Great leaders are born or made

Are Great Leaders Born or Made?

A leader is someone who is able to influence others to achieve a desired goal or outcome. How a leader does this is referred to as their leadership style, of which there are many different variations.

For example, Lewin (1939, p.271) defined leaders as being authoritarian (e.g. Adolf Hitler), democratic (e.g. John F. Kennedy) or laissez-faire (e.g. Ronald Reagan).

House (1976, p.4) promoted the idea that some leaders exhibit a charismatic style (e.g. Steve Jobs) whilst Bass (1990, p.19) expanded upon this by suggesting that some leaders exhibit a more transformational style (e.g. Richard Branson).

However, whilst these styles of leadership may be useful in helping us to understand how leaders lead, they do not address the question of what makes a leader great. Or more specifically, whether such leaders are born or whether they are made?

What Makes A Leader?

During the early twentieth century the idea that leaders were born rather than made was widely accepted. Many scholars during this time for example agreed with the views of Jerome Dowd who saw the masses as being led by “the superior few” (Organ 1996, p.1), and also those of Thomas Carlyle, a proponent of the Great Man Theory who argued that “some people are born with more leadership ability than others” (Browning and Sparks 2002).

A casual glance at past historic leaders such as William Wallace, King Arthur and Alexander the Great, certainly seems to support the idea that these “great men” possessed unique qualities which the “average man” did not. But what made these people the leaders they eventually became?

In an attempt to answer this question, trait theories of leadership began to emerge with the aim of identifying the characteristics that leaders possessed. The basic premise was that leaders became leaders because they possessed physical, social or mental traits which others did not.

For example, William Wallace is thought to have been significantly taller than the average man of his day. Therefore, according to trait theories, Wallace’s height advantage may have made him the leader he became because it gave him more strength and a more powerful presence than the average man.

However, if we look at other tall individuals such as the “gentle, quiet man” Sultan Kosen, currently the world’s tallest man (Cockcroft 2009), we find that even though height provides certain advantages, it may help, but by no means will make someone a leader.

Predicting Leadership

The lack of correlation between traits and leadership was demonstrated by Stogdill (1948, p.35) who found that there were no universal traits that could be used to predict leadership.

Many researchers subsequently took these findings as a sign to abandon trait theories, even though Stogdill had recommended studying the interaction of traits with their environment (Cooper 2000, p.131).

This is unfortunate, because as shown by the comparison between Wallace and Kosen, there can be a lack of correlation between the trait of height and leadership.

However, the fact that Wallace became a leader whereas Kosen has not, does suggest that environmental factors may play a role in developing the genetic traits we are born with.

Research on the importance of traits and leadership carried out by Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991, p.48) certainly seems to support this view, especially with their conclusion that “the possession of certain traits alone does not guarantee leadership” but that “traits help the leader acquire necessary skills”.

So whilst some researchers may have disregarded trait theories as an irrelevant relic from the past, a reexamination of these theories shows that they may still hold some relevance in today’s modern age.

For example, a recent review of leadership literature identified several key traits such as extraversion and conscientiousness which were “consistently” associated with leadership (Judge and Bono 2000, p.751).

Based on these findings, it may be possible to use such traits as predictors of leadership (Robbins and Judge 2009, p.422), either of young children or of adults.

If young children’s personalities are tested, and the progress of those who are indentified as having these leadership traits are monitored, then we may be able to determine how much of an influence genetics play in developing leaders and the relative importance of the environmental factors that interact with these traits.

Fortunately, Arveya (2006, p.1) has already carried out a similar study on the leadership achievements of male twins, from which he concluded that genetics accounted for 30% of leadership abilities.

This means, according to Arveya’s research, that environmental factors play a greater role in leadership development than genetics.

Although some may find these results surprising, they become less so when you begin to examine the research that has been carried out on the relationship between intelligence quotient (IQ) scores and the environment in which one has been raised.

Skeels (1966, p.1) for example, found that when children who were removed from an unstimulating orphanage were later tested for intelligence, they scored, on average, 30 IQ points higher than those who remained in the orphanage.

