Sunday, December 15, 2013

Leaders Born or Made?

The question of whether people are born with certain traits or learn certain traits has deep historic roots. It started with Aristotle, asking whether the mind was a tabula rosa, or blank slate, and whether we are all born with this tabula rosa or whether we have acquired these traits before we were born. The qualities and traits of leaders are exactly the same and the historic question of these traits being heritable or acquired is a question that still draws much debate in scholastic circles. But, when we look at who our leaders are today, the majority of them served as followers before they became leaders, slowly working themselves up into the leadership position that they are in today. These traits are acquired because if leaders were born, then learning about leadership traits and trying to become a leader is effectively worthless. If we are not born a leader than surely we will never become leader if we operate under the framework of leaders being born. Leaders have to first learn how they can lead before leading.

1 comment:

  1. I appreciate you taking a more philosophical approach to this post, Oliver. Sentences such as this one: "we are not born a leader than surely we will never become leader if we operate under the framework of leaders being born," were not entirely clear to me, but I think your general premise was in support of leadership being learned. Be sure to start these posts early enough that you can proofread your response for clarity. Too, this post was in connection to a quote from Kouzes and Posner, so it would behoove you to complement your philosophical perspective with a connection to the quote and our class discussions on the topic.

    ReplyDelete