Morris, Charles G., and Albert A. Maisto. Understanding Psychology. 10th ed.

Upper Saddle
River. Pearson Education, Inc., 2014. (480-482) Print.
A variety of theories are used to try to answer the question, What makes a great leader?
The great-leader theory states that leaders are extraordinary people who assume positions of
influence and then shape events around them. (Morris, 480) Another theory explains the
emergence of successful leadership by having the right person in the right place at the right time.
Examples include leaders like, Martin Luther King Jr. and Bill Gates. In the 1950s and 1960s,
Martin Luther King Jr., lead the civil rights movement. He did carry the correct characteristics
such as, motivated, intelligent and eloquent, which correlates with the great-person theory.
Although, if the timing was not right and the United States was not going through the racial
issues at that specific time in history, Dr. King may not have had the opportunity to become such
a prominent leader. Bill Gates carried similar traits such as intelligent, innovative, and
determined. Likewise, Gates would not have become the leader that he is seen to be today. He
was born at a convenient time to have the chance to advance technology with a new computer
software company, Microsoft.
Fred Fiedlers contingency theory suggests that personal characteristics are important to
the success of a leader. A task oriented leader believes that the completion of the task is more
important than the relationships with his group members. On the other end of the spectrum, the
relationship oriented leader is more concerned with caring for his group members. The
effectiveness of these styles are determined by the structure of the task (laid back or demanding),
the relationship between the leader and the group (the leaders personable skills), and the leaders
power (great or little over the group.) The reason seems to be that female managers have
effectively combined such traditionally masculine task-oriented traits as decisiveness,

planning, and setting standards with such feminine relationship-oriented assets as

communication, feedback, and empowering other employees (Morris, 482) Basically, the
contingency theory proves that there is not one individual type of leader that is best for all
situations. The leader must have a variety of qualities and abilities to handle the specific
situation and come up with the best possible solution.
Other Quotes: [Robert J.] Stenbergs theory of effective leadership stresses certain essential
traits necessary for effective leadership: wisdom, intelligence, and creativity, synthesized. (481)
In the collectivist culture that values cooperation n interdependence among group members,
although one group member may be named the manager it is less likely that individuals will
have clearly defined roles as this type of leader or that type of leader. All members see
themselves as working together to accomplish the groups goal. (481)
Analysis: I agree with the right-place-at-the-right-time theory to answer what makes great
leaders. Opportunities have a lot to do with why some people hold higher position than others.
Being in the right place at the right time could be a life changing moment so I understand why
this could be used as a reliable solution of the great leader inquiry. Since, this information is
from a school textbook, I believe it is easy to read and provides plenty of details. It is broken
down into sections with headings to help separate the information by relevance. The text
provides readers with key words in bold (great-leader theory and right-place-at-the-right-time
theory) and supporting examples. This piece is useful to me because it gives me information
about types of leadership and the theories provide me with some insight on how to answer the
question, Are leaders born or made?

Gentry, William, Ph.D., Jennifer J. Deal, Ph.D., Sarah Stawiski, Ph.D., and Marian Ruderman,
Ph.D., Are Leaders Born or Made? Center for Creative Leadership. Mar. 2012: 4-11.
Web. Access: 16 Mar. 2015
Made. Commonly, this is the answer when asked the question, Are leaders born or
made? Gentry and associates conducted a study with the purpose of investigating how top-level
leaders and executives believe how people become leaders. The focus groups were based on born
versus made beliefs, which developed the names, the Borns and the Mades. The Borns and
the Mades were compared by their responses to leadership topics. The studys results conclude:
19.1% believe that leaders are born, 52.4% believe they are made, and 28.5% believe they are
equally born and made. Out of the people that believe leaders are born, most of them (41.21%)
think the traits of a person is the main contributor in creating a leader. Out of the people that
believe leaders are made, most of them (45.60%) think a persons experiences is the main
contributor in creating a leader.
The focus groups have opposing beliefs: Borns are likely to be more supportive of
individual actions and more leader or authority-focused, while Mades will be more supportive of
influencing and other-focused actions. (Gentry, 8) This is one of the many differences that exist
between the Borns and the Mades. According to Exhibits 3 and 4 on page 10, Borns believe
being formal and rule-abiding have considerable contribution to leadership. Despite the
differences in opinion of the born and made believers, they do share some combined beliefs.
Both believe that leaders should be participative, team oriented, charismatic, and humane
oriented. Borns and Mades believe leaders should not be evasive and indirect.
Other Quotes: While Borns and Mades both believe that pay and relationships with others
should be important to leaders, Mades more than Borns think that making the world a better

