Dear Rehaan,

In the millions of words spoken about leadership, there is general agreement that leadership is independent of positional power or authority, though often the two run in parallel.

In any group of people working or living together for any period of time, various individuals will demonstrate a degree of leadership from time to time. This may because of a "natural tendency" to offer leadership, or perhaps because the individual has particular knowledge and experience with regard to specific matters. How that leadership is expressed is a function of the personality and confidence of the individual.

So the capacity for leadership is inherent in all of us. Some may stifle this capacity because of a lack of confidence or a lack of interest in contributing in this manner. However the capacity remains.

However, it is all too easy in a team environment to let someone else take the running with leadership. This is a "low risk" approach. The down side is that decisions are not as enriched when this happens.

The military are a good example of a system that developes the leadership capacity of a broader range of individuals. My hypothesis is that because the military (and similar organisational structures) operate with a clear procedural/operational framework, exercising leadership at an individual level is less "risky". Everyone knows what needs to be done in many situations, and are very aware of what is expected of individuals. Leadership here is a function of both procedural knowledge and expectation. It is a limited kind of leadership though as the opportunity for creative approaches is somewhat limited.

Regards

Professor Mamta

Dear Colleagues,

To say that leaders are born is confusing charisma with leadership

leadership is a skill...and skills can be acquired.....u may have a knack for it...but u cant be born with a skill...

ther is an experiment by alan jabvoitz (i hope i got the spelling right). he observed 5 similar traits in leaders
1 restlessness
2 self confidence
3 tendency to be a loner
4 need for independence

and i dont remember the 5th one

also, alan found the same cylce in the leaders he observed
1 early exposure to corporate life
2 trouble in school
3 problems with authority at work
4 need for taking risk and independence
5 bliss at entrepreneurship

BUT, there was another experiment done by someone named Brazeal he said tht leadership depends on the environment (argument for being made) the inner environment...and the social environment.

my conclusion.

it is both!!!

LEADERS ARE BORN WITH THE QUALITY AND NEED TO POLISH IT.

example..playing the piano...its a skill....which u have to learn...u cant just take birth and strt playing the piano. thts absurd

simillarly....u cant teach a monkey to be a leader....he must have tht charisma or tht quality in him

comments expected!!!

paul thomas

Webster's defines a leader as simply being, a person or thing that leads. While leadership is defined as being the function or position of a leader, but it is more complex than that. Leadership is a behavior we exert when we take responsibility for our actions and their consequences.

It is about being accountable when we assume responsibility for guiding others. Leadership is often the difference between success and failure. It is what separates the doers from the observers, and it is what gives positive direction to individuals and organizations.

I say leaders are made by US, with the help of society, nature, and under different circumstance!!!

Regards
Rajul