Handout

 Leadership

Course Instructor: Biplob Barua

1|Page
 Leadership: Concept

Leadership is the influencing process of leaders to achieve organizational objectives

through change.

Five key elements of the definition:

1. True (Leaders- Followers):

Leadership, the influencing
process is between
leaders and followers, not
just a leader influencing
followers; it’s a two- way street.
Knowing how to lead and developing
leadership skills will make you a true
leader and follower. Organizations have
two major classifications of employees:
managers, who have subordinates and
formal authority to tell them what to do; and
employees, who do not. All managers perform
four major functions: planning, organizing,
leading, and controlling. Leadership is thus a part of the manager’s job. However, there are
managers, who are not effective leaders. There are also non managers who have great influence on
managers and others. A follower is a person who is being influenced by a leader. A follower can
be a manager or a non manager. Good followers are not “yes people” who simply follow the leader
without giving input that influences the leader. In short, effective leaders influence followers and
their followers influence them.

2. Influence: Influencing is the process of a leader communicating ideas, gaining acceptance of them,
and motivating followers to support and implement the ideas through change. Influencing is also
about the relationship between leaders and followers. Managers may coerce subordinates to
influence their behavior, but leaders do not. Leaders gain the commitment and enthusiasm of
followers who are willing to be influenced. Effective leaders know when to lead and when to
follow. Thus, leaders and followers often change roles throughout the influencing process. The
influencing process is reciprocal.

3. Organizational Objectives: Effective leaders influence followers to think not only of their own
interests but also of the interest of the organization through a shared vision. Leadership occurs when
followers are influenced to do what is ethical and beneficial for the organization and themselves.
Taking advantage of followers for personal gain is not part of leadership. Members of the

2|Page
 organization need to work together toward an outcome that the leader and followers both want, a
desired future or shared purpose that motivates them toward this more preferable outcome.
4. Change: Influencing and setting objectives is about change. Organizations need to continually
change, in adapting to the rapidly changing global environment. Statements like these are not in a
successful leader’s vocabulary: We’ve always done it this way; we’ve never done it that way
before; It can’t be done; No one else has done it; and It’s not in the budget. Leadership involves
influencing followers to bring about change toward a desired future for the organization. The people
who advance in organizations are those who are willing to take a risk and try new things.

5. People: Leadership is about leading people. Effective leaders and followers enjoy working with
people and helping them succeed.

Understanding the differences: Leader Vs Manager

A leader is one who influences the behavior and work of others in group efforts towards achievement of
specified goals in a given situation. On the other hand, manager can be a true manager only if he has got
traits of leader in him. Manager at all levels are expected to be the leaders of work groups so that
subordinates willingly carry instructions and accept their guidance. A person can be a leader by virtue of
all qualities in him.

Leaders and Managers can be compared on the following basis:

3|Page
Leadership Theory

For decades, leadership theories have been the source of numerous studies. In reality as well as in practice,
many have tried to define what allows authentic leaders to stand apart from the mass! Hence, there as many
theories on leadership as there are philosophers, researchers and professors that have studied and ultimately
published their leadership theory. A great article to read before diving into the theories is the the
Philosophical Foundations of Leadership.

Theories are commonly categorized by which aspect is believed to define the leader the most. The most
widespread one's are: Great Man Theory, Trait Theory, Great Event Theory, Leader member exchange
theory, The Black- Mouton Managerial Grid, Path Goal Theory, and Servant Leadership.

Great Man Theory

The Great Man theory evolved around the mid 19th century. Even though no one was able to
identify with any scientific certainty, which human characteristic or combination of, were
responsible for identifying great leaders. Everyone recognized that just as the name suggests; only
a man could have the characteristic (s) of a great leader. The Great Man theory assumes that the
traits of leadership are intrinsic. That simply means that great leaders are born.

Trait Theory (1930's - 1940's)

The trait leadership theory believes that people are either born or are made with certain qualities
that will make them excel in leadership roles. That is, certain qualities such as intelligence, sense
of responsibility, creativity and other values puts anyone in the shoes of a good leader. In fact,
Gordon Allport, an American psychologist,"...identified almost 18,000 English personality-
relevant terms" (Matthews, Deary & Whiteman, 2003, p. 3).

