Thank you Dr. I wait answers from professional people like you, and I care to know your thoughts regarding this question. 

Such an important; well elaborated answer. Thank you so much again.

Leaders are not born, they evolve out of the passion for doing something good to others and society. These are the people, who learn from real life situations and enrich themselves with the knowledge gained through experience, apart from the knowledge acquired through education. These people are persuasive, selfless and committed. These characteristics attracts followers, who find realization of their dreams and goals through the selfless, and  dedicated effort of the leaders. Leaders possess some acquired traits like oratory, composed demeanor and trustworthiness. I am quoting  the following  'quotes' to strengthen my views. Genetics may talk of intelligence and not leadership. These two are different qualities / characteristics.

“Leaders aren’t born, they are made. And they are made just like anything else, through hard work. And that’s the price we’ll have to pay to achieve that goal, or any goal.” ~ Vince Lombardi .

“The leaders who work most effectively, it seems to me, never say ‘I’. And that’s not because they have trained themselves not to say ‘I’. They don’t think ‘I’. They think ‘we’; they think ‘team’. They understand their job to be to make the team function. They accept responsibility and don’t sidestep it, but ‘we’ gets the credit…. This is what creates trust, what enables you to get the task done.” ~ Peter F. Drucker

Dear Fatima

Your question is  thought provoking  which has been debated for ages across multiple forums . Hardly you can cite any valid or reliable  theory that support or refute that leadership qualities come through nature  at birth or are nurtured through life experience .  Every theory has at least some  assumptions , hypotheses and limitations .  In my opinion , leadership qualities come through   both ways , by nature to some extent and largely developed through life experience . So , leaders are both,  born to some extent but largely are made through their life experience.

Aloysius

I strongly agree with you Dr. Sequeira. Thats the answer I was waiting, in addition to what you mentioned the situation the person is placed in either enhance his leadership skills or not, and the followers that sorrounds him plays a role. It is a complex matter. 

I came up with the leadership equation Im planning to study, the equation governs most of the debatable topics in regards to the leadership and its compremising. 

 Leaders are born in the sense that they acquire  the leadership right from college career & subsequent from their career planning program . In such case leaders are born & not made.

In other cases time remain the factor & members who are interested to move towards contribution in their program they come in the contact with the certain social organisation where they placed their efforts ,their contribution,their suggestive line of action & help their growth of the social organisation such individual with their contribution come in the spirit of leadership & it is the natural that they may acquire the leadership after certain time consuming qualitative work .

This is my personal opinion 

Are leaders born leaders or they acquire leadership by time?

I think some people are fit into the "leaders are born" theory whereas some people are fit into the theory that leadership can be acquired etc.  Think we can't use certain leadership theories to generalize to all the people in the world.  Reason being human beings are very complex systems that have different strengths & weaknesses, different talents, some with seeds of talent that can shine after certain shaping & takes times, some may behave differently when the condition / situation is critical / evolved etc.  Also human beings can become more matured / changed from time to time in which the way they think, the way they express themselves, the way they act also will change etc.  All these can play a role in influencing the way they lead.

 please, i agree with Leonidas A. Papakonstantinidis

Dr. Han,

You answer is outstanding and have a sense of wisdome in it.

Thank you all

We stand on the shoulder of giants. Leader is the tip of the iceberg rooted in capitalism. Ghandi is an exception.

There are two theories in this subject, the first German, which believes in the theory of will, for example Hitler became the leader of the will that made him, as it is the French theory is based on the will is made by a leader,

Leaders are not born to lead, but prepared to lead.

http://goo.gl/z7hh9Y

Leaders are made by reading for example, because all leaders are readers. 

Main determinant is the enviroment including social and physical. Even the climate is deeply affecting behavior. 

Dear Fatima,

Thank you very much for your interesting questions. Basically there are two intellectual arguments on leader/leadership, are they born or made?

The academia believe these two arguments are important and it should be a combination of both (born and made).

Some important inborn talents and traits affect to be a successful/unsuccessful leader. The environment, training institutions and also the situations will help them to gain knowledge, experiences to be a successful leader. 

Much water has flowed under the bridge since "great man" (or "charismatic") theories of leadership were put together. You might want to read up on servant-leadership, distributed leadership, and informal authority, for example. Short articles on these topics are at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254582899_Exercising_Servant_Leadership, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254583108_Distributing_Leadership, and https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254582905_Informal_Authority_in_the_Workplace. More recently, there is also interest in complexity leadership, a new theory that—in the century of complexity—frames leadership in multiple contexts, e.g., simple, complicated, complex, and chaotic.

