Are Leaders Born or Made

Following the historical development of leadership practices Nahavandi (2003) describes two eras one that face fungus a belied that leaders be natural and the one pastime it has the idea that leaders be make. Interestingly enough Nahavandi (2003) showtime describes the era of when mountain thought that leaders are born, stock- quiet down after just 100 years they made an self-assertion that they are made, therefore as Garic (2007) has put it that with experience people?s attitudes might change, so did they towards leadership. However there still remain authors that channel out that leaders cannot be born and give reasoning and others that oppose and say that you cannot make mortal a leader if he was not born with this. in that location have been a lot of disputes outlining the advantages and disadvantages of both ways of thinking, til now still authors could not come to one opinion.

Avolio(1999) holds a point of view that leaders are made since extensive learning is required in any case, therefore those who considers that leaders are born will not be able to inform why then leadership training and development classes are held in order to make a leader more(prenominal) effective.

Garner (2005) opposes to this saying that leaders are born barely it takes certain efforts in order to become a leader, he says that it is not enough to be born with certain qualities a person also has to understand how these could be used in order to produce results.

Summing up the two opinions is Bock (2006) answers this read/write head in an affirmative manner; he says that the answer has been assemble long ago however different authors still play along debating about its implication. Bock says that leaders are both made and born, he says that it cannot be just one of the two because differently we would...

If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Orderessay



If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: How it works.