“A good coach will make his players see what they can be rather than what they are.”
Ara Parasheghian
I really wanted to believe that Santa Claus was real.
I really wanted to believe the tooth fairy was the Federal Reserve.
I really wanted to believe that leaders are made and not born.
I really wanted to believe that coaching facilitates lasting behavior changes making leaders more effective.
What if executive coaching  turns out to be nothing more than a very weak intervention that only under the most optimum conditions can help increase awareness, motivation to change and help those capable of becoming better to improve only a little bit? If coaching has any real return on investment, leaders must be capable of being influenced, motivated to try new behaviors and practice new techniques, strategies and processes until they become better.
In fact, most personality traits such as conscientiousness, drive, achievement orientation, sensation seeking, curiosity and even happiness are influenced dramatically by genes.
Past studies suggest that while 50% of happiness is due to situational factors like health, relationships, and career, the other 50% is largely influenced by genetic predisposition.
A recent study by Weiss et al. (2008) involved more than 900 identical and non-identical twin pairs who completed a standardized survey designed to identify personality traits. The researchers were able to identify evidence for genes tied to certain personality traits and genes that predispose people to happiness. The researchers found that people who don’t worry excessively and are sociable and conscientious tend to be happier, according to the report in the March issue of Psychological Science ((Weiss, A., Bates, T. & Luciano, M. (2008). Happiness Is a Personal(ity) Thing: The Genetics of Personality and Well-Being in a Representative Sample. Psychological Science, 19, 205-308)). Those lucky enough to have the right gene mix appear to have a disposition for happiness when times are tough, the researchers reported.
What about leadership traits?
We know form recent research comparing identical and fraternal twins that much of the variance in terms of who ends up in leadership rolesis better explained by environmental factors than heritability ((Arvey, R. D., Zhang, Z., Avolio, B. J., & Kreuger, R. F. (2007). Developmental and genetic determinants of leadership role occupancy among women. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 693-706)). In standard genetic studies of this type, the number of leadership roles that a person assumes in their career is what is being measured. In three separate studies for both men and women, approximately 30% of leader emergence seemed to be accounted for by genes.
Sounds like a convincing argument that leaders are made and not born but no analysis was done on whether any of these individuals were actually effective in those roles. We also have no clue if anyone really had the interest and passion to want to lead once they were in these roles. With the estimated base rate of leadership incompetence hovering around 50%, those arguing that leaders are made might want to reflect on the fact that winding up in a leadership role doesn’t seem to guarantee that one possesses the “right stuff to truly engage and retain talent today and facilitate high performance teams.
In fact, our own research with our Career Profile Inventory suggests that approximately 15% to 25% of all individuals in managerial career paths prefer to be in another path like specialist/independent contributor, generalist/project manager or entrepreneur  (i.e., they possess clusters of interests, motives and values that are not aligned with leadership).
If you want to find out your own career orientation using our Career Profile Inventory just let me know at support@envisialearning.com and I will set you up for a free trial.
I think it’s pretty easy to argue that true leadership effectiveness is really a function of several factors including genetic predisposition, interests, Â personality/skills of the leader, company culture, staff/team capability and organizational stage among other things.
What is important to keep in mind from this research is that approximately 50% of personality (e.g., conscientiousness or  happiness) is genetically fixed around a “set point” and from 10% to 30% may be due to situational circumstances with the rest being under our direct control in terms of behaviors we choose to deploy each day.
So, I still want to believe that leaders and leadership are largely made through experiences. I just don’t see the evidence to support these popular claims. But, it sure sells executive development, coaching and leadership development programs and fable books….Be well…
[tags]emotional intelligence, leadership, talent management, born versus made, executive coaching, personality, happiness, heritability, leadership effectiveness, kenneth nowack, ken nowack, nowack[/tags]
Ken Nowack
Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D. is a licensed psychologist (PSY13758) and President & Chief Research Officer/Co-Founder of Envisia Learning, is a member of the Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations. Ken also serves as the Associate Editor of Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research. His recent book Clueless: Coaching People Who Just Don’t Get It is available for free for a limited time by signing up for free blog updates (Learn more at our website)
