Case Study 5-6 pages

STATEMENT

Point/Counterpoint: Are Outstanding Leaders Born or Made?

Marjan Boerma, PhD,a Elizabeth A. Coyle, PharmD,b Michael A. Dietrich, PharmD,c

Matthew R. Dintzner, PhD,d Shannon J. Drayton, PharmD,e Johnnie L. Early II, PhD,f

Andrea N. Edginton, PhD,g Cheryl K. Horlen, PharmD,h Cynthia K. Kirkwood, PharmD,i

Anne Y.F. Lin, PharmD,j Michelle L. Rager, PharmD,k Bijal Shah-Manek, PhD,l

Adam C. Welch, PharmD,m Nancy Toedter Williams, PharmDn

a University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, Little Rock, Arkansas b University of Houston College of Pharmacy, Houston, Texas c Midwestern University College of Pharmacy – Glendale, Glendale, Arizona d Western New England University, College of Pharmacy, Springfield, Massachusetts e Medical University of South Carolina, College of Pharmacy, Charleston, South Carolina f The University of Toledo, College of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Toledo, Ohio g School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada h University of the Incarnate Word, Feik School of Pharmacy, San Antonio, Texas i Virginia Commonwealth University, School of Pharmacy, Richmond, Virginia j Notre Dame of Maryland University, College of Pharmacy, Baltimore, Maryland k Shenandoah University, Bernard J Dunn School of Pharmacy, Winchester, Virginia l Touro University - California, College of Pharmacy, Vallejo, California m East Tennessee State University, Bill Gatton College of Pharmacy, Johnson City, Tennessee n Southwestern Oklahoma State University College of Pharmacy, Weatherford, Oklahoma

Submitted September 28, 2016; accepted January 16, 2017; published April 2017.

The question of whether outstanding leaders are born or made has been debated for years. There are numerous examples of historical figures that came naturally to leadership, while others developed their leadership skills through tenacity and experience. To understand leadership, both nature (the genetic component) and nurture (the environmental influences) must be considered. This article represents the work of two Academic Leadership Fellows Program groups who debated each position at the 2016 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Interim Meeting in Tampa, Fla., in February 2016.

Keywords: leadership, genetics, environment, debate

INTRODUCTION According to R. M. Stogdill’s Handbook of Leader-

ship, “There are almost as many different definitions of leadership as there are persons who have attempted to define the concept.”1 While there is no standard definition of leader, there are many different kinds of leadership that exist in today’s environment. When thinking about out- standing leaders, whether present day or historical, one may question how they became such a notable leader. Were they born this way or were they taught to lead? The Great Man Theory, popularized in the 1840s by Thomas Carlyle, suggested that leadership traits are in- trinsic, meaning that great leaders are born and will

emerge when confronted with the appropriate situation. 2

These individuals possess certain qualities and talents,

such as deep honesty, moral vision, compassion and

care, that make them well-suited for leadership.3 On

the contrary, organizations invest much time and money

to help their employees develop leadership skills based

on the assumption that leaders can be trained. In fact, US

companies spend approximately $14 billion each year on

this training, and higher education offers a multitude of

degree courses pertaining to leadership.4 This suggests

that leadership itself is a skill that may be learned (ie,

extrinsically fostered). This article will examine and

provide further perspective on the much debated ques-

tion: are the foundations of outstanding leadership in-

trinsic (ie, leaders are born) or extrinsic (ie, leaders are

made)?

Corresponding Author: Adam C. Welch, PO Box 70413, Johnson City, TN 37614. Tel: 423-439-6334. Fax: 423-439- 6310. E-mail: [email protected]

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2017; 81 (3) Article 58.

1

METHODS The purpose of a debate is to search for the truth, or

perhaps the best answer, by comparing or contrasting ideas.5 The structure of a debate can be simplified into three components: the claim, the warrant, and the impact. The claim provides the position that the debater would like to instill upon the audience. Outstanding leaders are born, or made, is the claim. The warrant justifies the claim, either by evidence, or with external opinion. The impact places the claim into perspective and suggests why the audience should be interested. All three components (claim, warrant, and impact) are necessary for a complete argument.

