John B. Watson : An American Behavioral Psychologist

If leaders are simply born that way then what is the point of leadership development. The answer perhaps creates controversy because the answer is simply both. Clearly there are those who have certain abilities that allow them to more easily assume leadership roles while others of us work to develop the necessary skills. The reality is that each person is unique in their skills and abilities as is each leader. One may be charismatic while another is empathetic, one may have clear vision another remarkable communication skill. We all have a different mix of skills and abilities that allow us the opportunity to lead. “Genetic endowment may merely influence the rate at which domain-specific expertise is acquired without imposing any upper or lower bounds on attainment.” (Simonton, 2007) While some leaders definitely have a genetic advantage on leadership, and may find

In Lesson 6, Dr. Fischer explores the ideas of whether leaders are born or made. In some cases certain traits such as extroversion, conscientiousness, openness, and emotional intelligence can suggest that leaders can in

Behaviorism is one of seven schools of thought. Behaviorists focus on observable actions rather than the internal aspects of individuals, such as thoughts and emotions. Ultimately, behavior is a response to the surrounding environmental stimuli. Behaviorists have established many basic principles that are still critical to understanding human behavior today.

Is the “traits” approach to the study of leadership valid? If so, in what ways? How does recent research on the links between personality and individual behavior contribute to our understanding of leadership?

Throughout time the question of “ Are leaders born or made?” continues to be debated. This question has been part of several myths that try to explain what makes a person a leader. According to the trait approach theory, it sets a benchmark for what certain traits an individual must possess in order to make them a leader. Before leadership traits were considered innate. However, as time has progressed research has indicated that situations differentiate leaders from non-leaders. Therefore, an individual does not possess certain traits, rather it is the relationship between the person and its society that make him/her leader. All leaders must have a set of skills that help them lead subordinates to reach an overall vision. A vision must originate from both the leader and its followers, and it is the leader's job to articulate the vision. Furthermore, leaders demonstrate the capacity to lead their followers and

As a growing debate, the question at hand is whether great leaders are born with specific leadership traits, or if one can be taught certain traits over time. According to (Wikipedia.com) the approach of listing leadership qualities, often termed "trait theory of leadership", assumes certain traits or characteristics will tend to lead to effective leadership. I believe that leadership traits such as honest, competent, initiative, inspiring, hardworking, intelligent, and the ability to lead the masses, are some of the leadership traits one should possess. Within this paper, I will examine the overall concept of leadership traits, while observing the traits that were, or can be associated with successful leaders.

The trait approach is clearly flawed because it only takes into account one side of leadership; however, it does provide valuable insight on the leadership side. Trait theory provides an outline for feedback. Subordinates can quickly pick up on qualities that a leader does or does not have. This feedback can provide individuals with a good understanding of where they stand as a leader. Simple surveys such as the leadership trait questionnaire can be conducted to translate feedback into tangible evidence. I have distributed this questionnaire and collected results for myself to grasp my perceived leadership trait levels. For my example as a plebe, I had a clear perception of where the firstie stood as a leader. I unconsciously recognized many leadership traits without having a solid understanding of what I saw. This illustrates the nature of the approach. It identifies people who have demonstrated leadership traits and has no description for how a leader should act in an environment or situation. It is extremely easy to conceptualize but fails to take the leadership situation and context into account. The trait approach provides important concepts to better understand leadership but is clearly is not enough be used exclusively as a guiding theory.

In the text it explains a problem with trait leadership is it never explains which traits are the ones that make a leader and which one maintains one as a leader. I disagree with this statement as a leader may not possess the traits of a leader currently or yet but through life or circumstances that effect their decisions and personal qualities may change them and form a leader.

To be a leader in today’s society, in my opinion, one must possess genuine abilities that empower and strengthen those they wish to lead or mentor. The idea that an individual is born with the skill set and talents of someone that has spent the majority of their life “evolving” through priceless experience is both extremely farfetched and a bit unbelievable. However, throughout my own experiences, I have seen others achieve leadership positions through training and or personal development. Moreover, I am sure that there are some “would be leaders” that have a natural talent for leadership but I use the term “some” lightly. Research has shown that the qualities of a leader are not necessarily tied to one or the other but leaders have shown

Early on in the study of leadership, it was believed that people were born with specific traits that made them great leaders. In other words, early

leader is, if there is some type of genetic makeup to leaders, or whether skills can be learned,

Psychologists have been focused on observing and understanding human behavior for centuries, dating back to the Greek philosophers when psychology and philosophy were considered one.Today, Psychology is the study of human behavior, beginning before birth and lasting until death. It is clear that the observance human behavior is a vast and profound source of data for psychologists. Early philosophers relied on methods of observation and logic. A physiologist named Wilhelm Wundt in the 1800’s began using scientific research methods in his study of mental processes. However, the situation was totally different in the beginning of 20th century when psychology still struggled to be regarded as a separate discipline with practical value(Mastering,2011). Psychologists had only begun to be accepted as a science. It was John B. Watson who established the school of Behaviorism and inspired many other psychologists to study patterns of human behavior and their mechanisms. Watson 's contribution to psychology is important not to underestimate; he studied animal and human behavior to come up with a methodology that would give Psychology a respected status among other scientific disciplines. This essay will focus on the biography and works of John B. Watson with a purpose to show why his works are important for Psychology today(Hergenhahn & Henley, 2013).

Trait leadership theory suggests that all leaders are born with or display certain key personality characteristics. Certain characteristics are particularly suited to leadership. People who make good leaders have a sufficient combination of these character traits. Most of the time the traits are considered to be naturally part of a person’s personality. Hence, leadership trait theory tends to assume that people are born as leaders or not as leaders. However, according to Shead (2007), the idea that leadership traits are inborn and unchangeable appears to be incorrect. He posits that it is true that many of our dispositions and tendencies are influenced by our personalities, but most people will acknowledge that it is possible for someone to change their character traits for the worse. Someone typically known for being honest can learn to be deceitful. Stogdill (1974) identified the following traits and skills as critical to leaders.

There are many kinds of leaders; some lead through position and authority, while others lead through inspiration and vision. Some people are simply natural born leaders. However, whether one was born a leader or has to become a leader, all great leaders spend time developing their traits. Similarly, when you train for a sport, you first learn to develop the fundamentals, and then you work to master and apply them. I’ve been told I am a born leader, but have always sought to improve my leadership abilities through experience. Maxwell states, “The learned leader; has seen leadership modeled most of life, has learned leadership through training, and has self-discipline to become a great leader” (Maxwell, 93). This statement is reflective of my experience during my military tenure, and what it means to me is; leadership must be developed in practice, as well as in theory.

So if a leader needs a combination of characteristics that makes them successful is a leader born or made? The answer is both. Some people already possess the traits that they need to be leaders and are often leaders from an early age. Some people observe and eventually become leaders. Leadership can be taught. Over the years many theories about leadership have been developed. These theories include but are not limited to trait theories, behavioral theories, contingency theories, and functional theories.