Some believe that people are naturally born as leaders while others feel that leadership skills can develop. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Many are of the view that

leadership

is innate, rather than cultivated through time and experience. In my opinion,

leadership

is largely more developed rather than gifted. Those who believe that there are naturally born leaders point out the character of a person as a fixed quantity. There are certain individuals who display a natural charisma and inimitable capacity for command. A recent example of

this

would be Barack Obama. He is a naturally eloquent, stately, physically imposing presence and perfectly walks a fine line between warmth and firmness. Researchers have long identified common natural characteristics of

leadership

such

as height, a deep voice, a strong chin and natural grace of movement. These cannot be developed to a significant degree and

therefore

support the claim that

leadership

is intrinsic.

However

, great

leadership

is more deliberate than spontaneous. There are countless examples of individuals possessing all the physical characteristics of leaders who fall well short of inspiring people. An instructive example of

this

is Steve Jobs. Early in his career, he inspired people with his exceptional talent, but that had its limits as he pushed and demeaned employees ultimately leading to his ouster from Apple.

This

humbling experience led him to soften the sharp edges of his personality in the ensuing decade by considering other viewpoints and giving up more control to competent employees. These learned traits served him well when he become CEO of Apple again and reached what many regard as the pinnacle of

leadership

. In conclusion, though the endpoint may obscure the origins, all leaders must cultivate their hubris to become great leaders. The long-standing assumptions about

leadership

must be challenged in order to put in place better institutional practices to mould future pioneers of industry and politics.