Article Exercising Servant Leadership

Article Distributing Leadership

Article Informal Authority in the Workplace

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 on heritability estimated that leadership is 24 percent genetic and 76 percent learned. Another study, 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 .However, even those of us who aren’t naturally gifted with leadership acumen can acquire it.

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.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/northwesternmutual/2015/03/11/how-do-you-build-credibility-as-a-leader-when-you-arent-the-technical-expert/#3bb9eed63574

En algunos casos considero que es una cualidad innata pero hay otros casos en los que se hace, con el esfuerzo y estudio

Creo en la condición innata. Pero el contexto puede influir en el desarrollo de habilidades. El estudio también puede influir de manera que la conjunción de  cualidades y contexto son influyentes.

I agree with most of you that some traits are innate but working on those talents and becoming skillful by learning is the major part, in addition to the situation since as one situation can work for a certain leader type while doesnt for another.

From Carol Dweck's book, The Growth Mindset: "..everyone can change and grow through application and experience... a person's true potential is unknown (and unknowable)..."

Some temperamental elements may always underlie your self-presentation to the world, but intention, effort, opportunities, and experience allow individuals to radically transform themselves throughout life. Think about yourself at age 6, at age 16, and so on. At those early ages, would you say that your potential was fixed, was innate? I wouldn't think so. Over-emphasis on genetics and the idea of innate ability is very self-limiting, and often self-fulfilling.

Estimo que se adquiere con el tiempo, aunque algunos lo logran muy jóvenes pero en esos casos también está el peligro de la falta de madurez y la inexperiencia. Por eso insisto en que es válido el contexto y la preparación.

The knowledge is important for the charisma

There is two main essential force in building a Leader:

I think there is something,something hidden in a person which portrays his/her ability to lead.It may be observed during the early phase of life.These types of persons are really born leaders and they do not require any specialised training to enhance their skills.

one in  millions are those whome made a big impact on the international wise but they needed special traning and guidance in specific areas

I think that fundamental leadership skills are already born characteristics - but to become a great leader you need to structure and develop these skills and to understand how to use the right tools resp. the right keys in the right situation.

Before I began to study MBA I already tried all the leadership models without any knowledge about them. Within the modul "Leadership Experience" I understood the structure and now after some practice I am able to use my acquired knowledge to change my own leadership style whenever it's needed to fit the circumstances.

Personally, based on what I learned in my MBA, three other masters, and PhD, as well as life experience, leaders should have certain innate characteristics but they must be nurtured and learned throughout life through experience. For example, a person  may have natural charisma, take initiative, possess, self motivation, self determination, and self efficacy, yet not have the knowledge of how to apply these characteristics to leadership. It takes training, both academic, and practical, to understand how to be a transformational, transacdtional, or contingent leader focusing on becoming task oriented, versus people or behaviour oriented. Therefore, leadership is learned from innate characteristics, training, and application to different situations. Leadership is broader than management and is more than just planning, organising,staffing, evaluating,implementing, or controlling. It is leading by example, being  a role model, motivating, and serving, in lastly what is termed servant  leadership common in faith based situations, and ideally in governmental leadership. 

Dr Réagan Lavorata, PhD

We are talking about one of the characteristics of human beings, to appreciate it appropriately we need to look at the life cycle which start from nothingness and sinks into it. In a simple way, we can say these characteristics as we see them during the life span of an individual are outcome of his various development phases.

Most of these phases are not in control of the one who lives it such as embryonic, natal, infancy, early schooling and so on. It looks that leadership characteristics are present in all individual but they are like dull and dry like seeds, they germinate and bloom only if they get suitable environment.

Everyone can become a leader but we (society) have to give him the right environment. There is no divine right to lead/ rule as stated and communicated by the leaders.

Leadership is a science and art at the same time. There are various theories in this connection: Great Man Theory (Leaders are born, not made), Trait Theory, Behavioural Theories, Managerial Grid, Contingency Theory etc.

Dr. Réagan;

Your answer is the answer Ive been waiting for, and it came from an expert.

