Boerma et al. (2017) devoted a study to figuring out the stance on born leaders and made leaders. The born leader standpoint discovered that genetics (twin studies) and behavioral components influence being born a leader (Boerma et al. 2017). Whereas the made leader side found that the statistics for genetic makeup have some flaws and that leaders can learn such skills through development and experiences (Boerma et al. 2017). The way I see it, leaders are made, not born. I believe this because the twin study isn’t a strong perspective and leadership can be learned. Being a leader could seem natural but one could always use more tools and education to be a successful leader, the example used regarding Walt Disney and his journey to success supports this stance (Boerma et al, 2017, p. 3-4). In a way, both could be true but I feel like even a natural leader could be made into a better leader through new skills and abilities picked up on whatever they’re leading.
Boerma, M. Coyle, E. A., Dietrich, M. A., Dintzner, M. R., Drayton, S.J., Early, J. L., Edginton, A. N., Horlen, C. K., Kirkwood, C. K., Lin, A. Y.F., Rager, M. L., Shah-Manek, B., Welch A. C., and Toedter Williams N. (2017). Point/Counterpoint: Are outstanding leaders born or made? American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 81(3), 58. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe81358
This research was conducted by me, Niyah Lighty, for the Leadership and Society course at Old Dominion University.
Comentários