This is an interesting observation, because some researchers, such as Elliott Jaques, believe that a person’s leadership ability is directly tied to their level of intelligence (Browning and Sparks 2002).

Therefore, if intelligence can be enhanced as a result of environmental influences, then perhaps the same can occur with leadership?

Situational Creation of Leaders

Whilst trait theories may be useful in helping us to understand the characteristics of leaders, they do not tell us the relative importance of each trait or how those traits interact with the environment.

This is a significant omission, because it means that even though a person may be identified as having leadership traits, we can not say for certain if those traits will turn them into a leader or what type of leader they will become.

For example, prior to World War 2 Winston Churchill was generally regarded as being unpopular and as a failure (Cohen 2008, p.204).

During the war however, his courage and vision caused his popularity soar, but this was short lived as he quickly became unpopular again after the war had ended.

What we learn from Churchill is that even though someone may possess the ability to become a leader, the situation they are in can play a significant role in determining how effective they will be.

Fred Fiedler’s contingency model seems to support this conclusion, as it proposes that the effectiveness of a leader is largely dependent upon having the right leader for the right situation (Hossain 2006, p.33).

However, if we take into consideration how quickly subjects adapted to the role of prisoner or guard during the Stanford Prison Experiments (Blass 2000, p.201), it could also be argued that the situation itself may be responsible for creating the leader by awakening previously dormant leadership traits.

Following this logic, one may wonder whether Martin Luther King would have become the leader he became without the racial tension that existed in the United States at the time? Or if William Wallace would have become the leader he became without the oppression of the Scottish people by the English?

Of course it is impossible to say for certain, but the example given by Churchill does seem to provide some evidence that particular situations can cause a leader to emerge, and without that situation, that leader may never emerge.

This situational creation of leaders could be further extended by including the attribution theory of leadership, which proposes that leaders become leaders because others have labeled them so (Meindl 1995, p.329).

One such individual which may be used as supportive evidence of this claim is Mahatma Gandhi, who, despite having no formal power, became recognised as a leader as a result of his non violent opposition to British rule in India.

If we accept the attribution of leadership, then we can also accept the situational leadership theory, which, in essence, states that the effectiveness of a leader is dependent on whether their followers accept or reject them as a leader (Graeff 1983, p.285).

The underlying implication being that if a leader is right for the situation they will be accepted, but if they are wrong for the situation, they will be rejected.

This in turn provides further evidence to support the claim that situational factors are an important determinant in leader emergence, but that ultimately, it is the followers who determine who becomes a leader and who does not.

Life Experiences and Leader Development

If we agree with the proposition that followers create leaders through their willingness or unwillingness to follow them, then by examining the personality types which engage these followers, we can gain a better understanding of not only how successful leaders lead, but also, whether it is possible for others to emulate their success.

Research carried out by Judge (2002, p.765) for example, found “strong support” of a link between personality types organised around the Big Five personality framework (i.e. emotional stability, extraversion, openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness) and leadership, suggesting that leaders do indeed have common personality traits.

Furthermore, findings from twin studies have concluded that these personalities are “substantially” heritable (Loehlin 1998, p.431), indicating that personalities associated with leadership may also have a genetic basis.

However, it is important to note that these same studies also stress the importance of situational factors in shaping a person’s personality, which give credence to Robert Thomas’ view that the ability to learn from “crucible” life experiences plays a significant role in leader development.

For example, Bob Galvin, former Motorola CEO, credits parts of his development as a leader to an experience he had when working in a factory at age seventeen.

Galvin, who accidentally shut down an assembly line, received help from the plant supervisor to correct the problem who he later overheard complimenting him.

Galvin now credits that experience as giving him “the confidence to make mistakes and learn from them” (Thomas 2008, p.201).

What we learn from such examples is that the factors which affect personality development, also, to some degree, seem to affect leader development.

For example, a child’s early life experiences and the way in which they were treated by their parents can play a significant role in developing that child’s personality (Brungardt 1997, p.81).

