The Natural Born Leader Myth
I just heard this phrase again the other day to describe a pro athlete and had the same reaction I usually do, one of confusion and disdain. I mean, the guy being discussed is an amazing athlete, makes a ton of money, and has his name and face all over the media. Yep, he is a household name. But then the commentators gushed about how he was also a “natural born leader”! Tell me, how do athletic ability, money and fame begin to automatically reflect leadership skills or capability? Now, maybe he was born with athletic potential but I doubt he could dunk a basketball at an early age. He was at least a toddler or even an early teen-ager before he could dunk. He’s that good.
How often have you heard that phrase describing someone as a “natural born leader”? And, what was your reaction? I mean, really, “natural born” leader? Have you ever seen a newborn come out that immediately asserts leadership?
By definition, if someone is a natural born leader then they were born to that role and capacity. Frankly, I’ve never seen a baby born and begin leading right away, have you? Have you ever witnessed a baby actually leading other babies? Check out the newborns next time you’re in a hospital, and I’ll bet you that there’s no way to identify which one is the natural born leader. Of course, you could argue that the one that cries first or loudest, makes eye contact or initiates some other behavior must be the leader, I guess. Good luck with that!
My experience is that, as cute as they are, babies spend most of their time eating, sleeping and pooping. And, babies are some of the most selfish, self-centered beings out there, although I expect we all know a few teenagers, or even twenty-somethings, that might compete. And, I’m talking about the second sentence, not the first one. We won’t go there.
Reality is that a baby must be taught then learn those behaviors and characteristics which translate into leadership. Maybe it begins with getting the baby to recognize and interact with someone else, usually a parent; or, maybe it begins when the baby first learns to share…a lesson that seems to continue for decades. The point is that “natural born” leader really doesn’t exist—because any naturally born person will first consider themselves, not leading other people.
Why is this important? Because if we fall for the myth that someone is a natural born leader, we risk missing those opportunities to identify then develop those people who possess or have learned some basic leadership traits or skills but now need mentoring and experience. Or, we miss seeing someone who wants to learn to lead but needs investment by others to grow. Or, worse yet, we simply default to someone as a natural born leader, conclude he or she needs little or no further development, and risk the person stagnating, damaging others or even worse.
Now, saying there is no such person as a naturally born leader does not mean everyone is, or has the potential to be, a leader. We all know people for whom leadership roles are simply not viable—unfortunately, some of those whoms that we know are already in leadership roles; however, that’s a different story. Rather, the reality is that as a person develops, certain leadership characteristics or behaviors can be concurrently developed. Emphasis is on the word “develop”. This means experience, time, assessment and investment.
The bottom line from my decades (ouch) of experience is that it’s more beneficial to watch for person who has basic leadership traits or interests then invest in developing that person. Rather than miss the opportunity to identify a potential leader and make that investment, or move someone into a leadership role where they are destined to fail, seek the development opportunities based on who you observe. No matter what your starting point with that person, even if you choose to start very young, the long term growth and value has much more opportunity to be successful. A person is naturally born, but a leader takes investment and opportunity.