place, being of service to society, and contributing to humanity (altruism) should be important to
leaders. (9)
Analysis: This peer reviewed scholarly article provides valid information backed up by collected
data and surveys conducted by the Ph.D. authors. Anyone seeking information revolving around
leaders and followers or more specifically, the inquiry, Are leaders born or made? can use this
article as a reliable source. Overall, this article is not difficult to read, although there may be a
few words that would cause the average reader to look up. The authors provide charts and visuals
to help the readers grasp certain information like statistics used as evidence. This source
provides me with the direct answer that I am going to apply to my inquiry paper. All groups
overwhelmingly agree that people become leaders in large part as a result of experiences that
help them learn how to be a leader. (Gentry, 12) The ultimate conclusion is that leaders are
made. This academic article also guides me in the right direction to conduct more research. I
have learned more about a variety of leadership types and perspectives. My broadened
knowledge about the topic will help me investigate both sides of the inquiry to develop my own
educated opinion.

Zimbardo, Phillip, Ph. D., Obedience to Authority. Heroic Imagination Project 2013 Web. 16
Mar. 2015
The most frequent example used and related to obedience to authority is Hitler and the
Nazis. This famous part of history is a learning opportunity and may be able to provide some
answers to the inquiry, What makes people feel the need to obey authority figures? It is easy
for people to claim that there is no way that they would have allowed themselves to be victims of
obedience to Hitler. There is an experiment that contradicts these popular claims. Stanley
Milgrams 1963 obedience experiment showed a shocking example of misguided obedience and
how people are to give in to it.
Obedience seems to be engraved in us to the point where we are unsure at what point
should it be decided that a situation has been taken too far. Usually, individuals make that
decision to late or not at all. The possible reason could be out of fear of consequences. The lack
of making the decision to disobey when not wanting to do something easily leads to misguided
obedience. Misguided obedience is commonly given in to, which is a surprise to most people.
Other Quotes: Stanley Milgrams groundbreaking experiment, conducted in 1963, offers a
chilling example of misguided obedience in action. Milgram wanted to know whether average
Americans would be susceptible to the same situational forces that the Nazis were, and if so,
could they be convinced to participate in similarly reprehensive acts.
Sixty five percent (65%) of the participants administered the maximum level of shock (450
volts) despite the evident distress shown by the learner, and participant administered a shock
above the level they personally felt was ethical.

Analysis: This article is easy to read. It uses plain language to easily educate the average reader.
The article provides several Youtube videos to demonstrate obedience to authority. A point in the
article that I thought was specifically interesting is obedience to misguided authority. Stanley
Milgrams obedience experiment is something that I am going to look more into to get specific
details about. This experiment is going to be sufficient evidence to support the connection and
incorporation of Hitler into my inquiry. The results of this experiment are astonishing. Milgram
found out that that overall, people can be influenced by misguided authority and do things that
may not want to do. In one of the videos, Fast Food Strip Search, a customer is not forced, but
guided to take off their clothes. The fast food restaurant does not have the right to demand this
of a customer, although, the customer is willing to obey. It will be interesting to find out why
people feel the need to fall into traps like these and obey authority when it is not a necessity. I am
planning on using one of the videos as one of my other four sources. This source has opened up a
unique pathway I can take that would put a twist and add another perspective (followers
perspective) to my inquiry paper.