Therefore, a child who grew up already possessing some or all of the Big Five personality traits, such as extraversion and emotional stability, will most likely find it much easier to adopt a leadership role than a child who grew up lacking such traits.

However, as shown by Warren Buffett who learned to become a more socially adept person by reading the self help book “How To Win Friends and Influence People” (Lasson 2009), personality traits associated with leadership, such as charisma, can also be learned later in life (Howell and Frost 1989, p.243).

Great Leaders: Born or Made?

In light of the evidence presented in this report, leadership development appears to arise as a result of a complex interaction between genetics and environmental factors. Genetics appears to be of most importance in personality development.

For example, if one examines the different temperaments of babies at age four months, which can range from babies who are withdrawn with a negative mood to babies who are approaching with a positive mood (Chess and Thomas 1998, p.144), one could make the claim that an element of leadership development is hereditable if babies at such an early age can already display traits which are consistent with the Big Five personality framework.

From a religious perspective, this could then be used to support the notion that some individuals, such as Jesus Christ or the Dalai Lama, are leaders from birth.

However, care must be taken when following this line of reasoning, because at present, no “leadership gene” has been identified.

If such a gene is ever discovered, then perhaps it may be possible to literally create leaders using a drug which activates this gene? For now, at least, we can only infer from personality traits who is likely to become a leader, and who is not.

In terms of environmental factors, the experiences one has in life, and in particular the situations a person finds themselves in, seems to play a big role in leader emergence and development.

Richard Branson for example, credits the continual challenges he experienced during his childhood as a significant factor in developing his independent nature (Branson 1999, p.14).

On a larger scale, an Accenture study of leaders found that leaders learned more about leadership from life and work experiences than they did from training programmes or formal study (Thomas and Cheese 2005, p.24), which suggests that learning from life experiences is a common characteristic shared by most, if not all, leaders.

Finally, it is important to recognise that a leader can not exist without followers. Would Napoleon Bonaparte or Julius Caesar for example, have become the leaders they are recognised as today if they had no followers? In all likelihood, no, because a leader is ultimately created through the willingness of their followers to follow them.

What one may conclude from the aforementioned information is that whilst genetics may predispose certain individuals to act like a leader and adopt a leadership role, individuals who do not have this predisposition may still become leaders providing they have the right experiences in life which give them the opportunity to develop leadership traits.

A leader can therefore be both born and made, but in the long run, it is the followers who determine who becomes a leader and who does not.

Bibliography

Arveya, R.D., Rotundob, M., Johnsona, W., Zhanga, Z., and McGuea, M. (2006)
The Determinants of Leadership Role Occupancy: Genetic and Personality Factors. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(1), pp. 1-20.

Bass, B. (1990) From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to Share
the Vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18, pp. 19-31.

Blass, T. (2000). Obedience to Authority: Current Perspectives on the Milgram
Paradigm. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 201-203.

Branson, R. (1999). Losing My Virginity: How I’ve Survived, Had Fun, and Made a
Fortune Doing Business My Way. Three Rivers Press, pp. 14.

Browning, P. and Sparks, W. (2002). Are Leaders Made or Born – or Both? Charlotte
Business Journal [Online] 17.26, Available from: http://charlotte.bizjournals.com/charlotte/stories/2002/09/30/editorial3.html [Accessed 19 November 2009]

Brungardt. C. (1997) The Making of Leaders: A Review of the Research in Leadership
Development and Education. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 3(3), pp. 81-95.

Chess, S. and Thomas, A. (1998) Book Forum: Temperament and Personality. The
American Journal Of Psychiatry, 155(1), pp. 144.

Great leaders are born or made

For centuries, it was thought that great leaders were born, not made. Many have professed that the Caesars, Lincolns and Gandhis of the world were born to accomplish greatness – to command and inspire hundreds, thousands or even millions.

Those who subscribed to this school of thought supposed that great leaders have innate qualities that cannot be taught. In the 19th century, this notion was named the ‘great man’ theory by historian Thomas Carlyle, who argued that people do not enter the world with equal abilities and talents. The very best leaders are born with distinctive capabilities, enabling them to captivate the masses.