5 The structure of the debate follows a point/ counterpoint format, where one side provides an argu- ment, followed by a rebuttal from the other side. The opportunity for targeted questions and answers between debaters also occurs during a typical debate.5

For this debate, two Academic Leadership Fellows Program (ALFP) groups drew a position at random. The position drawn may not have necessarily represented the personal views of the ALFP group members. Research by each group member involved literature review of primary sources, expert opinion, and historical references. Re- gardless of the position drawn, each group researched both positions, as opposing research prepares a debater for potential counter-arguments. Sources included Google Scholar, PubMed, ERIC (Educational Resources Informa- tion Center), and broad-based Internet searching for known leaders.

After extensive research, each ALFP group began preparing and practicing specific remarks for their posi- tion. Preparation involved mock debate sessions that were closely timed. Certain group members posed as the oppos- ing group to better mimic a real debate. The entire prepa- ration process, from research to debate, extended over several months and involved several group meetings, both live and virtual. The culmination was a debate presented at the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP)InterimMeetinginTampa,Fla.,inFebruary2016.

POINT: LEADERS ARE BORN The Role of Genetics in Leadership

Over the past three decades, numerous twin studies have been conducted evaluating the heritability of leader- ship.6-10 Twin studies provide a good assessment of born and made leadership in that each twin serves as a control for the other. Identical or monozygotic twins who share 100% of their genetic material can be compared to frater- nal or dizygotic twins who share 50% of their genetic material to evaluate both genetic and environmental in- fluences on leadership. Data from twin studies have con- sistently shown that leadership has a substantial degree of

genetic basis. 6,7,9 These studies have used a variety of

methodologies including questionnaires and mathemati- cal models to evaluate the genetic and shared or unique environmental experiences of twins in leadership roles. A majority of twin studies demonstrate moderate genetic contributions for personality traits of leaders, with an overall relative influence of a genetic relationship for leadership of up to 30%.

7,10 In fact, in a study by DeNeve and colleagues evaluating what traits determine leader- ship role occupancy, the shared environment of the twins was not significant with only a 10% correlation; whereas, the genetic component was found to be 24%.7 Overall, twin studies have consistently demonstrated a genetic component to leadership.

In particular, DeNeve and colleagues demonstrate that leadership role occupancy may be associated with the rs4950 genetic marker, a single nucleotide polymor- phism (SNP) that resides on the neuronal acetylcholine receptor gene on chromosome 8.

7 The neuronal acetyl- choline receptor gene can be related to personality traits, suggesting a link between leadership role occupancy and personality traits.7 Indeed, personality traits were consid- ered in the book, Good to Great, where a level 5 (highest) leader often possesses traits such as personal humility and professional will.11 It follows that a favorable genetic background sets outstanding leaders apart from the rest.

In practice, we can reference historical examples of twins who have demonstrated notable leadership. Identi- cal twins Mark and Scott Kelly, NASA astronauts as well as retired US Navy captains, have both led great discov- eries in space.12 Julian and Joaquin Castro are identical twins from Texas. Julian served as the US Secretary of Housing and Urban Development from 2014 to 2017 and Joaquin is currently a US congressman.13 Examining twins aids in the understanding of how genes lay the groundwork for leadership. The twins are born with po- tential and the ability to emerge as leaders if the genetic leadership traits are fostered in the right environment.

The evidence consistently shows a genetic compo- nent to leadership. As a result, leaders are born, not made.

Leaders and Followers We can look to nature to argue that one can be taught

to follow, but not to lead. The concept of leadership exists throughout the animal kingdom, and animal models are commonly used to study leadership behavior.

14 The three-spined stickleback fish, for example, serves as a model species for research on personality and social behavior. Individual fish show large differences in the extent in which they emerge from covered areas to ex- plore their environment. Some fish are bold and act as leaders, while others are shy and prefer to follow those

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2017; 81 (3) Article 58.

2

that lead.15,16 To determine how individuals may cope with a forced change in their leadership/follower role, Nakayama and colleagues formed pairs of stickleback fish, each consisting of a member that had shown natural leadership behavior and a member that had naturally taken on a follower role.15 The followers were rewarded with a small amount of food each time they showed ini- tiative, while the bolder fish received the same reward only when they followed the shyer member of the pair. The resulting behavioral patterns were compared with those resulting from fish being rewarded for showing their natural tendency to lead or follow. While the positive re- inforcement helped both leaders and followers to show significantly more follower behavior, the increase in leader behavior was less significant. Moreover, when the fishwere forced to swaproles, theoverallperformance of the pairs, as measured by the amount of food they were able to collect together, was reduced.