HeroicImaginationTV. Obedience- Fast Food Strip Search. Online video clip. Youtube.
Youtube, 26 Sept. 2011. Web. 18 Mar. 2015
Fast food restaurants such as, McDonalds, Wendy, Burger King, Hardees, and more were
the locations of a conmans cruel demands. The conman would pretend to be a person that held
authority, a police officer, and instructed the managers of the establishments to conduct a strip
search on employees. During the strip search, the employees had their clothes taken from them,
told to perform ridiculous acts such as, running in place and jumping jacks, and even perform
sexual acts. Many questions were raised from this strange situation. Surprisingly the questions
were not directed towards the conman, but towards the victims. Why did the managers listen to
the supposed police officer? The authority figure was giving demands over the phone, so why
did the managers feel the need to obey the voice? The main question that was asked in this
Youtube video was Why is it so easy for us to obey orders eve when we know they are wrong?
One of these famous fast food strip search incidents, at a McDonalds in Kentucky, was
caught on video. The manager, Donna gives her explanation on how she was convinced to do
everything he was told to do by the conman. She was caught on the surveillance camera
conducting a strip search on one of her Donna claims that everyone watching would simply say
that they wouldnt do what she did, but she protests that no one knows how it actually feels or
what they would do until put into the situation. This is her answer to most of the questions she is
asked during the interview. She explains that she doesnt remember things like her employee
begging her to get her out of the situation or ever witnessing the employee completely naked.
Although, the surveillance contradicts Donnas claims. The employee was also interviewed and
Other Quotes: The man has convinced seven to a hundred other places very same thing. Hes
very good at what he does.

He was getting some type of satisfaction out of being an authoritative figure and telling people
what to do and realizing by the phone conversation that they were actually doing what he said.
Analysis: I found this Youtube video as I was working on a different source. This was a video
used as an example for the article that was written on the website. I found the article helpful and
informative and this video turned out to be incredible, visual proof. I believe the audience would
be shocked and maybe form a dislike towards the manager, who was conducting the strip search.
The audience would most likely feel sympathy for the employee, who was a victim of the strip
search. I liked this source because it was more entertaining than my other sources so far. The
video makes it extremely easy and fast to extract the information that I really need. This source
gave me the followers perspective of leadership. Fast Food Strip Search is relevant to multiple
questions that I plan to answer in my inquiry paper: What makes people feel the need to obey
authority figures? What establishes a person as a leader? These questions and answers will lead
me up to my main question and answer: Are leaders born or made? I would like to find one more
video that provides important information that I can use for my inquiry.

Nakayma, Shinnosuke. Scientific American. Leaders Are Born, Not Made, Fish Study Finds.
Rpt. The Conversation. 28 Aug. 2013. Web. Access: Mar. 26 2015
Fish, birds, primates, and more animals that live in groups have leaders and followers in
order to be productive. The leaders that were focused on in this article were fish. They need to
get away from predators, find food, and ultimately survive. The leaders of groups of fish,
schools, emerge naturally. This is known as group living. Most fish use group living as a use of
defense and protection. In these groups, the fish have leaders that are looked up to guide the rest
of them. Fish leaders are born, so it must be possible for human leaders must be able to be born
too. Right?
It is important to realize that humans and animals have different innate abilities, as well.
The reason that fish are born with these innate abilities of leadership is that leaders and followers
are born through natural selection. (Nakayma) For example, most animals are born with the
ability to swim. Unlike animals, humans do not have this natural skill at birth. Humans have to
be taught how to swim. Is this the case with being a leader too? Animals may be born with this
natural skill to lead as a necessity to survive. Since humans are not under as much stress as
animals are to survive, leadership abilities by natural selection is not necessary. Despite these
possible differences, humans and animals are alike in the characteristics that are associated with
leadership. Both humans and animal leaders share traits such as extraversion and boldness.
Leaders use these skills to suggest their ideas to the followers. Of course, humans and animals
have different reasons for leader-follower relationship, but the relationship works similarly.
Other quotes: But our work with stickleback fish suggests that while our followers may not
have what it takes to lead, leaders can learn to follow.

Individuals who force their preferences on others are more likely to be followed, which
encourages these individuals to initiate more often.
Analysis: I do not agree with the fact that leaders are born. The reason I chose this source is
because I wanted one that completely focuses on the belief that leaders are born. Most of my
sources are supportive of my belief that leaders are made. I want to include both sides of the
arguments to incorporate a they say, I say format. I really like that the author brought in the
comparison of animal and human leaders to back up the point of the article. This was
something that I would have never thought about. The point is not strong enough to make me
want to change my beliefs about the inquiry.