“Shakespeare called them ‘becoming graces’,” said John Adair, author of Lessons in Leadership and How to Lead Others. Adair also listed some of the qualities that make a great leader: “Enthusiasm, integrity, [being] tough or demanding but fair, warmth or humanity, and humility – no arrogance or self-importance.” Arguably, many of these qualities are intrinsic – can warmth, for example, be taught?

We see it in everyday life too: there are certain people we meet who have a natural charisma, a way with people and words that brings out the best in others. They inspire and motivate, doing so with positivity, not threats or fear. In these cases, one can recognise a natural inclination to lead that is present in some and absent in others.

Born this way
Other attributes that are often linked with great leadership include vision, decisiveness, positivity and an ability to build confidence and solve problems. Regrettably, not every person in a leadership role displays these qualities: often, people fall into management positions due to expectation, automatic career progression or a simple case of timing. This marks the difference between a manager and a leader. Co-author of The Leadership Lab Chris Lewis noted: “Managers do things right. Leaders do the right thing… Management is the domain of actions. Management has a ‘to-do’ list. Leadership has a ‘to-be’ list.”

Often, people fall into management positions due to expectation, automatic career progression or a simple case of timing

This falls in line with the belief of Peter Drucker, widely known as the father of management, who once said: “Leadership requires talent. This gift is rare. In the world of management, the best managers are in limited numbers, and the leaders among them are many times less.” Bad managers – of which there are plenty – fail to engage their workforce, which leads to a loss in both productivity and talent. The end result could be disastrous for a company, costing hundreds of thousands (if not millions), in addition to an incalculable number of lost opportunities.

But appointing individuals with a natural proclivity for leadership is no easy feat: assessing a candidate’s ability to think holistically and take bold action when needed, while always respecting and helping others, is a hard ask. What’s more, an individual with these qualities doesn’t necessarily make a good leader.

“The modern descendant of the great man theory of leadership – namely that all you need is a charismatic or transformational CEO at the top, give him or her complete power and a massive salary and your troubles are over – is very wide of the mark,” Adair told European CEO. He argues that good management is necessary at all levels of a business, from day-to-day operations to company-wide strategy. “It is the teamwork of this network of leaders that delivers the goods,” he explained.

Lessons to be learnt
There is, however, an argument in stark opposition to the great man theory. According to some behavioural psychologists, great leaders can be made. Adair said: “We now know that leadership can be learned. There is no one in – or destined for – a leadership role who cannot significantly improve his or her contribution to the common good as a leader, providing, of course, that they are prepared to invest some time and effort towards that purpose.”

Certain skills can be picked up and honed over time, Lewis explained: “Most entrepreneurs will tell you that they learned their skills because they had to. They were either compelled to learn or they had no alternative.” In cases where there is no alternative, leaders are forced to think outside the box and maximise the resources available to them in order to achieve results. The ability to adapt can be improved and mastered with each obstacle that must be dealt with.

The ability to adapt can be improved and mastered with each obstacle that must be dealt with

Great leaders never stop learning, whether through day-to-day challenges, their personal relationships or the people they work alongside. With each challenge comes a new experience, a different way of thinking or an invaluable lesson in understanding others. The skill of observation is therefore key, but this is not necessarily innate: it can come with time and practice.

It is important to note, however, the distinction between being taught and learning. “There’s a role for business education, but the problem with that is it tends to hone analytical skills,” Lewis commented. Adair agreed: “It is learning by doing, not being lectured at, as the leadership academics do.” In other words, practical exercises and group discussion can bring out one’s ‘inner leader’. Constant observation and self-awareness, meanwhile, can ensure that leadership skills are enhanced over time.

Nature and nurture
That some people are born with certain talents and attributes that increase their suitability for certain roles is difficult to dispute. University College London has undertaken research to prove that an inherited trait is involved in producing a great leader. The study, published in 2013 by The Leadership Quarterly, was the first to identify a genotype correlated with a tendency towards leadership roles. “We have identified a genotype, called rs4950, which appears to be associated with the passing of leadership ability down through generations,” said lead author Dr Jan-Emmanuel De Neve in a press release.