Thank you kindly; I am glad to help

Dr Reagan Lavorata

Mrs. Rifai, all the right answers that my above colleagues gave missed one major point: A true leader as defined by the 2011 book of Haslam and his cplleagues (The New Psychology of Leadership) is a one trusted by followers. For instance, without such trust one's modelling makes no difference as no one follows. Trust creation require of one convincing followers of her/his trustworthiness, and about how true leaders do it and false leaders faked it you can read in my publications, especially my just published Routledge book "Mismanagement, 'Jumpers,' and Morality."  

thank you Dr Reuven;

ill read your publications and you are 100% right regarding the trust and integrity.

The question is somewhat too broad. My reply may also be.....

I think it is important to include personal factors in the first place and honour early life story that impacts us as leaders. In this, both the parental effects  and the sibling effects are to be considered. Parents provide templates, models of being leaders, they trigger reactions in us, varying from embracing their example, till rejecting it) which we then internalise and own.

Sibling studies provide a whole different sort of information. The famous Sulloway Born to Rebel research shows how older siblings tend to identify with the authority and power they are exposed to, younger tend to rebel against them, while middle children are famously know for healing the rifts and building the relations within the sibling cohort.

In short, a leader who was an oldest child with an authoritarian parental system, will be a total different leader than one who was a youngest child having explored many ways of dealing with a family system differently or than one who was a middle child and brings the quality of bringing groups together.

Therefor, Fatima, when you think of 'born leaders', all three of these siblings bring  a very different quality to their leadership as adults. Companies, departments, teams etc do well when they consider what sort of leader they need, before choosing one on the basis of having done enough additional courses.

Servaas van Beekum, Sydney

You opened my eyes into a whole new prespective for the leadership

Such a smart answer.

Thanks Fatima

A standard question in any leadership interview should be: "What was your place and role in your family as a child?"

Moreover, a leader sets the mission,the vision, and values of any strategic long term organisation or project. They serve like Jesus, they transform, transact, and they extend beyond management. A leader will motivate, through the forces of self efficacy as discussed by Bandura, and will lead by example. I agree that one should ask on a leadership interview about the role and place in one's family as a child, but also the role that one played in school peer groups as well as with friends at a young age. 

Dr Reagan Lavorata

Yes leaders have certain permanent inhrent traits but there are certain traits such as honesty and integrity that must be taught at a young age. David Hume talks about the  impact of moral behaviur on persons which can be applied to leadership. Even Peter Drucker noted the shortage of effective leaders, leading him to discuss the fifth discipline and organisational learning as a way to make organisations and leaders learn together.

Dr Reagan L

"Leadership is born and not made": the theory of the great man and theories of personality traits where you believe that people inherit certain qualities and attributes that make them more suitable for leadership, and suggests that leaders come to The world with an exceptional gift that makes them unequal to people of equal capacity and equal talent "(Thomas Carlyle 1840).

There are certain innate characteristics that prepare people to be leaders. There is a big difference between "learning skill" and mastering skill, and in the same way that others are born with amazing musical gifts or sports talents, they will naturally excel in these areas, but others swim like fish out of water Some may struggle to reach the same point. Natural leaders are different from industrial leaders, and all outstanding leaders have left a great history behind them. They have been leaders since the beginning of their life journey, but if leaders are hereditary only, what is the purpose of some of us to study leadership or Administration? The birth is a natural process and the idea to link the leadership with what you say, but is it all about?

The theory of "leaders are made and not born": Behavioral theories believe that people can become leaders through teaching, learning and observation. Leadership is a set of skills that can be learned through training, visualization, practice and experience over time. , leaders always seek the good development opportunities that will help them learn new skills.

The Army Foundation embraces this latter doctrine and this is evident through leadership training programs. Can a person who has enrolled in the training program in management and leadership skills be a leader after completing the training? Is it possible for the prestige and influence, physical integrity and the ability to be taught? It is awarded a certificate and a few letters on behalf of someone who can make him captain?

Soft skills can be interpreted, but can not be implanted, and the ability to share your vision takes more than a sophisticated PowerPoint presentation, and some clear words on a set of 4 x 6 cards.

Leadership can be learned by anyone who has the basics, but a huge number of leadership skills can not be taught, some people are good at learning and others find themselves offering modest results and poor preparation for leadership.

In my opinion, leadership is an art and not a science. It is a collection of innate, select and excellent qualities acquired over time with education, training and experience. There is also an important aspect to it: being in the right place at the right time. because you are getting used to or you're not in a position through which can shine your talents.