17 Altogether, the investigators concluded that fish can learn to follow but struggle to take on a leadership role. If we extend this into human leadership behavior, it may indicate that leader- ship is mostly born.

COUNTERPOINT: LEADERS ARE MADE Arguments for the claim that leaders are born should

not be supported because (1) there are statistical flaws in the twin studies evaluating leadership; (2) numerous ex- amples exist of historical figures devoid of a family his- tory of leaders; (3) individuals can learn the skills to be an outstanding leader through life experiences and leader- ship development programs. There has yet to be research to identify one single trait or mix of traits that is found in all leaders. Warren Bennis, author of the book On Becom- ing a Leader, identifies several characteristics that leaders share: a guiding vision, passion that provides hope and inspires others, integrity (which encompasses candor, maturity and self-knowledge), curiosity, and the willing- ness to take risks.

18 These are not traits that individuals are born with and cannot change, but rather traits that are developed as a result of life experiences. According to Bennis, “Developing character and vision is the way leaders invent themselves.”18 Leaders embrace opportu- nities, engage in skill development, and respond to a set of external circumstances.

The Role of Genetics in Leadership There is a lack of experimentation in humans on this

issue, so researchers have relied heavily on statistical analysis of variance between pairs of twins to estimate the extent to which differences between the pairs correlate with genetic or environmental factors. The accumulated results of twin studies have consistently estimated the

genetic component of leadership role occupancy at only 30% while estimating environmental influence at 70%.

10,19,20 Even more recent studies in molecular genet- ics have estimated the heritability of leadership at only 24% by demonstrating an association between leadership role occupancy and the rs4950 genotype.7 Simply having occupancy in a leadership role does not assume that the person is an outstanding leader.

Twin studies also make significant assumptions that limit their validity, such as the equal environment as- sumption (EEA), which assumes identical and fraternal twin pairs grow up experiencing roughly equal environ- ments.

21 Every person has slightly different perceptions of the world, and they see, hear, and internalize their environment to a different extent. Furthermore, results from twin studies cannot be directly generalized because they do not represent a random sample of the general population. While twin studies and molecular genetics have provided some indirect evidence in the form of sta- tistical correlations or associations with self-reported leadership occupancy, these same studies also conclude that leadershipis complexand that it is formed much more significantly by a person’s environment.

7 That is, leader- ship is not something we are simply born with like blue eyes or red hair. Leaders, especially outstanding leaders, are developed over time through hard work and lived experiences.

Historical Examples Genetics logic would suggest that outstanding

leaders are born to parents who are also leaders. Devel- oping leadership skills through deliberate practice would be unnecessary for outstanding leaders. Both are false, and several historical examples support this statement.

Walt Disney came from humble beginnings and grew up in a home with his unassuming home-maker mother, his entrepreneurial father who failed at most busi- ness schemes in which he ventured, and four mostly or- dinary siblings. His strict and aloof father disapproved of Walt’s creative leanings and actively forbid his participa- tion in related events. Despite all of this, Walt succeeded, at the age of 29, with Mickey Mouse. He emerged, through perseverance, learning from mistakes and devel- opment of his skills to rally a team around an idea, as a pioneer in the field of animation.

22

Another example of an exceptional leader being made despite a less than leader-like pedigree is John D. Rockefeller Sr., the richest American in history.23 His father was a “snake oil” salesman and bigamist who aban- doned his family when John was just a small boy. Despite this “pedigree,” John created and grew Standard Oil, the largest oil refiner in the world, during the turn of the 20th

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2017; 81 (3) Article 58.

3

century.23 Rockefeller established his immense wealth slowly and deliberately, through success and failure, not through a predetermined set of innate leadership abilities.

In addition to Disney and Rockefeller, President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Roman Emperor Claudius Caesar Augustus are two further examples of outstanding leadersfromalessthanoutstandingparentalpedigree.24-26

These leaders were mentored, learned from their environ- ment, and developed through time and experience.