The trait theory of leadership focused on analyzing mental, physical and social characteristic in
order to gain more understanding of what is the characteristic or the combination of characteristics
that are common among leaders.

Great Events Theory

A crisis or important event may cause a person to rise to the occasion, which brings out
extraordinary leadership qualities in an ordinary person. This is the Great Events Theory.

Leader Member Exchange Theory

Informal observation of leadership behavior suggests that leader’s action is not the same towards
all subordinates. The importance of potential differences in this respect is brought into sharp focus
by Graen’s leader-member exchange model, also known as the vertical dyad linkage theory. The
theory views leadership as consisting of a number of dyadic relationships linking the leader with a
follower. The quality of the relationship is reflected by the degree of mutual trust, loyalty, support,
respect, and obligation.

4|Page
 According to the theory, leaders from different kinds of relationships with various groups of
subordinates. One group, referred to as the in-group, is favored by the leader. Members of in-group
receive considerably more attention from the leader and have more access to the organizational
resources. By contrast, other subordinates fall into the out-group. These individuals are disfavored
by the leader. As such, they receive fewer valued resources from their leaders.

Leaders distinguish between the in-group and out-group members on the basis of the perceived
similarity with respect to personal characteristics, such as age, gender, or personality. A follower
may also be granted an in-group status if the leader believes that person to be especially competent
at performing his or her job.

Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid

The treatment of task orientation and people orientation as two independent dimensions was a
major step in leadership studies. Many of the leadership studies conducted in the 1950s at the
University of Michigan and the Ohio State University focused on these two dimensions.

Building on the work of the researchers at these Universities, Robert Blake and Jane Mouton
(1960s) proposed a graphic portrayal of leadership styles through a managerial grid (sometimes
called leadership grid). The grid depicted two dimensions of leader behavior, concern for people
(accommodating people’s needs and giving them priority) on y-axis and concern for production
(keeping tight schedules) on x-axis, with each dimension ranging from low (1) to high (9), thus
creating 81 different positions in which the leader’s style may fall.

5|Page
 The five resulting leadership styles are as follows:

Impoverished Management (1, 1): Managers with this approach are low on both the dimensions
and exercise minimum effort to get the work done from subordinates. The leader has low concern
for employee satisfaction and work deadlines and as a result disharmony and disorganization
prevail within the organization. The leaders are termed ineffective wherein their action is merely
aimed at preserving job and seniority.

Task management (9, 1): Also called dictatorial or perish style. Here leaders are more concerned
about production and have less concern for people. The style is based on theory X of McGregor.
The employees’ needs are not taken care of and they are simply a means to an end. The leader
believes that efficiency can result only through proper organization of work systems and through
elimination of people wherever possible. Such a style can definitely increase the output of
organization in short run but due to the strict policies and procedures, high labour turnover is
inevitable.

Middle-of-the-Road (5, 5): This is basically a compromising style wherein the leader tries to
maintain a balance between goals of company and the needs of people. The leader does not push
the boundaries of achievement resulting in average performance for organization. Here neither
employee nor production needs are fully met.

Country Club (1, 9): This is a collegial style characterized by low task and high people orientation
where the leader gives thoughtful attention to the needs of people thus providing them with a
friendly and comfortable environment. The leader feels that such a treatment with employees will
lead to self-motivation and will find people working hard on their own. However, a low focus on
tasks can hamper production and lead to questionable results.

6|Page
 Team Management (9, 9): Characterized by high people and task focus, the style is based on the
theory Y of McGregor and has been termed as most effective style according to Blake and Mouton.
The leader feels that empowerment, commitment, trust, and respect are the key elements in creating
a team atmosphere which will automatically result in high employee satisfaction and production.

