training.
M. Pohto wrote:
Yes.

J.A. Cole wrote:
My take is the latter - a combination of the two. While I may believe that some people are born with
'Leader DNA', if they don't have the opportunity to exercise those skills properly, they're not leaders. By
the same token, should someone have all the best training, nurturing and opportunities, but would rather
be on the ground directing traffic....not a leader. An unwilling participant, however hidden or
unconscious. An actor, a tourist who's never on vacation. The combination hands down of 'born' and
'made' spawn the best, greatest and most productive leaders.
It's really interesting to read what others have answered. Especially looking at the responses where
people have cited textbooks or assigned their own homegrown labels for leadership qualities. I realize
that people have a lot of 'baggage' about this topic, and in some cases it's apparent what their rub is with
regard to their personal experience, and what their expectations of a leader is. Everyone wants a person
who is just like them, but at the same time, their expectations of a leader clash with the human factor of
trial and error or by-products of a learning curve, as well as dealing with interpersonal team issues. Often
a leader is like a nanny in a big corporate/institutional playpen that has to enforce the rule of 'everyone
play nice, now', then on the drive home wonders 'I got an MBA for this?' Maybe that's where the DNA
plays a factor - good genes, good balance, healthy system, healthy outlook - makes it easier to maintain
grace under pressure.
That's my take.

J. Letton wrote:
Leaders are the "Ones" that are
prepared to make mistakes, and
ultimately learn from them.
The best executive is the one who has
sense enough to pick good men to do
what he wants done, and self-
restraint to keep from meddling with
them while they do it.
Theodore Roosevelt
Y. Hanoulle wrote:
I think it can be learned. Some
people learned this in their
childhood, or at the first companies
they work for.
I have created a leadership game
together with my father. In this
game people learn to look at
different leadership styles.
I see this as the beginning of how
people learn to look at leaders.

J. Munoz wrote:
I think all great leaders are to some degree a combination of
both born and made.
Leadership is so much more and "art" than a "science" that
there has to be some innate desire to take charge in a given
situation already present in the person or they will not seek
out or succeed at the training necessary to take this personal
trait and shape it into a true ability to lead successfully.

T. McDonald wrote:
I think that they are made not born - I
think with our backgrounds and the way
that we are raised by our parents tends to
lead to leadership in our lives. As a former
athlete, I also think that plays a huge role
in both our ability and our want to lead. I
know that the days of participating in
sports helped me a great deal both with my
ability to want to lead and the ability to be
able to lead.
H. Cuevas wrote:
This is a quintessential
question. My answer:
leaders are born although
they might get better and
polished with time.
Also, leadership styles
varies along time as you
reach maturity

B. Simpson wrote:
I like Gary's answer liking it to Athletics - you can be naturally great at
Leadership - or not so great. But you can make yourself better.
Winston Churchill was the greatest leader the UK has ever seen (in my
humble opinion). I don't for one minute believe that anyone who had
spent a lifetime studying leadership could carry off what he did.
Having said that - everyone should try and improve their leadership
ability. And I include in that anyone who is anyone - not just leaders.

J. Foster wrote:
Both.
Look back to human roots, leaders were the strongest. Survival of the
fittest, hunters and gatherers, the strongest was most often the leader.
Now did that mean that person was the best leader?
What you learn, is life experiences. Based on those life experiences,
training mentoring, you can hopefully make better more sound choices.
The born traits are personality traits, and of the personality traits some
can be molded from birth, some stick with the person regardless.

A. Garoo wrote:
"I wish I knew the formulae, to make the test tube baby influence the doctors!"
Leaders are born first & made later! The environment and the people play an
important role in influencing humans. A leader's IQ is a result of his DNA as well as
quality education, while EQ is a result of atmosphere / surrounding and people with
whom he/she interacts.
Both DNA as well as environment play an important role in making a difference
between Good to Great!
A person with the right set of traits/characteristics can be groomed and guided
towards excellence in leadership.

S. Das wrote:
Made, made....simple made. There are lots of theories and ideas pointing
towards the opposite, but leaders are made not only circumstances and the
environment, but also by how they choose and shape their personalities
according to the rigors and challenges of the business and professional
environment.
If all leaders were born, then there would be a dearth of these individuals
everywhere. Organizations now exert more influence on the global
environment than governments, and since they are run by individuals at all
levels, I think the answer is very clear...

J. Jeckmans wrote:
Interesting question to start with.
Is it so, that the question behind the question is maybe
even more important
Meaning, it only matters what you believe to be true. If you
believe that true leaders are born, than no matter what,
this will be true to you. If you believe the other belief, than
this will be true to you.

T. Schulte
Both.

27 leaders born or made

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Similar a 27 leaders born or made

Similar a 27 leaders born or made (20)

Más de SALMAN SHAIKH

Más de SALMAN SHAIKH (20)

27 leaders born or made