Leadership Industry It has been demonstrated that it takes thousands of

hours of deliberate practice to acquire mastery of skill. Research by Ericsson and colleagues in 1993 demon- strated that deliberate practice was responsible for 80% of the difference in outcomes between elite musicians and committed amateurs.27 While the probability of succeed- ing at a high level is relatively low without some talent, the small role for talent is overshadowed by the larger role that preparationseems to play.WaltDisneyspent10years learning and practicing his leadership skills following

a first failed business attempt and ultimately went on to transform the entertainment industry. Leaders can indeed be developed, and leadership can be taught and practiced. Even AACP supports leadership development through various resources and programming, particularly the ALFP program to which the authors are participating.

Billions of dollars are spent yearly by corporations seeking to have their employees develop leadership skills. Leadership development is not a single activity, but rather a set of activities that typically occur over a period of time (ie, several years). Each leadership development activity may contribute to leadership capacity of the individual, of the group, or of the organization.

28

CONCLUSION Are leaders born or made? Each ALFP group mem-

ber, excluding the two leadership facilitators, provided his/her brief opinion on this topic, which is summarized in Table 1. Consistent themes are noted when reading these statements. The group debating that leaders are born argue that certain innate traits are needed in order to

Table 1. Authors’ Opinions on Outstanding Leaders Debate

Position Debated: Leaders Are Born vs. Made Opinion

Born When asked, many leaders who are valued for their leadership by others are not able to explain what makes them stand out. Therefore, real leadership depends, for a large part, on one’s natural abilities.

Born Leaders are born with certain core traits that through situations and training foster them into becoming outstanding leaders.

Born Unless an individual is born with certain traits (eg, humility), life experiences will not develop him/her into an outstanding leader.

Born An admired and common trait among outstanding leaders is humility. A humble leader is inspiring and helps to bring out the best in others.

Born People are born with certain innate traits that allow them to emerge as outstanding leaders when the situation is thrust upon them.

Born We are all born with certain traits that have the potential to make us outstanding leaders. Those traits are highlighted when the environment and circumstances align and allow one to show his/her true potential.

Made We all have talents, some which make it easier to step into a leadership role, but without the right situation, development, and awareness, those talents may be wasted. Not everyone has the talent to be a great leader, but every great leader needs more than just skills to fulfill that role.

Made To become good leaders, people have to be motivated to discover who they are and what they believe in (personally and professionally), then use their experiences, training, and education to build and leverage those strengths.

Made While it may be true that we’re born with a certain propensity to lead, outstanding leaders are the product of hard work and development over time.

Made Although compelling arguments can be generated that leaders are born, history teaches us otherwise, thus resulting in the conclusion that leaders are made.

Made It’s easier to support the notion that outstanding leaders are made when the definition of environment can be so broad. It is also possible there are genetic components that have yet to be discovered.

Made The bred vs. born debate is unlikely to move forward in the absence of a clear definition of leader. There is an impossibility in assessing correlation (eg, genetics) when the outcome (eg, leader) lacks clarity.

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2017; 81 (3) Article 58.

4

develop into an outstanding leader when life experiences and circumstances present themselves. The group debating that leaders are made argue that training, hard work, and experiences result in the development of outstanding leaders. The answer is likely not just one viewpoint or the other, but rather a combination of both. There is evi- dence to support a 30% genetic component to being in a leadership role.

7 The genetic evidence, however, largely uses indirect outcomes, such as self-reported leadership role occupancy, which makes no claim to the aptness of leader within that role. Further, studies from nature sup- port that some fish could learn to follow, but were less likely to learn to lead.14 The translational ability of such a study from fish to humans is not yet demonstrated.

Historical examples exist to support both a genetic and environmental component to leadership. Whether an evidence-based endeavor or a financial opportunity, the leadership industry exceeds $14 billion annually and is purportedly committed to making leaders. Leaders most likely arise from a combination of genetic predisposition as well as development through reactions to environmen- tal factors.

