Discussions about topics as these though immensely thought provoking, the ultimate valid objective or result would be, (because of the very nature of this subject and its exploration), to find oneself at the necessary threshold of transcending the boundaries within which such (this) topics emerge in the first place!!!
Even if leaders are born, they undergo nurturing consciously or inevitably through contact with the environment in which they interact!!! Such nurturing is the "making" of the leader. While some people may be more indisposed to possessing some leadership skills (in-born traits), nurturing is inevitable. We need to recall that Leadership doesn't exist in a vacuum, it is always relative. At this point of time in discussion I wish to limit my views to this stage only unless and until, we have good number of exploratory responses on this topic.
It is the very human nature to ascend, seek and discover higher possibilities, transcend limitations (self-actualization / self-realization), attain to higher states of existence, all of which result in or lead to expanding of one's consciousness. Man always strives to go beyond and transcend his / her initial limitations. Leadership is about gaining control over phenomena responsibly (response-ability) and take the reponsiblity squarely on our own shoulders, to create the state of affairs of our liking but which does not transgress or run-counter to one's own primordial holistic nature. (Since we would not be in a co-operative frequency of the nature holistically and at some point in future the efforts may run counter-productive and break down).
Can a leader be a leader without followers? Ofcource, having a following is not the true aim of any leader for the purpose of merely having followers. Rather it is to create and possess the synergy, create the thrust (synergies) to transcend the original situations or break through the initial barriers and limitations, what ever these limitations might be. So according to me, leaders, even if it be assumed, "are born" have to be made (nurtured), since at least the counterpart of the leader, that is the followers, who are the critical variable of the environment and without which the leaders would not have any role to play; the leader has to communicate or learn to communicate in ways that will connect with and inspire the followers. How can this be an in-born skill or trait since these can only come into play after the so called discovered individual-later-turned-leader is born?
POTENTIAL CAN BE IN-BORN (LATENT) BUT MANIFEST LEADERSHIP IS ONLY ON INTERACTION WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. CAPACITY TO LEARN MAY BE IN-BORN BUT LEARNING AND HAVING LEARNT COMES ONLY LATER. PERHAPS KNOWLEDGE CAN POSSIBLY BE ACQUIRED BY BIRTH BUT APPLICATION IS ALWAYS AFTER HAVING BEEN BORN AND REQUIRES INTERACTION WITH ENVIRONMENT. IN THE CONTEXT OF LEADERSHIP, THE RELEVANT KNOWLEDGE AND THE KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE APPLICABILITY OF THAT KNOWLEDGE (WISDOM) FOR EFFECTIVE LEADING ARE THE TWO SIDES OF THE SAME LEADERSHIP COIN. All required leadership elements can never be assigned or solely confined to the "in-born" argument. Leaders are thus made (by their own involvement or the circumstances or by conscious learning). "The leaders are made",more so, because we believe that, since man possess the capacity to constantly evolve and break free from the barriers gradually through perseverance aided by discriminating ability, pure intelligence, courage,adventure, sacrifice and being guided by heart, we believe that management and leadership can be learnt and thus can also be likewise taught. However, what are the effective ways of teaching and learning is debatable and is a different, though definitely a related matter.
These are my authentic views. Any comments on the above? Kindly participate, share and critique.
Warm regards to all,
From United Arab Emirates, Sharjah
Thomas Carlyle,â The person who has found his vocation in life is a blessed human being. Let him ask for no other blessedness.â
Benjamin Franklin," There are three things extremely hard: steel, a diamond and to know one self"
Research by the Gallup corporation suggests that there is no point sending that staff for training in areas where they are unsuitable. So all this made business is selectively true. Idea should be to first detect talent and then give input because there is no use filling petrol in a diesel tank.
From India, New Delhi
To ask a question or write a reply on this discussion you will need to create an account and login.