Servant Leadership

In essence, servant leadership represents a decentralized structure that focuses on employee

empowerment and encourages innovation. This means having the upper management share key
decision-making powers with employees who work directly with clients and customers; they are
arguably better aware of what is needed to remain competitive because of their knowledge of what
is occurring on the "front lines" of the business.

“The servant-leader is servant first… It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to
serve first.”

-Robert K. Greenleaf

They have high integrity and lead with generosity and can achieve power because of their values
ideals and ethics. This approach can create a positive corporate culture.

Transactional Leadership Theory

The transactional style of leadership was first described by Max Weber in 1947 and then by Bernard
Bass in 1981. This style is most often used by the managers. It focuses on the basic management
process of controlling, organizing, and short-term planning. The famous examples of leaders who
have used transactional technique include McCarthy and de Gaulle.

Transactional leadership involves motivating and directing followers primarily through appealing
to their own self-interest. The power of transactional leaders comes from their formal authority and
responsibility in the organization. The main goal of the follower is to obey the instructions of the
leader. The style can also be mentioned as a ‘telling style’.

The leader believes in motivating through a system of rewards and punishment. If a subordinate
does what is desired, a reward will follow, and if he does not go as per the wishes of the leader, a
punishment will follow. Here, the exchange between leader and follower takes place to achieve
routine performance goals.

Transformational Theory

 Leaders have integrity and high emotional intelligence. They motivate people with a shared
vision of the future, and they communicate well.
 Leaders inspire their team members cause they expect the best from everyone and hold
themselves accountable for their action.
 Leaders ensure engagement of the members by setting clear goals . They have good conflict
– resolution skills.

7|Page
Leadership Styles

Six Leadership Styles:

Not only do the greatest teammates allow different leaders to consistently emerge based on their strengths,
but also they realize that leadership can and should be situational, depending on the needs of the team.
Sometimes a teammate needs a warm hug. Sometimes the team needs a visionary, a new style of coaching,
someone to lead the way or even, on occasion, a kick in the bike shorts. For that reason, great leaders choose
their leadership style like a golfer chooses his or her club, with a calculated analysis of the matter at hand,
the end goal and the best tool for the job.

My favorite study on the subject of kinetic leadership is Daniel Goleman’s Leadership That Gets Results,
a landmark 2000 Harvard Business Review study. Goleman and his team completed a three-year study with
over 3,000 middle-level managers. Their goal was to uncover specific leadership behaviors and determine
their effect on the corporate climate and each leadership style’s effect on bottom-line profitability.

1. The coercive leader demands immediate compliance. If this style were summed up in one phrase, it
would be “Do what I tell you.” The coercive style is most effective in times of crisis, such as in a company
turnaround or a takeover attempt, or during an actual emergency like a tornado or a fire. This style can also
help control a problem teammate when everything else has failed. However, it should be avoided in almost
every other case because it can alienate people and stifle flexibility and inventiveness.

2. The authoritative leader mobilizes the team toward a common vision and focuses on end goals, leaving
the means up to each individual. If this style were summed up in one phrase, it would be “Come with me.”
The authoritative style works best when the team needs a new vision because circumstances have changed,
or when explicit guidance is not required. Authoritative leaders inspire an entrepreneurial spirit and vibrant
enthusiasm for the mission. It is not the best fit when the leader is working with a team of experts who
know more than him or her.

3. The affiliative leader works to create emotional bonds that bring a feeling of bonding and belonging to
the organization. If this style were summed up in one phrase, it would be “People come first.” The affiliative
style works best in times of stress, when teammates need to heal from a trauma, or when the team needs to
rebuild trust. This style should not be used exclusively, because a sole reliance on praise and nurturing can
foster mediocre performance and a lack of direction.

4. The democratic leader builds consensus through participation. If this style were summed up in one
phrase, it would be “What do you think?” The democratic style is most effective when the leader needs the
team to buy into or have ownership of a decision, plan, or goal, or if he or she is uncertain and needs fresh
ideas from qualified teammates. It is not the best choice in an emergency situation, when time is of the
essence for another reason or when teammates are not informed enough to offer sufficient guidance to the
leader.