The theme of leadership is also about location and environment. Are we talking about this great performance (born or made) in a small organization or in an industry in a society in a country or in the world?

If the fear of exceeding leadership is to be prepared to assume responsibilities, this fear makes one subordinate, not everyone can be a leader, just like everyone can not be a good representative, some people do not have this aspect while others have The ability to be leaders, and therefore can learn how to command, and read all books, but education and training can not transform a person from a subordinate to a leader .. One may need some formal training; to be a leader in a particular regulatory environment, learn good management, start a business, leading the project team, neighborhood Good governance is based on the basic rules - these rules can be learned and mastered.

Leadership is often the result of the person's choice. The leader is the one who moves forward to face the challenge. Therefore, the person who advances in multiple positions is indeed a leader who must start. One should get the best training and receive the necessary care and opportunity. It prefers to be hiding in the crowd, which is unwilling to participate .. This is not the leader.

The methods of leadership vary according to the maturity of the personality and the people involved and the different positions. In researching the study of the characteristics of leadership in 60 countries, the results were as follows: "Integrity, charisma, inspirational personality, and has the insight, encouragement and positive, confidence-building and dynamism , Build effective teamwork, communication, coordination, decisiveness, intelligent, solve the problem in a "win-win" manner, these qualities are a combination of personality traits, characteristics and skills, ability to communicate, emotional intelligence, so the leader generates a leader, then develops his skills in the field communications, invested through experiments Life.

The best estimate presented by the research is that the attributes of leadership are divided into one-third and two-thirds. Depending on how it defines the concept of leadership, it may be a two. Leadership leaders should include leaders such as Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther, King Junior, Aung San Suu Kyi, etc., individuals who Do not seek wealth or fame, selflessness, love of justice, and empathy for people who have worked for the benefit of others.

In the study of leadership, theories can be comprehensive, can not really support aside and deny the other, although there are thousands of books, dozens of well documented studies, which can continue to be discussed forever without approaching a logical result, that is The reason I wanted to share a true story is that when I was little, all the elderly villagers (who had a long past) were saying to my mother, "This girl is different."

I think the purpose of studying leadership and administration is to nurture natural leadership skills and use some personality traits to develop others. It is also important for  leaders to learn the proper techniques of leadership and administration. A person may be naturally a task oriented leader for example, but that person requires training and development to effectively carry out the necessary tasks needed on a day to day basis. Also these training programmes can facilitate behaviour or relationship oriented leaders to develop interpersonal relations or effective traits for leadership, management,  and decision making. Therefore, leaders have certain innate characteristics but need to nurture and develop these characteristics in an effective manner

Dr Lavorata

Hi, Kindly have a look at the attached article which may help you.

Article Impacts of "Organizational management's tasks" on "Making th...

I will for sure, 

Regards

it is both . Leadership to some extent comes through birth by the abilities inherited while being born . But to large extent , leadership is developed through various modes at different point of times . Thus to summarize , leadership comes through nature in small measure but nurtured during life span to a large extent. There is no definite research to prove any of these conclusively. 

Good question and informative answers thank you all!

Leaders first emerge as such, and then on the basis of education at the various levels of education, this ability leads to some steps forward based on science.

Interesting question.

Experience is acquired over time not born with man

Experience is acquired over time not born with man

Interesting question.

If leadership is also a birth ability, would an assassin behavior be explained in the same way? Perhaps, misogynist? racists? Musicians? Hard questions between nature and social learning. People become leaders according to their experiences and training. There is no ‘free meal‘for anything, but discipline, hard working and science.

The answer is yes and no, 30% of leadership qualities are said to be genetically determined, however, in the 70% the qualities can be acquired through, training perception and experience

We can have some comments based on the leadership theories. According to Great Man Theory leadership is something comes from birth. According to Trait Theory it can both come from birth or acquired later. On the other hand Behavioral Theory asserts that leadership behaviors can be developed which means it dooes't come from birth but acquired along the life. General belief about the topic is clear that most of people today still believe leadership is inborn. But for me, it is something mostly can be developed by experince and interaction with environment. Similar to personality development (mostly character and a little temperament).