REFERENCES 1. Stogdill RM. Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of Theory and Research. New York, NY: The Free Press; 1974. 2. Carlyle T. On Heroes, Hero-worship, and the Heroic in History. Project Gutenberg; 2012. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1091/1091- h/1091-h.htm. Accessed August 28, 2016. 3. Gini A, Green RM. 10 Virtues of Outstanding Leaders: Leadership & Character. Chichester, West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2013. 4. Gurdjian P, Halbeisen T, Lane K. Why leadership-development programs fail. McKinsey Quarterly. 2014. http://www.mckinsey.com/ global-themes/leadership/why-leadership-development-programs-fail. Accessed August 28, 2016. 5. Wolfson JA. The Great Debate! A Handbook for Policy Debate and Public Forum Debate. 4th ed. Naperville, IL: LightningBolt Press; 2012. 6. Johnson AM, Vernon PA, McCarthy JM, Molson M, Harris JA, Lang KJ. Nature vs nurture: are leaders born or made? A behavior genetic investigation of leadership style. Twin Res. 1998;1(4):216- 223. 7. DeNeve J-E, Mikhaylov S, Dawes CT, Christakis NA, Fowler JH. Born to lead? A twin design and genetic association study of leadership role occupancy. Leaders Q. 2013;24(1):45-60. 8. Jang KL, Livesley WJ, Vernon PA. Heritability of the big five personality dimensions and their facets: a twin study. J Pers. 1996;64 (3):577-591. 9. Johnson AM, Vernon PA, Harris JA, Jang KL. A behavior genetic investigation of the relationship between leadership and personality. Twin Res. 2004;7(1):27-32.

10. Arvey RD, Rotundo M, Johnson W, Zhang Z, McGue M. The determinants of leadership role occupancy: genetic and personality factors. Leadersh Q. 2006;17(1):1-20. 11. Collins J. Good to Great – Why Some Companies Make the Leap and Others Don’t. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers; 2001. 12. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Human research program. August 3, 2016. https://www.nasa.gov/twins-study. Accessed September 23, 2016. 13. Kroll A. The power of two: inside the rise of the Castro brothers. The Atlantic. January 23, 2015. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ archive/2015/01/the-power-of-two-inside-the-rise-of-the-castro-brothers/ 440034. Accessed September 23, 2016. 14. Couzin ID, Krause J, Franks NR, Levin SA. Effective leadership and decision-making in animal groups on the move. Nature. 2005; 433(7025):513-516. 15. Nakayama S, Harcourt JL, Johnstone RA, Manica A. Initiative, personality and leadership in pairs of foraging fish. PloS ONE. 2012;7 (5):e36606. 16. Jolles JW, Fleetwood-Wilson A, Nakayama S, Stumpe MC, Johnstone RA, Manica A. The role of previous social experience on risk-taking and leadership in three-spined sticklebacks. Behav Ecol. 2014;25(6):1395-1401. 17. Nakayama S, Stumpe MC, Manica A, Johnstone RA. Experience overrides personality differences in the tendency to follow but not in the tendency to lead. Proc Biol Sci. 2013;280(1769):20131724. 18. Bennis W. On Becoming a Leader. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Perseus Books Group; 2009:33–48. 19. Arvey RD, Zhang Z, Avolio BJ, Krueger RF. Developmental and genetic determinants of leadership role occupancy among women. J Appl Psychol. 2007;92(3):693-706. 20. Li W-D, Arvey RD, Zhang Z, Song Z. Do leadership role occupancy and transformational leadership share the same genetic and environmental influences? Leadersh Q. 2012;23(2):233-243. 21. Joseph J. The equal environment assumption of the classical twin method: a critical analysis. J Mind and Behavior. 1998;19(3):325- 358. 22. Barrier JM. The Animated Man: A Life of Walt Disney. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press; 2007. 23. Chernow R. Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller, Sr. New York, NY: Random House; 1998. 24. Eisenhower JSD. Presidential children don’t belong in battle. NY Times Web. September 27, 2008. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/ 28/opinion/28eisenhower.html?_r50. Accessed February 2, 2016. 25. Ambrose SE. D-Day June 6, 1944: The Climactic Battle of World War II. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster; 1994. 26. Dennison M. The Twelve Caesars: The Dramatic Lives of the Emperors of Rome. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press; 2012:101- 130;159–188. 27. Ericsson KA, Krampe RT, Tesch-Romer C. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychol Rev. 1993;100(3):363-406. 28. Hedges K. If you think that leadership development programs are a waste of time you might be right. Forbes. 2014. http://www.forbes. com/sites/work-in-progress/2014/09/23/if-you-think-leadership- development-is-a-waste-of-time-you-may-be-right/#484ba80c5dcc. Accessed February 22, 2016.

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2017; 81 (3) Article 58.

5

Copyright of American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education is the property of American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.