Such a genetic gift, which could well be inherited, should be recognised and nurtured. Adair told European CEO: “A natural talent for leadership – which may show itself in the early years and be commented upon by others – especially calls for development. Indeed, anyone with a natural gift for leadership has [a] moral responsibility to develop that talent and put it to profitable use. Why? Because this world… stands in pressing need of good leaders and leaders for good.”

The ‘nurture’ aspect of leadership remains essential. Without it, a great leader could just end up being an adequate manager. Through continued learning, practical experience and collaboration, certain tendencies can be polished. Numerous moving parts make a good leader; natural qualities are involved, but these are enhanced by skills and lessons learned over time. A willingness to adapt and learn from others is crucial.

Only through a combination of these inherent qualities and learnt skills can great leadership be achieved. In terms of the age-old argument of nature versus nurture, Adair explained: “It is not either/or, but both/and.”

Real Talk: Are Leaders Born or Made?

Are leaders born or made? It’s an important question, especially for those who aspire to head up teams or companies, be the face of a movement, or help others achieve greatness.

Some believe that true leaders are born that way—naturally charismatic, influential, and inspiring individuals who are destined to make a mark. But while certain people may be naturally predisposed to leadership, just as they’re naturally predisposed to athleticism or musicality, we believe it’s absolutely possible to cultivate the characteristics and skills necessary to call yourself a leader. As legendary American football coach Vince Lombardi once said: “Leaders aren’t born, they are made. And they are made just like anything else, through hard work.”

So whether you were born with the “special sauce” or not, if you want to be a leader you’re going to have to work to develop and refine the characteristics of the greats. Read on to learn some of the specific traits that are critical for leadership—and how any one of us can work on nurturing them in our careers.

Leadership Trait #1: A Clear, Achievable Vision

Leadership is the capacity to translate vision into reality.

True leaders have the capacity to develop a big vision—one that inspires and motivates their team—and turn it into reality. This requires not only a passion for the vision, but the clarity to communicate it and the intelligence and experience necessary to execute it.

How to Work on It

Start by setting a clear vision for yourself. Pick a method that works best for you—whether it’s making a vision board or making lists—and start laying out some of your biggest goals right now. Make sure to be specific; for example, don’t just say you want to move forward in your career, say you want to land a new job at the manager level by the end of Q1. Ultimately, you want each goal you set to have a measurable outcome (like the number of freelance clients you bring in or the amount of money you want to help generate for the business) and a timeframe associated with them.

Once you have your inspiring goal ahead of you, lay out some baby steps or set up some habits to help you actually do it. The more you practice setting and achieving goals for yourself, the more you’ll be able to lead others to do this down the road.

Leadership Trait #2: The Ability to Influence and Inspire

I think it’s important to move people beyond just dreaming into doing. They have to be able to see that you are just like them, and you made it.

Remember that your work and its success isn’t solely dependent on you; good leaders know how to rally the people around them toward the same overarching goal. If you want your team, your friends, or even random strangers on the internet to follow your lead, you need to get clear on where you want to take them, start down that path yourself, and be willing to hear them and help them along the way.

How to Work on It

Whenever you’re pitching an idea or talking about something you’ve worked on—whether it’s talking to your boss about a new way to approach a process or bringing a big new project to your team—see it as an important opportunity to practice this skill. Take some time to carefully plan out how you’re going to both help people emotionally connect with your idea (a.k.a., getting them excited!) and also convince them that it’s totally feasible with the help of some tactical steps for moving forward. Great ideas can fall to the wayside if they’re not communicated well, so be sure to practice and refine this! Giving your pitch to a friend or mentor before you give it to the powers that be can be a great way to figure out what you’re missing before it really matters.

Leadership Trait #3: The Capacity to Adapt

A true leader has the confidence to stand alone, the courage to make tough decisions, and the compassion to listen to the needs of others.

