Discover why leadership skills are not born but developed through experience, learning, and deliberate practice. Learn how anyone can build leadership capability.
Written by Laura Bouttell • Fri 9th January 2026
Leadership skills are not born—they are developed through experience, learning, and deliberate practice. The romantic notion that great leaders emerge fully formed, blessed with innate gifts the rest of us lack, makes for compelling biography but poor science. Research consistently demonstrates that whilst certain personality traits may provide modest advantages, the capabilities that truly distinguish effective leaders are acquired through developmental experiences, not genetic lottery. This understanding matters profoundly because it transforms leadership from exclusive birthright to accessible aspiration.
What makes the "leaders are made" perspective so compelling is the evidence behind it. Studies of identical twins separated at birth show that shared genetics explain only modest variance in leadership emergence. Research on leadership development demonstrates that targeted experiences produce measurable capability improvement. Historical analysis reveals that many acclaimed leaders developed slowly, often after early struggles that would have eliminated anyone relying solely on inborn talent. The question is not whether you were born a leader but whether you are willing to develop into one.
Understanding the debate clarifies what leadership development requires.
Leaders are predominantly made rather than born, though genetic factors provide modest starting advantages. Research shows that approximately 30% of leadership variance is attributable to genetic factors, meaning 70% is environmental and developmental. This doesn't mean genetics don't matter—certain personality traits like extraversion and conscientiousness are partly heritable and correlate with leadership emergence. But the majority of what makes leaders effective is learned through experience, education, and deliberate practice.
Leadership variance sources:
| Factor | Approximate Contribution | Implications |
|---|---|---|
| Genetic/inherited | ~30% | Some traits provide advantage |
| Developmental experience | ~40% | Experience drives most development |
| Formal learning | ~20% | Education contributes meaningfully |
| Deliberate practice | ~10% | Targeted improvement adds value |
Genetics contribute to leadership primarily through personality traits and cognitive abilities that provide modest starting advantages. Research identifies heritability in traits like extraversion (linked to leadership emergence), emotional stability (enabling consistent performance), and cognitive ability (supporting complex decision-making). However, these traits represent potential rather than guarantee—many with advantageous traits never become effective leaders, whilst others without apparent advantages develop exceptional capability through effort and experience.
Genetic contributions:
Research supports the developmental view of leadership.
Twin studies research shows that leadership is substantially influenced by environment and experience, not just genetics. Studies comparing identical twins (sharing 100% of genes) with fraternal twins (sharing 50%) find that genetic heritability explains only about 30% of variance in leadership role occupancy and effectiveness. The remaining 70% reflects environmental factors—experiences, education, opportunities, and choices that shape development. Even twins with identical genetics develop different leadership capabilities based on different experiences.
Twin studies findings:
| Study Type | What It Measures | Genetic Contribution |
|---|---|---|
| Identical twins raised together | Shared genes and environment | ~30% for leadership |
| Identical twins raised apart | Shared genes, different environment | ~30% for leadership |
| Fraternal twins | Partial genetic sharing | Lower correlation |
| Siblings | Some genetic sharing | Lower correlation still |
Experience research demonstrates that specific types of experiences develop leadership capability. The Centre for Creative Leadership's research identified key developmental experiences: challenging assignments (stretch beyond current capability), hardship (adversity and failure), bosses (good and bad examples), developmental relationships (mentoring, coaching), and formal training (courses and programmes). Leaders who have diverse experiences across these categories develop stronger capabilities than those with narrow experience, regardless of initial traits.
Developmental experiences:
Understanding the myth's persistence helps counter it.
People believe leaders are born because: hindsight bias (successful leaders seem obviously destined), narrative appeal (born leader stories are more compelling), self-interest (existing leaders may prefer scarcity), complexity avoidance (simpler than understanding development), visibility bias (we see polished performance, not developmental journey), and cultural mythology (hero narratives emphasising destiny). These psychological and cultural factors perpetuate the myth despite contradicting evidence.
Myth persistence factors:
| Factor | How It Works | Counter-Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Hindsight bias | Past seems inevitable | Many leaders had uncertain beginnings |
| Narrative appeal | Destiny makes good stories | Development stories equally valid |
| Self-interest | Scarcity protects position | Actually, abundance is healthier |
| Complexity avoidance | Simple explanation | Reality is more nuanced |
| Visibility bias | See performance not practice | Development is invisible |
| Cultural mythology | Hero and destiny tropes | Myths aren't science |
The born leader myth causes harm by: limiting aspiration (potential leaders don't try), reducing investment (organisations underinvest in development), creating self-fulfilling prophecy (those labelled "not leaders" don't develop), ignoring development (relying on selection alone), excusing failure (leaders blame lack of talent rather than effort), and perpetuating inequality (advantage accrues to those who "look like" leaders). The myth serves neither individual development nor organisational effectiveness.
Myth-caused harm:
Understanding development enables intentional growth.
Experiences that develop leaders include: stretch assignments (roles requiring new capabilities), first leadership roles (early management experience), turnaround challenges (fixing broken situations), start-up experience (building from scratch), international assignments (cross-cultural leadership), visible projects (high-stakes, high-visibility work), and hardship (failure, adversity, difficulty). The common thread is challenge—experiences that push beyond current capability force development that comfortable situations never provide.