5. The pacesetting leader expects and model’s excellence and self-direction. If this style were summed up
in one phrase, it would be “Do as I do, now.” The pacesetting style works best when the team is already
motivated and skilled, and the leader needs quick results. Used extensively, however, this style can
overwhelm team members and squelch innovation.

6. The coaching leader develops people for the future. If this style were summed up in one phrase, it would
be “Try this.” The coaching style works best when the leader wants to help teammates build lasting personal

8|Page
strengths that make them more successful overall. It is least effective when teammates are defiant and
unwilling to change or learn, or if the leader lacks proficiency.

Situational Leadership Theory

Their theory is based on two concepts: leadership itself, and the developmental level of the
follower. Blanchard and Hersey developed a matrix consisting of four styles:

 Telling (S1): In this leadership style, the leader tells people what to do and how to do it.
 Selling (S2): This style involves more back-and-forth between leaders and followers. Leaders
"sell" their ideas and message to get group members to buy into the process.
 Participating (S3): In this approach, the leader offers less direction and allows members of the
group to take a more active role in coming up with ideas and making decisions.
 Delegating (S4): This style is characterized by a less involved, hands-off approach to leadership.
Group members tend to make most of the decisions and take most of the responsibility for what
happens.

Techniques to develop Self-leadership:

Learn Followership: “Civilization is always in danger when those who have never learned to obey
are given the right to command.” Bishop Fulton J. Sheen

9|Page
 Only a leader who has followed well knows how to lead others well. Good leadership requires an
understanding of the world that followers live in. Connecting with your congregation and your staff
becomes possible because you have walked in their shoes. You know what it means to be under authority
and thus have a better sense of how authority should be exercised. Leaders who have never followed well
or submitted to authority tend to be prideful, unrealistic, rigid and autocratic. They lord their position and
power over others. If we desire to make an impact, we must first learn to follow under the authority of
others. The idea of Self-leadership suggests that people lead because they choose to serve (follow) others.
Being a leader asks us to both serve one another and to serve higher (work-communitywide) purposes.

Self-leaders need to learn to follow their bosses so they can honestly teach their followers to also
follow them. Acceptance of the follower role helps leaders develop the ability to respond willingly and
openly to their bosses. As inner leaders accept instruction, they gain greater wisdom through observation
and emulation based on acknowledgment of the skills and talents of their bosses. These actions awaken a
sense of assurance that the boss is, in fact, worthwhile and someone from whom they can learn. Being
followers’ lets inner leaders learn to respect others, to not ignore or belittle their fellows. They come to
recognize the accomplishments of others and their dependence on the accomplishments of many as the
basis for their own success.

How to be a good Follower:

a. Understand, Support, and Work for the Leader’s Vision
b. Help your Leader to Succeed
c. Provide Open, Honest, and Accurate Information
d. Positive, Collaborative, and CAN DO Attitude
e. Learn Attitude

Understanding David Rock’s SCARF Model

The SCARF model (Rock, 2008) is a summary of important discoveries from neuroscience about the way
people interact socially. Much of Rock's current thinking is distilled in Managing with the Brain in Mind,
published in August 2009 in strategy and business, Booz & Company's quarterly magazine and in "SCARF:
A brain-based model for collaborating with and influencing others," a paper originally published in 2008
in Issue #1 of the Neuro Leadership Journal (co-founded by Rock)”.

The model is built on three central ideas:

1. The brain treats many social threats and rewards with the same intensity as physical threats and
rewards (Lieberman, & Eisenberger, 2009).
2. The capacity to make decisions, solve problems and collaborate with others is generally reduced
by a threat response and increased under a reward response (Elliot, 2008).
3. The threat response is more intense and more common and often needs to be carefully minimized
in social interactions (Baumeister et al, 2001).

