Discover whether leadership is a skill you can develop or an innate trait. Learn how to build leadership capabilities regardless of your starting point.
Written by Laura Bouttell • Sat 10th January 2026
Leadership combines both innate traits and learnable skills, though research increasingly confirms that skills development matters more than natural ability. A meta-analysis by Judge and colleagues examining 78 leadership studies found strong correlations between personality and leadership effectiveness—yet Peter Drucker, perhaps history's most influential management thinker, argued that leadership "has little to do with personality" and that "with discipline and constant practice, it is possible for anyone to gain the knowledge needed to make great decisions."
This apparent contradiction sits at the heart of one of leadership's most enduring debates. Are effective leaders born with special qualities, or do they develop capabilities through experience and deliberate practice? The answer shapes how organisations identify, develop, and deploy leadership talent.
Trait theory proposes that certain individuals possess inherent qualities that predispose them to leadership effectiveness. This perspective, sometimes called the "Great Man Theory," suggests that figures like Winston Churchill, Florence Nightingale, and Isambard Kingdom Brunel shaped history because of inherited abilities to lead others.
Research has identified several traits consistently associated with leadership emergence and effectiveness:
| Trait | Description | Research Support |
|---|---|---|
| Extraversion | Sociability, assertiveness, positive energy | Strongly correlated with leadership emergence |
| Conscientiousness | Organisation, dependability, achievement orientation | Linked to leadership effectiveness |
| Openness | Creativity, curiosity, intellectual flexibility | Associated with transformational leadership |
| Emotional Stability | Resilience, stress tolerance, composure | Predicts sustained leadership performance |
| Agreeableness | Cooperation, empathy, consideration | Mixed findings; context-dependent |
Hogan, Curphy, and Hogan's comprehensive review of 70 years of personality research confirmed that four of the five major personality dimensions consistently relate to effective leadership. Leaders scoring high in extraversion, conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stability tended to achieve better outcomes.
Despite compelling evidence for trait-leadership correlations, the trait approach faces significant limitations:
Prediction problems: Researchers from Singapore's Nanyang Technological University argue that leadership success or failure cannot be accurately predicted by traits alone because of our limited understanding of how personality affects leader effectiveness in different contexts
Causation questions: Correlation between traits and leadership may reflect that leadership roles develop certain traits, rather than traits causing leadership success
Context blindness: A trait that serves brilliantly in one context may prove disastrous in another—the bold risk-taker who succeeds in a startup may struggle in a regulated industry
Development neglect: Overemphasis on traits can discourage investment in developing leaders who don't fit a predetermined profile
The skills approach asserts that leadership effectiveness stems from learnable capabilities that anyone can develop through education, training, and experience. This perspective democratises leadership, suggesting that potential leaders need not be born but can be made.
Mumford and colleagues' influential skills model identifies three fundamental leadership competencies:
As leaders advance in their careers, the relative importance of these skill categories shifts:
| Leadership Level | Technical Skills | Human Skills | Conceptual Skills |
|---|---|---|---|
| Supervisory | High | Medium | Low |
| Middle Management | Medium | High | Medium |
| Senior Executive | Low | High | High |
This model explains why exceptional individual contributors sometimes struggle in leadership roles—technical mastery alone proves insufficient for leading others.
Understanding the distinction between traits and skills clarifies what can and cannot be developed:
Traits are relatively stable personality characteristics that influence behaviour patterns. They develop early in life, remain somewhat consistent over time, and resist deliberate change. You might be naturally introverted or extraverted, and whilst you can learn to behave differently in specific situations, your underlying disposition persists.
Skills are learned capabilities that improve with practice. They can be acquired at any age, developed systematically, and transferred across contexts. You can learn to facilitate meetings effectively, provide constructive feedback, or communicate a compelling vision—regardless of your personality.
The practical implication: whilst you cannot fundamentally change your personality, you can develop skills that compensate for trait-related limitations or amplify trait-related strengths.
Contemporary leadership research increasingly recognises that both traits and skills contribute to leadership effectiveness. Neither alone proves sufficient; the most capable leaders combine advantageous traits with well-developed skills.
Consider this integrated framework:
Leadership Effectiveness = f(Traits × Skills × Context)
This formula suggests that:
Research by Hoffman and colleagues found that both dispositional traits and developed capabilities strongly correlate with leader effectiveness. This finding suggests that organisations should neither rely solely on selecting for traits nor assume that development can fully compensate for trait deficits.
Virtually all leadership skills respond to deliberate development, though some prove easier to build than others:
Highly Developable Skills:
Moderately Developable Skills:
Challenging but Developable:
The key insight: even skills that seem closely tied to personality—like inspiring others or building authentic relationships—can be developed, though they may require more time and effort for some individuals than others.
Whether you're developing your own leadership capabilities or designing development programmes for others, research suggests several evidence-based principles.
Leadership development research consistently finds that:
This distribution doesn't diminish the importance of formal learning—that 10% often catalyses the other 90% by providing frameworks and language. However, it underscores that leadership skills develop primarily through practice, not instruction.
