The question on whether leaders are made or born has been debated and argued by many scholars for a continued period of time over decades now. Several scholars who have researched and written on this topic have used various theories and example to argue out their views. However there is no single clear answer on whether a leader is born or made. This paper adopts the answer ‘yes and no’ approach to the question under investigation. The general scope of argument on this topic is broad but the arguments made in this paper will focus on the analysis of the various ingredients that make a leader and how one comes to possess these ingredients. The factual analysis about leadership is based on results published in journals and books by various reputable scholars within their respective fields.
ARE LEADERS BORN OR MADE?
Before advancing this argument, we need to answer the question; who is a leader? The obvious answer that rings in one’s mind will simply be “a leader is a person or a being that leads”. However it is important to understand that the idea of leadership is more complex than just the understanding of the term ‘leading’. The term leadership has various implicatures such as; giving directions to individuals, motivator, inspire, guiding others, taking responsibility amongst others. Some people have argued that a ‘leader’ and ‘leadership’ are two distinct entities, but in this paper, we will argue out the two as related entities as will be explained later on. The complexity of defining the concept of leadership and who a leader is, leads us to the next big question; where do leaders come from? Are they born or made?
Warren (2009:4) argues that in a nation and a world as complex and fluid as ours, we cannot function without leaders. People need someone to serve the function of ensuring the effectiveness of an organization, to serve as anchors and uphold the integrity of our institutions. According to him the basic ingredients of a leader are; guiding vision, passion, and integrity and trust (p34). Therefore the first ingredient implies that a leader should have clear idea of what he or she wants to do. The second ingredient implies that a leader should be one who loves what he/she does. The third ingredient implies that a leader should be in possession of some underlying promises of life combined with a particular passion for a vocation. It is obvious that these three ingredients touch on integrity and character.
+ Emotional Intelligence
+Passion
+Integrity
+ Trust
The question that arises from this observation would be whether leadership courses and training can teach integrity and character? Warren’s (2009:36) answer to this question is NO and he continues to argue that leadership courses can only teach skills.
Warren uses the example of ‘Ed’ to explain how character and integrity cannot be taught. Ed was born of working class parents in Brooklyn, New York and is described as smart, ambitious and one who was determined to succeed. Right after high school he started by working in a factory and later managed to take a degree in accounting. He made his way up in the management of the factory and eventually was made a vice president. Then arose an opportunity of becoming a CEO in a family owned firm in the same industry. Ed thought this as the opportune moment to achieve his ambitions. He moved with his family to Minneapolis to work with that firm with the aspirations of being promoted to CEO position. However when the time came for the appointment some members of the family board declined to approve his appointment on the grounds that he needed to improve his “people skills”. The effort to train Ed on ‘people skills’ did not bare fruits as people could not trust the changes that occurred in his leadership after the training. He was not appointed as CEO. In summary what Ed lacked was character. This is proves that character cannot be taught.
In his chapter on what makes a leader, Daniel Goleman (2011:2) states that effective leaders have a high degree of emotional intelligence. He identifies the components of emotional intelligence as; self-awareness, high degree of self-management skills, empathy and social skills. However, he does not fully dispute the fact that the IQ and technical skills are key to making a successful leader. Knowing oneself means being able to separate who you are and who you want to be from what the world thinks you are. A person with a high degree of self-awareness recognizes how their feeling affect them, other people and their job performance- a key ingredient of a leader. A leader gives directions to humans and is responsible to human being, therefore it is important for them to have a deep understanding of their emotions, strengths, weakness, needs and drives as well as those of the people they are leading.
