Are leaders born or made?

[cronus71]

Guys, would like to have your opinion on this.

Do you think leaders are born or made?

Perhaps with a focus on more recent history, though if you want to argue that in the Roman times etc. one was born to the job, that's OK too.

Sample leaders, would be Ghandi, Mandela, Martin Luther King or any another person you want.

Leadership:

The ability to influence a group toward the achievement of goals.

*EDIT - I left the option "Both" out, as I'd like you to choose either one of the two options.

[BBK]

Its difficult. I think certain attributes of a great leader must be genetic, but then maybe they are also made out of circumstance. Would MLK have been a great leader if there was no civil rights atrocities in america needing resolving? Likewise for Ghandi, if Britain weren't running India what would have been his "cause"? Saying that, the vast majority of people wouldn't be able to pick up the mantle of leader in the same circumstances, so in this instance I would say born. Maybe its a combination of born (genetic) and born (out of necessity). So yes, born

[cronus71]

Its difficult. I think certain attributes of a great leader must be genetic, but then maybe they are also made out of circumstance. Would MLK have been a great leader if there was no civil rights atrocities in america needing resolving? Likewise for Ghandi, if Britain weren't running India what would have been his "cause"? Saying that, the vast majority of people wouldn't be able to pick up the mantle of leader in the same circumstances, so in this instance I would say born. Maybe its a combination of born (genetic) and born (out of necessity). So yes, born

Very good start here

[MercuryRises]

One or the other eh?

I don't think I can argue one point or the other, as whilst some people are massively charismatic leaders without certain situations they wouldn't have a cause, or a way to rise to power.

For Instance, Napoleon Bonapart. If he hadn't been caught up in the French Revolution and to a certain extent been in the right place at the right time, would he ever have been in a position to become ruler of France (and eventually most of Europe) ? He was a brilliant tactician and the best Military commander at the time (Wellington was at the time Just Arthur Wellesley and Aide De Camp in Ireland) but he wasn't much liked due to his Corsican Ancestry.

Wellington made a name for himself in India, however he didn't become truely the leader people know him as until he returned to take on Napoleon in Europe, helped in part by the fact that his brother was an MP who helped him secure his rank, A born leader, but witout the situation he had, and influence from other areas would he be so well known, or reached his high rank fast enough to become a leader?

Che Guevara, another well known leader, and one of the most Iconic, obviously had some charisam and natural ability as a leader, however one of the main reasons for his rise as a guerilla leader was his distaste at the endemic poverty in his home country, which led him into Communism etc. Born with the charisma of a leader, but if he'd been born in a richer country, would he have had cause to become a leader?

It's a difficult one to argue, and I'm afraid i'm fence sitting on this one, and have to agree with BBK and go for Born and Born (of necessity) as without certain social/economic situations there would be no precedent for the leaders.

[$kint]

dont want to over complicate what is a 50/50 poll but there are many types of leader be it political,dictatorship,revolutionary,military etc. all require different qualities but only part of what makes a great leader can be educated the majority imo has to be from the fire, passion and belief in their cause that makes a GREAT leader

[CzarJunkie]

They are born. Conditioning cannot teach instinct and so much of what makes a good leader is buried deep in instinctive reactions to difficult and challenging situations. When Gary Glitter sang, 'I'm the Leader of the Gang, I am', I like to think he was talking about me..........

[hxbro]

you are made a leader, you can train yourself to be a pack leader, and influences when growing up will make you take on those aspects required to be a leader.

It's quite possible for humans to be fake pack leaders, and convince others around them that they are a leader, but dogs know otherwise and will sense you are not a real pack leader

if anyone is interested I've been reading "Be the pack leader" by the dog whisper recently, it goes into it.

[casio]

born definatly, just look at gordon brown and tony blair, blair was born a leader. As much as he wanted to be a leader, gordon brown isnt, hes trying but ive gotta say hes no leader, if he didnt know where the "bodies" are buried i doubt he'd have got the pm's job. As cjs posted "conditioning cannot teach instinct"

[$kint]

i have been pondering this but if we follow or look to these leaders then in essence dont we MAKE them our leaders without us they wouldnt have anything to lead so whilst they may be born with leadership skills they are actually made leaders...interesting

[casio]

i have been pondering this but if we follow or look to these leaders then in essence dont we MAKE them our leaders without us they wouldnt have anything to lead so whilst they may be born with leadership skills they are actually made leaders...interesting

Did you vote for gordon brown then?

[burner1]

Difficult, I think it involves different aspects, but one I think is usually a common factor that I would call 'natural' is a persons charisma/personality, but then again, a persons up-bringing plays a part in their view of leading others against something they are against if it's an ethical issue.

[MercuryRises]

Did you vote for gordon brown then?

Nope, but he was Made a leader by Tony B-Liar's resignation, much like a lower rank taking over command when the general buys it int the old WW2 movies.

[casio]

what i was meaning though was its different being put in charge like gordon brown was rather than taking it from someone like blair did, a real leader takes control (thatcher,blair,hamilton,senna,bush) rather than the ones who are gifted the job by someone else leaving (king's, queens, pope etc)

personally i dont think ive got it in me to vote for the convervatives, but id rather have a choice to vote for who i feel is the leader when the pm is chosen than not,

[doughboy]

leaders are made, not born. just like murderers or any other outcast.

[flukesy]

Martin Luther King? He was no leader he was employed by the government to preach integration.
The true leader of that time was Elijah Muhammad and his spokesman Malcolm X.

[BBK]

Martin Luther King? He was no leader he was employed by the government to preach integration.
The true leader of that time was Elijah Muhammad and his spokesman Malcolm X.

I hate to think where we would be if those two had had more influence. The NOI is a separatists organisation, preaching (amongst other things) for a black state and not an integrated state. For me this is not leadership unless you include people like Jim Jones - or come to think of it Hitler - as great leaders.

[beansontoast]

They are made through upbringing & experience. The only way they're born is if dad's a dictator/emperor/pharaoh & they get into the job through fear/reputation/birthright etc.

[4me2]

Good leaders have good characters and people aren't born with character they develope it.

Most bad leaders are not leaders at all they are dictators.

Some leaders are born leaders purely because they inherit their titles and positions from their fathers ie Lords. Some also walk into leadership positions because of wealthy parents ie uppercrust Army officers commonly known as Rodnies and Ruperts.They are rarely good leaders and rarely command any respect from their subordinates and quickly climb the promotion ladder so they been be posted onto other units and become someone elses problem.

[cronus71]

Thank you guys, nice split between this, which was kinda expected.

If one googles around for this, I think the most common view is the option I didn't include. I think as we have evolved, leaders have been made, and not born to the job that much. I think in the cases where one is born to the job, one is exposed to puppeteering, and infact just a fasad to leadership, where the actual leader(s) are in the background.

Most people have a passion for something, could of course be something very egoistic, but could be for the good of others as well. If one is allowed room, to focus on that one thing, I believe you can get through to people, gain followers, and that way achieve a goal. Sadly too many of us today, just think 'I can't be arsed', leaving the door open for crappy leaders to step in or take the stage.

Then of course we have the 'leaders' who have taken the leadership, hasn't this always resulted in disaster?

[4me2]

Then of course we have the 'leaders' who have taken the leadership, hasn't this always resulted in disaster?

Like Jesus and Mohammed ?