The only constant—in work and in life—is change, and a good leader knows how to navigate that inevitability. Change shouldn’t be viewed as an obstacle, but rather as a chance to be inventive, adaptable, and decisive in the face of uncertainty. It’s also the perfect opportunity to show others that they can rely on you to make big decisions.

How to Work on It

Change can be stressful, so one of the first steps in learning this skill is getting over the feeling of panic that can set in during a shifting situation—or at least getting more comfortable with the feeling. So, look for ways to put yourself in settings where change is happening, like in an organization that’s always innovating or on a brand new project at work. When you find your heart rate rising in the face of change, remind yourself that it’s an opportunity for you or your organization to become better than ever.

Once you feel comfortable, you can take it a step further and be an agent of change. Whether you’re in charge or not, seek out smart ways to shake things up, think outside of the box, or facilitate needed change, so you can practice and showcase your inventiveness and adaptability.

Want to Grow Your Leadership Skills? Check Out Open Roles at Unilever

Leadership Trait #4: A Willingness to Accept Responsibility

If you set out to be liked, you would be prepared to compromise on anything at any time, and you would achieve nothing.

As the leader of a team, you assume responsibility not just for yourself and your work, but for the work, attitude, and accomplishments of others, too. This is no small feat; you are stepping up to ensure that you will not only show your team where to go and what to do, but also encourage them, answer questions, track progress, and provide motivation. Why? Because their success is your success—and their failure is yours, too.

How to Work on It

As long as you work with at least one other person, you can start working on this skill today! Every team project, client campaign, or even daily staff meeting is an opportunity for you to work with your colleagues as a group, offering support, answering questions, and asking how you can help.

And when things don’t go so smoothly? Don’t try to shove it under the rug—face your mistakes head on. Own up to what happened and apologize for it, come to the table with solutions for fixing the problem, and figure out what you can learn moving forward to keep it from happening again. As communication expert Amanda Berlin shares, “A lesser person might run and hide. By showing up, acknowledging your misstep, and offering solutions, you begin to show your character.” Your character as a true leader.

Leadership Trait #5: A Desire to Learn and Grow

Leadership and learning are indispensable to each other.

A constant desire to learn and grow is an important personal and professional characteristic, whether you want to be a leader or not. Leaders are curious, open-minded, and invested in their growth—the very best of them are always working to be better!

How to Work on It

In your daily life, seek out opportunities to learn more about how to be a leader. (Hey, just by reading this article, you’re off to a great start!) Is there an upcoming client campaign or team-building activity that you can offer to take the charge on? An organization you can work for that has programs to help employees grow? Are there leaders you admire who you can reach out to for coffee—maybe even finding your next mentor along the way? Any leadership books or podcasts you can consume in your free time?

There are so many opportunities for learning—you just have to have the motivation to pursue them.

Michael Jordan once said true leaders must “earn your leadership every day.” Doing this is a lifetime pursuit, and as with all personal and professional development, there will always be new skills to learn, new ways to strengthen your character, and new opportunities to put your leadership into practice.

Here’s to becoming more of a leader every day—whether you consider yourself to be “born with it” or not.

Are Great Leaders Born or Made?

Some people believe that leaders are born with the necessary qualities that make them successful as a leader. While others believe that leadership, like many other similar characteristics, can be learned and developed through life. For me, I think much of the debate depends on how you define leadership.

Defining Leadership

Let’s assume leadership means having an ability and desire to inspire and influence others. Based on that definition, I can certainly see the argument that leaders are born with leading qualities when I see my daughter using her inherent ability to influence her little brother (and sometimes her parents) to do the things she wants them to do.

If leadership means being courageous and willing to speak out for the betterment of those around you, I would think that leaders do not have to be born as such. I have seen people who consider themselves introverts and overall followers become successful leaders when faced with an issue they are passionate about.

If we define leadership as having atypical intelligence, creativity and/or drive, then I am back to believing that it’s a trait you’re born with, although you may or may not continue to develop that trait through your life.