I agree with Osman but my research found leadership is developed by experience and interaction that their effectiveness is depends on the leader's success in creating ascending trust spirals with knowledgeable partners who share with him the know-how and phronesis (Greek for practical wisdom) which they acquired by education, specialization, experience and learning in communities of practitioners; for this the leader not only have to prove trustworthiness by benevolense and integrity, but also must admit knowledge gaps by vulnerable involvement in followers/subordinates' deliberations and this require psychological safety which is largely depends on having referred expertise, expertise in domains pertinent to the subject matter of the group/unit/ organization s/he aim at leading. All these are the tips of the iceberg of leadership complexities which are learned (or missed in case of failing leaders) which appear in my works. see:

Ancient tribes used to have leaders either, obviously there were not so much to learn or a single person who could teach those required skills nearby. I think leadership requires only one thing "a group of people to lead"

Both, ideally, born leaders have to learn tools and techniques for effective leadership.

The born leader needs perfection, being educated as a leader and creating practical experience in this function. The non-born leader is completely dependent on the education and experience gained in practice. The difference between them lies in the former not starting from the xerro point, while the second starts from the xerro point. This can be compared to the case when a tropical plant grows in a tropical climate region and when it grows in a different climate, where it needs to sum up the tropical climate. In both cases the fruit obtained is the same but differs in the originality of the quality.

A question like this comes up every now and then in this forum. I get a bit bored by it, which I don't mean as an offence, Fatima. However, read the research on it, set out on innate qualities learned in early life from parents (their examples and demands) and mostly from siblings and peers, include social, cultural and religious dimensions which often go against women leaders and you got your answer. Bob's your uncle.

Very few leaders are born: most need experience and the earlier one starts, the better. But, if leaders need exposure, they must seek or be presented with a wide variety of work experiences and truly learn from these.

Article Leader Development Through Work Experience

“Are global leaders born or made?” The answer is that global leaders are born and then made...

Black, J. S., Morrison, A. J., & Gregersen, H. B. (2013). Global explorers: The next generation of leaders. Routledge.

It has generally been accepted that leaders are born, not made. ...

Reynolds, J. G., & Warfield, W. H. (2010). Discerning the differences between managers and leaders. The Education Digest, 75(7), 61.

Should companies let born leaders rise to the top? Or is it better to attempt to develop promising individuals into leaders–to treat leadership as a discipline...\

Nurture, N. V. Are Leaders Born or Made?.

Leadership is a gift but also this gift need to be equipped with education, experience, vision, transformational change skills, forecasting skills, leaders become more “conscious” and aware of the deeper and more subtle dynamics of transformation, especially regarding people and process dynamics. They apply this increased awareness to expertly lead people through the process of change to co-create a future that will enable their organizations to win in the ever increasingly competitive marketplace.

Some leaders are born, while others grow into leadership positions.

We are all products of genes and circumstance.

Born leaders can gain greater experience over time, whereas leaders who learn in the social and cultural environment can acquire first-hand knowledge over time.

I think it would require a qualitative and quantitative study to be sure about who is 'born' leader or not. sure, there are some. Personally, I think that a person's trajectory can take her to such posts. We all know that to get a place in some areas (specially, those traditionally, occupied by men, rich, white) is not only result of individual talent. Just look around! Well, certainly, some people have a charisma that helps a lot. But even these are learned things from your family and closest social group. People (classes) 'reads' each other and react to it. My own studies shown that the 'power of command' (in the case of women scientists) is an exercise that some people have since they are born: their parents have a phd, they learn since young to see themselves in these areas (imagine a daughter of a housekeeper to see herself as a scientist???). These people also learn since young age to give orders. They have employees at home (housekeepers, babysitters, drivers, gardnners). For instance, a child of an ambassador, politician, a jetset person? These child will grow up talking freely to these people, knowing how to behave, their codes, their way to self promote themselves. The same is a child of a traffic dealer or a mafia's son. It is a well know environment (there environment), where this child will fell comfortable, no great threats compare to an outsider. Thus, they learn since young to give orders. And, of course, this 'habitus' can be improved and maximized with courses, of course, accessible to those who can pay for that. The same happens with children of other professionals: military, artists, farmers etc. It is a craft-ship allied with network. So many elements that influence our position and 'luck' in the world.

Some leaders are born, while some are made.

Nice Contribution Adla Betsaida Martins Teixeira

This is a very old debate. A person does not become a leader in vacuum. The leadership is enacted in a work environment. The leader also has his/her personality. So, the combination of the personality type and the requirement of the workplace influences the person to display leadership action. We try to fit this action in some given formats provided by researchers and academicians.