There are also different behavioural and psychological consequences associated with threat and reward:

Threat leads to:

o Reduced working memory

o Narrower field of view
o Generalising of threat
o Greater pessimism

10 | P a g e
 Reward leads to:

o Greater cognitive resources

o More insights
o Increased ideas for action
o Fewer perceptual errors
o Wider field of view

The model is made up of Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness and Fairness. These five domains have
been shown in many studies to activate the same reward circuitry that physical rewards activate, like money,
and the same threat circuitry that physical threats, like pain, activate (Rock, 2009b).
Understanding that these five domains are primary needs helps individuals and leaders better navigate the
social world in the workplace (Rock, 2009b).

Understanding the five domains

The SCARF model involves

five domains of human social
experience: Status, Certainty,
Autonomy,
Relatedness and Fairness.

 Status is about
relative importance to
others.
At work, a person’s
status is determined
relative to others
around them. It can be
increased by praise,
recognition, promotion,
giving responsibility
and sharing important information. It can be diminished by criticism, failure and exclusion from
meetings or conversations. It can also be diminished by the successes of colleagues with whom the
individual does not enjoy a good relationship.

When a person’s status is threatened by being left out it activates the parts of the brain involved in
the perception of physical pain. This may be the reason why it’s quite common for a person to
develop back pain when something goes wrong at work.

Clearly, leaders will only avoid triggering the threat response if they pay attention to maintaining
each person’s status in ways that are constructive for the whole team. Bear in mind, individuals

11 | P a g e
 who feel their status is threatened may start indulging in behaviour that undermines their
colleagues, thereby rebuilding their perception of their own status.

You can support and increase the status of every member of your team if you regularly give positive
feedback, keep everyone informed and involved and consult them often.
 Certainty concerns being able to predict the future.
The brain is a pattern-recognition machine that is constantly trying to predict the near future. For
example, the motor network is useless without the sensory system. To pick up a cup of coffee, the
sensory system, sensing the position of the fingers at each moment, interacts dynamically with the
motor cortex to determine where to move your fingers next. Your fingers don’t draw on fresh data
each time; the brain draws on the memory of what a cup is supposed to feel like in the hand, based
on expectations drawn from previous experiences. if it feels different, perhaps slippery, you
immediately pay attention (Hawkins, 2004). The brain likes to know the pattern occurring moment
to moment; it craves certainty, so that prediction is possible. Without prediction, the brain must use
dramatically more resources, involving the more energy-intensive prefrontal cortex, to process
moment-to-moment experience.

Even a small amount of uncertainty generates an ‘error’ response in the orbital frontal cortex (oFC).
This takes attention away from one’s goals, forcing attention to the error (Hedden, Garbrielli,
2006). if someone is not telling you the whole truth, or acting incongruously, the resulting
uncertainty can fire up errors in the oFC. This is like having a flashing printer icon on your desktop
when paper is jammed – the flashing cannot be ignored, and until it is resolved it is difficult to
focus on other things. Larger uncertainties like not knowing your boss’ expectations or if your job
is secure, can be highly debilitating.

The act of creating a sense of certainty is rewarding. Examples are everywhere in daily life: music
that has simple repeating patterns is rewarding because of the ability to predict the flow of
information. Meeting expectations generates an increase in dopamine levels in the brain, a reward
response (Schultz, 1999). Going back to a well-known place feels good because the mental maps
of the environment can be easily recalled.

 Autonomy provides a sense of control over events.

Autonomy is the domain, which creates a sense of control for the person. The less autonomy the
person experiences, the more the situation is treated as a threat. On the other hand, the sense of
autonomy activates the reward structures of the brain, creating a more stress-free experience.

The control of the autonomy domain is especially crucial in corporate life, where
micromanagement can often be the norm. Therefore, reducing the threat to autonomy is an
important aspect of management.

12 | P a g e
 Wherever possible, give individuals discretion at the point of decision-making. Define areas where
each person’s own judgment is required. Nothing undermines that sense of autonomy faster than
having to refer every decision to your boss – even worse – a committee! Build individual decision-
making into your organizational processes and avoid lengthy procedures that require the approval
of multiple levels of management.
In the absence of
 Relatedness is a sense of safety with others - of friend
rather than foe. safe social
Relatedness involves deciding whether others are ‘in’ or
‘out’ of a social group. Whether someone is friend, or foe.
interactions the
Relatedness is a driver of behavior in many types of teams,
from sports teams to organizational silos: people naturally
body generates a
like to form ‘tribes’ where they experience a sense of
belonging. The concept of being inside or outside the group
threat response…
is probably a by-product of living in small communities for millions of years, where strangers were
likely to be trouble and should be avoided.