So what does all this mean?

Anyone Can Be a Leader

We all have areas of our lives where we have talent and propensity for success. If this is also an area you feel passionate about, you may exude qualities that are absent from other areas of your life. So while you may not be a natural born leader in the strictest sense, you can certainly overcome many obstacles and develop a desire and ability to lead when you are inspired to do so.

Let’s look at an example.

Say you are an animal lover, and you volunteer for an animal rescue group in your free time. The group is planning a huge fundraiser but lacks the direction necessary to execute it effectively. Without a leader in place, the event is destined for failure. You may not be completely comfortable talking in front of others, making decisions for a group and managing others, but you feel so strongly about the need for the fundraiser that you are willing to overcome these challenges. With the support of several volunteers who are experienced in various areas (marketing, event planning, community outreach, etc.), and your knowledge of the group and the background of the fundraiser, you successfully manage the group and event. Possible? Absolutely.

Developing Leadership

Aside from having a passion that translates into action, there are several ways you can develop your own leadership skills:

What do you think? Are leaders born or made?

Are Leaders Born Or Made?

Are leaders born or made? This is a debate as timeless as the question “Which came first: the chicken or the egg?”

Some people think leaders are born—they naturally possess the social intelligence and charisma that motivates others to work together. Others believe that leaders are made—they build their skills with practice, experience and mentoring.

So which is it—born or made?

It turns out that both camps are right. Researchers have found that leaders come by their talents partly through genetics but mostly through hard work and persistence. In fact, one study from The Leadership Quarterly 1 on heritability (that is, the innate skills you bring to the table) and human development (what you learn along the way) estimated that leadership is 24 percent genetic and 76 percent learned.

Another study, this one out of the University of Illinois, puts the value of genetics vs. learned behavior at 30 percent/70 percent. Researchers confirmed that some people are born with innate qualities that predispose them to being leaders (remember that outgoing kid in school who everyone wanted as class president, team captain or club leader?). However, even those of us who aren’t naturally gifted with leadership acumen can acquire it.

The study tracked a group of 165 undergraduate students enrolled in an introductory leadership theory course. It found that leadership development follows a specific progression, which authors Dr. Kari Keating, Dr. David Rosch and Lisa Burgoon call being “ready, willing and able” to lead. To be an effective leader you first need the motivation to lead; then you need the willingness to learn the skills necessary to practice leadership; and finally, you need the opportunity to express those skills by actually leading. Dr. Rosch describes this as like a math class: “You’re not ready to do calculus if you don’t know the basics of algebra.”

Students who came to Rosch’s class with leadership readiness—meaning they already saw themselves as leaders—were able to fast-track learning and improve their leadership skills. But that didn’t mean they necessarily succeeded. “Just as a year in a cave doesn’t make you a geologist, being senior class president doesn’t make you a leader,” Rosch said in an October 6, 2014, U of I article, “Are Leaders Born or Made? ”

If it takes more than a winning personality to rally people around you toward a common goal, maybe it’s time to finally put aside the debate over whether great leaders are born or made. Yes, genetics may give some people a faster start out of the gate. But as the old saying goes, “It’s not what you’ve been given but what you do with it that matters.”

Bottom line: Leadership isn’t a race; it’s a marathon that is run in stages throughout a career. It doesn’t matter how a leader comes by his or her skill. There is no such thing as a perfect leader or a one-size-fits-all way to lead. What matters is that you possess the requisite skills for the job and that you are willing to apply those skills for the benefit of those you lead. Fortunately, that’s something each of us can learn.

1 Born to lead? A twin design and genetic association study of leadership role occupancy. The Leadership Quarterly, Volume 24, Issue 1, February 2013, Pages 45-60.

The Northwestern MutualVoice Team is a group of professionals who share insights and opinions from experts and industry leaders across the enterprise. Our vision is to inspire others to take action and plan for their financial future through topics ranging from financial planning, retirement planning and distribution strategies, wealth accumulation and preservation, to leadership, philanthropy and innovation.