Are leaders born or made? (2014); Image source: Leadaprenuer.com
_____________________________________________________
This week’s discussion of the Psychodynamic theory got me thinking about a commonly asked question in leadership, are leaders born or made? The ideas underlying the Psychodynamic theory lean towards, made. The first two concepts in the Psychodynamic theory, family of origin and maturation or individuation support the idea that a leader is made. These concepts revolve around the idea that one’s leadership skills start the day they are born with their parents being their first leadership example (PSU, 2014, pg.3). In the maturation or individuation stage, key developments are made in relationship to authority figures and intimacy, reflecting ones’ leadership styles in the future (PSU, 2014, pg.5). Psychodynamic theory supports that leaders are “made”, made through their upbringing, their relationship influences, and through psychological understanding, aka repression and the shadow self.
In researching whether leaders are born or made, I learned about genotype rs4950. Dr. De Neve (UCL School of Public Policy) and his colleagues analyzed and compared approximately 4,000 genetic samples with jobs and relationships. They concluded that a significant relationship existed between rs4950 and leadership (University College London, 2013). What does this discovery for the “leadership” gene mean? This could change the world of recruitment and hiring. In a weak economy and high unemployment, competition heightens. Applicants could get tested for this gene and add to their resume.
This discovery could also change how we choose our mates. An international team composed of academics from Harvard, NYU, and University of California using a large twin sample, predicted that a quarter of the observed variation in leadership behavior between individuals can be explained by genes passed down by their parents (University College London, 2013). People with the genotype rs4950 could now began seeking each other out, mating exclusively to create genetically superior children with this leadership gene.
Though much research needs to be done on this topic, this discovery is exciting to the world of leadership theory. Perhaps we will find more genotypes that are significantly linked with good leadership behaviors. This could help identify good leaders earlier; helping give them the “environment” needed to nurture and grow their innate leadership abilities, producing a top breed of leaders.
Psychodynamic theory has caught a lot of slack, due to fact it is not “testable” or its inability to operationally define traits and characteristics. For example, how does one scientifically test for a “warrior” or a “magician.? It would be interesting to see what the critics of the psychodynamic theory have to say about rs4950. Testing for a gene and comparing it to specifically defined leadership traits should satisfy their need for a more modern scientific link. Technology is changing the development of theories. Perhaps one day, future students taking this course will have a new theory to study- one involving how leaders, are in fact, born.
Written by: Mai Dolinh
Sources:
Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2014). PSYCH 485. Lesson 3:
Psychodynamic Approach. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/fa14/
psych485/001/content/03_lesson/01_page.html
University College London (2013). Born to lead? Leadership can be an inherited trait, study finds. Science Daily. Retrieved September 10th, 2014 from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130115111553.htm
Brian Redmond says
This is a good post and good replies. But I have to point out that while a gene may be associated with particular traits (let’s say leadership for simplicity sake even though there is no one type of that), it doesn’t mean that person will automatically end up with that trait coming to fruition. It often takes an environmental trigger for the trait to emerge. So in the case of leadership, it would mean that one would need to be exposed to leadership opportunities first for leadership to emerge. I’ll give a more concrete example. Everyone actually has the potential to have any hair color, but it is a gene being switched on in the womb that turns the hair the color that you have. Then life occurs and those genes get switched in another direction. So for instance, reaching a certain age and having one’s hair turn gray. But as we all know stress can cause the body to react as if were aging, so environmental stress can cause gray hair to come earlier. The same thing would happen with leadership if a gene (which with behavioral traits, it is never one gene), it would take things like being in a group, a crisis situation where a team needed to react, competition, etc. to bring out the qualities. Those experiences may never occur for some people, and those with the gene may never be allowed to switch on for that reason and leadership wouldn’t emerge. So in short, biology is not destiny. It simply sets the potential.
Deanna Nicole Hunt says
I found this to be a very interesting concept that you brought up involving the psychodynamic theory. Based off of the information in your entry, it would seem as though leadership skills are something that one is born or instilled with at a young age. I find it very interesting that genetic samples have actually been taken to see if a “leadership” gene actually exists. If this proves to be true it would make for a much easier interview process when hiring management level employees.
However, I do have to wonder if a leader can be made through life experiences. Should a person who had a poor upbringing be completely voted out of a management position even though he or she may have credible leadership skills? While the psychodynamic theory may pose some truth when choosing specific leaders to work well with subordinates with similar traits, it is unfair to label people to have low leadership skills simply based on their upbringing.