Therefore the debate on whether leaders are born or made cannot be argued without answering the question of whether people are born with certain levels of emotional intelligence. Daniel Goleman (2011) suggests a paradoxical answer to this question, that the answer is ‘both’ this means that humans are born with emotional intelligence largely in the neurotransmitters of brain limbic system, which increases with age (maturity). This means that part of it is learned from experience and from other sources. This argument may not be fully supported by the psychologists from the behaviorist school of thought who argue that human beings are born with an empty brain that is termed as a blank slate/ tabula rasa. However, the author does not dispute this argument because it is true that experience contributes to one’s self-awareness which extends to a person’s understanding of his or her values and goals. These two arguments by Daniel Goleman and Warren that we have looked at with regard to the the ingredients of a leader and how these ingredients are acquired so far demonstrates that leadership traits are the equivalent of talent. They are innate and cannot be taught in any school however, they can only be improved through experience. The example of Ed givennby Warren clearly demonstrates how it is impossible to learn these people skills. Therefore we can summarize this part of the discussion by this statement, ‘the ingredients of leadership cannot be taught. They must be learned’.
Fielder defines a leader as a person who is appointed, elected, or informally chosen to direct and co-ordinate the work of others in a group. This definition then clearly draws a distinction between the concept of a leader and leadership: one can be a leader but lack leadership traits. This is because anyone can be chosen, elected or appointed to be a leader; having the ingredients of a leader is a separate issue for consideration. With reference to the question of discussion on whether leaders are born or made, the implicature in Fielder’s definition of a leader would be that anyone can be appointed, elected or chosen to be a leader, however certain predispositions such as personality and character will just be added advantages of leadership.
From the above observations then we can advance this argument towards the point that leadership is not about personality or talent and that one does not require all the charisma, the talent and emotional intelligence or some other ingredients to be a leader. Instead a good leader is that who get the right thing done the right way. To do this one simply requires to gain the knowledge they need to make smart decisions and convert that knowledge into effective actions and ensure accountability. It is true that the taught knowledge on leadership is important however if this is view followed fully and adopted by all organizations, institutions, firms and governments , then it might result to leaders being made by accident and circumstances. Instead leaders need leadership abilities. However, William Cohen (1998) argues that lack of leadership ability can most of the time be corrected with training and a little motivation.
LEADER
Source: research data.
In the first part of this paper we argued that a leader is expected to guide, influence, empower, be accountable, with a clear vision and goal, and that all these are talents that are innate. What if we look at them as skills? Can a guideline be designed and prescribed as: developing people to influence others, encouraging teamwork, empowering people, teaching people how to be passionate and having clear vision and goals. If this is so, then it is very possible for one to learn these skills in class, workplace or society.
Generally successful and effective leaders possess the suitable leadership traits. He or she also possess suitable acquired skills such as social skills and suitable leadership approaches. According to Lance (1987:7), leadership is largely an acquired skill and that a leader needs intelligence, a positive attitude, courage and common sense. His argument is in support of the focus of this discussion that leaders are born and made. A successful leader requires a combination of the natural talents that are innate and also the skills that are acquired and developed through education, training and experience. The absence of any or either of the two might result in the failure of a particular leader. A leader requires leadership training but also requires leadership characteristics.
Everyone is born with the ability to lead, this depends on the level one take this ability and the exposure to practical situations that require one to exercise these abilities. Leadership can also be learnt. However, whether one can also fully grasp and exercise the leadership skills need critical analysis. I would like to conclude this essay by asserting that to be a leader is a skill and a trait. Like most skills, practice makes perfect and the continued use of these skills makes a habit that defines the leader.
References
Daniel, Goleman., Peter, Purcker, F.,John P., and Warren Bennis. HBR’s ten must read On Leadership. Harvard Business Review Press- Boston. (2011)
Fred, Fielder. Theory of Leadership in Effectiveness. New York :MC Grow- Hill Inc.(1967)
Lance, Secretan. Higher Ground Leadership. New York- Warner Books. (1987)
Warren Bennis. On Becoming a Leader. New York. (2009)
William, Cohen. The Stuff of Heroes: The Eight Universal Laws of Leadership. Longstreet press. (1998)
Comments
Post a Comment