Leaders: Born or Trained?

A common topic of debate within leadership circles involves the ability to lead - can leadership skills be learned or is one just born a leader?

There are those you meet that just seem to ooze leadership qualities - when they speak, people want to listen; when they enter the room, people take notice; they appear almost bigger than life and their presence has this magnetic draw on others. These type of charismatic individuals seem to "naturally" possess certain leadership qualities, or traits, that equip them to influence others.

But then, there are others that don't appear, on first meeting, to be much different than the rest of us. There is no commanding smile or deep voice that turns your head to listen. There is no air of confidence or physical appearance that catches your attention. But, once you are around them a while, you begin to respect their deep insights and their wisdom in decision making. They reflect a wealth of discernment; others begin to look their way when difficult questions are raised without easy solutions; they have great skills in analysis and synthesis.

Charisma is a great attribute to possess. Often the charismatic leader finds him/herself with followers without much effort. But without depth, or well-designed strategies, or a clear map defining his/her goal, his/her leadership can be a flash that can result in the disappointment and the disillusionment of even the loyal follower. Those who possess these special charismatic attributes need to take care to use these gifts with great responsibility. Enthusiasm with a well crafted plan can lead to incredible results; inspiration with excellent strategic blueprints can produce a magnificent cathedral; motivation caused by dynamic words can move an entire organization.

So are all leaders born to be leaders? My answer is a qualified, YES! Some leaders possess these innate qualities that draw others to themselves, while others have worked hard to hone their skills and learn the best techniques for working with others. But, I firmly believe that every leader is a leader because God has ordained their opportunities. Every king has come to reign within God's sovereign plan. God used an uneducated fisherman, who often talked before he thought, to become the rock on which the early church was established. God knocked a highly trained Pharisee off his horse, blinded him for several days, and then raised him up to become one of the greatest global leaders of all time. In this sense, all leaders have been born to lead in God's sovereign plan.

From the slow of speech (Moses) to the mighty warrior (David), God's calling upon one's life has made all the difference. It seems as if some leaders have be groomed for their positions since childhood (Josiah), while, in contrast, others appear to be thrust into leadership roles (Joseph). It would be a fascinating study to research the world-leaders during World War 2 to see how many possessed those natural, innate skills of leadership and how many found themselves somewhat forced into leadership roles because of the circumstances of war.

I believe that some leaders are prepared by God to step into leadership roles at particular times and under special circumstances. As Esther was prepared and positioned at just the right time and just the right place to fulfill an critical leadership role in God' s plan, so some people are prepared for significant influence for "such a time as this" (Esther 4:14).


Portrait of Queen Ester found at http://blogoftheemissary.blogspot.com/2008/10/queen-esther.html

The Apprentice Approach

The Apprentice is such an interesting show. Donald Trump may be a very successful business man, but he has a very unusual method in choosing an executive manager. I enjoy watching the show, but not to learn leadership skills and techniques from the Donald. I find it fascinating to see the teamwork (or lack of it) among the candidates. The projects given to the teams, although bizarre at times, are fun and creative. Although the tasks are not always suited for the skill sets of the potential apprentices, the planning, organizing, leading and controlling of resources challenge the managerial gifts of the candidates.

I know that the show is made for the TV audience, but Donald's approach to the board room is anything but collaborative. He seems to get some great enjoyment over seeing the candidates turn on one another with accusations of blame and weakness. This "throw-your-fellow-teammate -under-the-bus" method of decision making in the "firing" process sets the culture for the entire show.

The strategy of the candidates during each task is to work hard but always find some area of weakness against at least one other player, so that if they are called into the board room they will have a bony finger of failure to point in someone else's direction. When Donald turns and asks, "David, who do you think I should fire?" David should be quick and decisive to point out the shortcomings of another person. Accusations of weakness are countered with a defense of competency. The volume level begins to rise and before Donald intervenes to quiet down the emotional volcano, three or four people are all talking at the same time. These vocal exchanges of frailties and mistakes cause deep wedges of mistrust and disloyalty.

Taking responsibility for losing, is a sign of weakness on The Apprentice. Taking credit for a team victory is a sign of leadership in the board room of the Trump Tower. The winning team celebrates with hand shakes and pats on the back while a member of the losing team hears those words of doom - "You're fired!" No one like to lose, but blame-shifting and dodging the responsibilities of decision making are not honorable characteristics of good leadership. The stressful times experienced in Donald Trump's board room do not develop character but rather reveal it.

I know its just a reality show - but how close is it to reality?

The Apprentice logo found at http://www.webtvwire.com