Class Work

Professional Development II Final Paper

Part I:

My group’s final presentation was the topic of nature vs. nurture or “Are Leaders Born or Are They Made?” Many think that leaders are simply born with the DNA to lead. Many others think that leadership can be learned and grown with proper education and experience. Some others think that it is a combination of the two breeds the greatest leaders. Personally I believe it is a combination of both.

But first one of the reasons I find this topic to be very interesting is because many times you hear the phrase he or she “looks like a leader.” What exactly does “looking” like a leader entail? Are there specific physical traits that cause somebody to “look” like a leader? Various studies have shown that tall men are often favored, and corporate CEOs are taller than average. Moreover, tall men tend to earn more than shorter men. But that may simply tell us about the stereotypes of what corporate boards think a CEO should look like and not that taller men are better leaders. Some of the most powerful leaders in history, such as Napoleon and Stalin, were little over five feet tall. Traits have come to be seen as consistent patterns of personality rather than inherited characteristics. This is called the “traits-centered” approach and it mixes both nature and nurture. This means that traits can to some extent be learned rather than merely inherited. This reminds me of one of the quotes that I mentioned during the presentation.

The question was asked to college students “Are Leaders Born or Are They Made?” One person pretty much summed it up to exactly how I feel: “They are born to be made. Leadership is a set of skills that can be learned by practice over time. This is true of literally any skill. However, you need some in-born talent or “pre-determination” to master the skill. There is a significant difference between “learning a skill” and mastering one”. I really like this quote because it says that the ability to...