Developmental experiences:
| Experience Type | What It Develops | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Stretch assignments | New capabilities | Unfamiliar project responsibility |
| First leadership | People skills | Initial management role |
| Turnarounds | Tough decision-making | Fixing underperforming team |
| Start-ups | Resourcefulness | Building new initiative |
| International | Cultural intelligence | Cross-border assignment |
| Visible projects | Stakeholder management | High-profile initiatives |
| Hardship | Resilience | Recovering from setback |
Deliberate practice applies to leadership through: focused skill development (targeting specific capability gaps), feedback integration (learning from performance information), reflection (processing experience for insight), progressive challenge (increasingly difficult applications), coached practice (supported skill building), and application repetition (multiple opportunities to apply learning). Unlike expertise domains like music or sport, leadership practice often occurs in real situations—but the principles of focused, feedback-rich, challenging practice still apply.
Deliberate practice in leadership:
Deliberate development accelerates growth.
Develop leadership skills through: seeking challenging experiences (volunteering for stretch opportunities), learning from experience (reflecting systematically), gathering feedback (seeking input on effectiveness), finding mentors (relationships with experienced leaders), formal learning (courses and qualifications), reading and study (self-directed learning), and practice and application (trying new behaviours). Development requires intentionality—skills don't develop from experience alone but from processed, reflected-upon experience.
Development approach:
| Method | Action | Benefit |
|---|---|---|
| Seek challenge | Volunteer for stretch | Capability building |
| Reflect | Process experience | Learning extraction |
| Seek feedback | Request input | External perspective |
| Find mentors | Build relationships | Wisdom access |
| Formal learning | Take courses | Knowledge foundation |
| Study | Read widely | Conceptual framework |
| Practice | Apply learning | Skill development |
Mindset plays a crucial role in leadership development because: growth mindset (believing capability can develop) encourages the effort and persistence that development requires, whilst fixed mindset (believing capability is innate) undermines the motivation to try. Research shows that leaders with growth mindset seek more feedback, take more risks, persist longer through difficulty, and ultimately develop further than those who believe their leadership ability is fixed. Mindset shapes the developmental behaviours that produce growth.
Mindset impact:
Understanding that leaders are made has organisational consequences.
Organisations should develop leaders by: providing developmental experiences (stretch assignments, rotations), supporting learning from experience (coaching, mentoring, reflection), investing in formal development (programmes, education), creating development culture (expecting and enabling growth), measuring development (tracking capability change), and holding leaders accountable for developing others (making development a leadership responsibility). If leaders are made, organisations must actively make them rather than simply identifying and promoting supposed naturals.
Organisational development approach:
| Element | Implementation | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Experiences | Stretch assignments, rotations | Capability building |
| Learning support | Coaching, reflection processes | Experience processing |
| Formal development | Programmes, education | Knowledge foundation |
| Culture | Expect and enable growth | Development orientation |
| Measurement | Track capability change | Accountability |
| Leadership accountability | Developing others | Cascade effect |
The implications for selection are that: potential matters more than current performance (capability to develop, not just current level), diverse backgrounds should be considered (development comes from many paths), growth indicators should be weighted (learning agility, feedback response), development plans should accompany selection (how will capability be built), and selection alone is insufficient (development must follow). Selecting for potential and then developing that potential outperforms selecting only for current capability.
Selection implications:
Leaders are predominantly made rather than born. Research shows approximately 30% of leadership variance is genetic, meaning 70% is environmental and developmental. Certain personality traits are heritable and provide modest advantages, but the majority of what makes leaders effective is learned through experience, education, and deliberate practice.
Evidence includes twin studies showing only ~30% genetic contribution to leadership, experience research demonstrating specific experiences develop capability, and historical analysis revealing many great leaders developed slowly after early struggles. The research consistently shows that developmental factors outweigh genetic ones in explaining leadership effectiveness.
People believe in born leaders due to hindsight bias (successful leaders seem destined), narrative appeal (destiny makes compelling stories), complexity avoidance (simpler than understanding development), and visibility bias (we see polished performance, not the developmental journey). These psychological factors perpetuate the myth despite contradicting evidence.
Key developmental experiences include stretch assignments requiring new capabilities, first leadership roles, turnaround challenges, start-up experience, international assignments, visible high-stakes projects, and hardships including failure and adversity. The common thread is challenge that pushes beyond current capability.
Develop leadership through seeking challenging experiences, learning from experience through reflection, gathering feedback on effectiveness, finding mentors, pursuing formal learning, studying independently, and practising new behaviours. Development requires intentionality—skills develop from processed, reflected-upon experience, not experience alone.
Growth mindset—believing capability can develop—encourages effort and persistence that development requires. Research shows growth mindset leaders seek more feedback, take more risks, persist through difficulty, and develop further than those believing ability is fixed. Mindset shapes developmental behaviours producing growth.
Organisations should provide developmental experiences (stretch assignments, rotations), support learning from experience (coaching, reflection), invest in formal development, create development culture expecting growth, measure capability change, and hold leaders accountable for developing others. If leaders are made, organisations must actively make them.
Leadership skills are not born—they are developed through intentional effort, challenging experience, and deliberate practice. This understanding is liberating: your leadership capability is not predetermined by birth but shaped by the choices you make about development. Every leader you admire was once less capable than they became; their excellence reflects development, not destiny.
For aspiring leaders, this means your path is open. Seek challenging experiences that push you beyond current capability. Reflect systematically on what you learn. Gather feedback and act on it. Find mentors who can guide your development. Invest in formal learning. Approach leadership development with growth mindset, knowing that effort produces improvement.
For organisations, this means leadership development is essential investment, not optional extra. If leaders are made, you must make them—through developmental experiences, supported learning, coaching, and progressive challenge. Selection matters, but development matters more. The organisations that will have the leaders they need are those that deliberately develop them rather than hoping to find them fully formed.