Watt, Willis M. Ph. D., Top Ten Traits of an Effective Academic Leader. Faculty Focus. 25
Mar. 2009. Web. Access: 26 Mar. 2015
The ten traits include: follow procedures and adhere to policies, submit to the authority of
others, take risks, commitment, be proactive, expect conflict, tell the truth with compassion,
listen, love people, and check your attitude. These characteristics of a person lead to positive
contributions to effective leadership. (Watt) Each section of the article simply states the trait and
gives an explanation. The traits are written from ten to one, meaning least important to most
important. I am not sure how some could be called more important than others because all of
them work together to create an effective leader.
Everyone is not capable of displaying and proving that they possess all of these
characteristics. More importantly, people are not born with these leadership traits.

People can

learn these type of leadership qualities and skills be observation and possibly trial and error, in
response to the followers reactions. Obviously, things that contradict these traits probably
wouldnt be effective. Although, some leaders that do not possess these traits still have
followers. I do not understand this and I plan to answer smaller questions like, Why do people
follow bad leaders? in my paper to support my inquiry.
Other quotes: An effective leader is a person who can commit to using his or her ability to lead
others, perform technical skills, and conceptualize situations, thus helping to ensure goal
achievement.
Leaders must be flexible enough to try a new procedure or implement a new policy.
To some degree conflicts occur because people are not able to differentiate between task related
conflict issues and their personal investment in a given situation.

Analysis: I think these ten traits of effective leadership are universal. I doubt that many people
would argue that a leader shouldnt tell the truth or follow procedures. I feel like most people
have a good grasp on what a good leader should look like. Although, that doesnt mean that
everyone can apply that and be a good leader. I have learned that there are certain characteristics
that are associated with being a leader. If a person possesses these characteristics, people are
more likely to follow them. As I went through these traits, I wondered, Can a person be
considered a leader if they only possess some of these traits, rather than all of them? I think the
answer to this is yes, based on the situational theory of leadership. I will discuss topics like these
in my inquiry to bring them back to the main question, Are leaders born or made?

Cherry, Kendra. Leadership Theories: The Eight Major Leadership Theories About Education.
Web. Access: 26 Mar. 2015
The great man theories support the idea that leaders are born. They explain that people
are born with certain characteristics such as intelligence, charisma, and social skills, contributing
to their success as leaders. The trait theories suggest that leadership has correlation with
personality and behavior characteristics. According to the theories, extraversion, confidence, and
courage are some of the type of traits that leaders should have. The contingency theories are a
little different in the fact that there is not a certain leadership style for all situations. Leadership is
determined case by case and more related to environment. (Cherry)
Situational theories are similar to contingency theories because they are both determined
by situational variables. These theories include different types of decision-making: authoritarian
style and democratic style. Behavioral situations focuses on the actions of leaders rather than
mental qualities, which supports the idea that leaders are made. People can learn how to be
leaders through teaching and observation. Participative theories encourage contributions from the
group to make decision. Ideal leadership style, similar to democratic style, is when leaders take
into account the followers input. (Cherry)
Management theories (transactional theories) focuses more on give or take between the
leader and the follower. Rewards for success and punishments for failed attempts are used to
maintain organization and achieve group performance. Relationship theories (transformational
theories) believe that connections between leaders and followers. These leaders focus on the
performance of the group and try to improve with motivation and inspiration. (Cherry)

Other Quotes: Early leadership theories focused on what qualities distinguished between leaders
and followers, while subsequent theories looked at other variables such as situational factors and
skill levels.
Analysis: Of course I do not agree with all of these theories. They support different beliefs
regarding leadership. Each of these types of theories can be determined as a supporter of leaders
are born or leaders are made. Some of these theories are similar to each other, for example,
situational theories and participative theories. I may not use all of these theories in my paper but
I will definitely use the contingency theory and the situation theories. Some of these overlap
with the theories I found in my very first source. I am glad that I am making these connections.
This will make writing my inquiry easier.