Assess your current capabilities: Seek feedback from multiple sources—supervisors, peers, direct reports, and external stakeholders. Leadership often looks different from different perspectives.
Identify development priorities: Focus on a small number of skills that will make the biggest difference in your current context. Trying to develop everything simultaneously usually develops nothing effectively.
Create practice opportunities: Deliberately seek experiences that will challenge you to use and develop target skills. Volunteer for stretch assignments, cross-functional projects, or temporary leadership roles.
Establish feedback loops: Arrange for ongoing feedback on your development progress. Regular check-ins with mentors, coaches, or trusted colleagues accelerate learning.
Reflect systematically: Schedule time to examine your experiences, extract lessons, and plan adjustments. Leaders learn as much from reflection on experience as from experience itself.
Research consistently identifies emotional intelligence as a critical leadership capability. Studies suggest that EI accounts for nearly 90% of the difference between top-performing senior leaders and average performers—a striking finding that underscores the importance of interpersonal and intrapersonal skills.
Emotional intelligence comprises four domains:
| Domain | Description | Key Behaviours |
|---|---|---|
| Self-Awareness | Understanding your emotions and their impact | Recognising triggers, seeking feedback, knowing limitations |
| Self-Management | Regulating emotions and impulses | Staying composed under pressure, adapting to change, maintaining integrity |
| Social Awareness | Sensing others' emotions and understanding dynamics | Reading rooms, showing empathy, navigating politics |
| Relationship Management | Using awareness to manage interactions effectively | Influencing, developing others, managing conflict, building bonds |
The encouraging news: whilst emotional intelligence has some basis in temperament, all four domains respond to development. Leaders can learn to better recognise emotions, regulate responses, attune to others, and manage relationships more skilfully.
The question of whether leaders are born or made has generated decades of research. The emerging consensus suggests a nuanced answer.
For individuals and organisations, the practical conclusion matters more than theoretical debates: leadership capabilities can be developed, and investing in development yields returns. Whether your starting point reflects natural advantages or requires overcoming natural limitations, growth remains possible.
As one researcher summarised: "Whilst certain individuals may possess innate qualities that facilitate their emergence as leaders, leadership effectiveness is primarily derived from the cultivation of skills and abilities."
Different leadership contexts demand different skill combinations, suggesting that leadership "skill" isn't monolithic but rather a portfolio of capabilities deployed situationally.
Entrepreneurs require skills in:
Senior executives need capabilities in:
Leading through crisis demands:
Building influence through expertise requires:
The implication: asking whether someone "has leadership skills" oversimplifies. The more useful question asks which leadership skills someone has developed and which contexts those skills fit.
Organisations seeking to build leadership capability should consider both selection and development strategies.
Whilst traits cannot be taught, they can be selected. Research supports assessing candidates for:
However, over-relying on selection creates risks. Hiring only those who already "look like leaders" perpetuates homogeneity and overlooks hidden potential.
Effective leadership development programmes share several characteristics:
Companies with robust leadership development perform 25% better and enjoy 2.3 times greater financial success than competitors with weaker leadership pipelines, according to research published by Harvard Business.
Leadership encompasses both traits and skills. Traits provide a foundation—certain personality characteristics make leadership behaviours more natural. Skills represent learnable capabilities that translate trait potential into effective action. Research suggests that whilst traits influence leadership emergence, skills development matters more for sustained leadership effectiveness.
Most researchers believe that virtually anyone can develop leadership capabilities, though the degree of development possible may vary. Some individuals have natural advantages that make certain leadership skills easier to acquire. However, with deliberate practice, appropriate support, and genuine motivation, significant leadership development remains possible for most people.
Emotional intelligence consistently ranks as the most impactful leadership capability. Beyond EI, communication skills, strategic thinking, and the ability to develop others prove particularly valuable. The specific priority depends on context—different roles and situations demand different skill emphases.
Leadership development is ongoing rather than completed. However, meaningful improvement in specific skills can occur within months with focused practice. Building comprehensive leadership capability typically requires years of varied experience, feedback, and deliberate development. Most senior leaders describe their development as a lifelong journey.
Personality traits show considerable stability over adulthood but are not completely fixed. Significant life experiences can shift trait expression. More importantly, people can learn to behave in ways that differ from their natural tendencies when situations require—an introvert can learn to speak compellingly to large audiences, even if it never feels entirely natural.
Research suggests experience matters more, but training amplifies experiential learning. The optimal approach combines formal learning (which provides frameworks and language) with challenging experiences (which build skills) and reflection (which extracts lessons). Training without experience rarely transfers; experience without reflection often fails to yield full learning.
Leadership potential indicators include: learning agility (learning quickly from new experiences), drive (intrinsic motivation to achieve and improve), self-awareness (understanding your strengths and limitations), and social intelligence (reading and responding to people effectively). However, potential only matters if developed—focus on growth rather than categorising yourself.