The decision that someone is friend or foe happens quickly and impacts brain functioning (Carter
& Pelphrey, 2008). For example, information from people perceived as ‘like us’ is processed using
similar circuits for thinking one’s own thoughts. When someone is perceived as a foe, different
circuits are used (Mitchell, 2006). Also, when treating someone as a competitor, the capacity to
empathise drops significantly.(Singer et al, 2006).

 Fairness is a perception of fair exchanges between people.

Studies by Golnaz Tabibnia and Matthew Lieberman at UCLA showed that 50 cents generated
more of a reward in the brain than $10.00, when it was 50 cents out of a dollar, and the $10 was
out of $50 (Tabibnia & Lieberman, 2007). This study and a number of others illustrate that fair
exchanges are intrinsically rewarding, independent of other factors. The need for fairness may be
part of the explanation as to why people experience internal rewards for doing volunteer work to
improve their community; it is a sense of decreasing the unfairness in the world.

Unfair exchanges generate a strong threat response (Tabibnia & Lieberman, 2007). This sometimes
includes activation of the insular, a part of the brain involved in intense emotions such as disgust.
Unfair situations may drive people to die to right perceived injustices, such as in political struggles.
People who perceive others as unfair don’t feel empathy for their pain, and in some instances, will
feel rewarded when unfair others are punished (Singer et al, 2006).

These five domains activate either the 'primary reward' or 'primary threat' circuitry (and associated
networks) of the brain. For example, a perceived threat to one's status activates similar brain networks to a
threat to one's life.
In the same way, a perceived increase in fairness activates the same reward circuitry as receiving a monetary
reward.

The model enables people to more easily remember, recognize, and potentially modify the core social
domains that drive human behavior.
In Summary,

13 | P a g e
Zero Point Leadership Model: EMBED model for creating new habits

The NeuroLeader, also sometimes referred to as a “Change Leader” or “Brain-Based Leader”, uses the
EMBED Model™ for creating new habits to help others change behavior.

1. Engage- The foundation for helping others to change unwanted habits is a state of engagement,
also known as a ‘toward” state. The organizing principle of the human brain is to “minimize
danger, maximize reward” (Gordon, 2000), with the default state being to minimize danger, also
known as an “away” state or “threat” state. When in this state, the human brain is cognitively
disengaged and noisy from the activation of the emotions elicited from being in a state of threat vs.
reward. The “toward” state sets the stage for reflection on the what’s getting in the way, making
new connections, and accessing novel solutions to problems.

2. Move to Insight- Helping people hear those quiet signals referred to as “a-ha” moments is at the
heart of personal learning and innovation. This is very different from telling someone what to do
or giving them advice, which can induce a threat state and create unnecessary noise in the brain. A

14 | P a g e
 toward state creates a space where roadblocks are clearly brought to light (awareness) and solutions
from the non-conscious are able to be accessed (insight). Insights create permanent neural changes
in the brain, are more memorable than linear problem solving, and are what’s needed for addressing
complex barriers to change.

3. Break unwanted patterns- Insights aren’t very useful unless action is taken. A leader helps others
to hold their attention on new ways of thinking and being by taking new and timely action.
However, breaking unwanted patterns of behaviors doesn’t require big action. Small steps can just
as easily create new habits. What is important is that action follows insight. This leads to the
creation of new neural pathways in the brain and the consolidation necessary for changes in
emotional responses, thinking, and behavior.

4. Evaluate and Adapt- Ongoing follow-up to identify and acknowledge the learning that comes from
taking action is essential for tracking progress and ensuring self-accountability. New action that
follows insight provides opportunity for learning, which leads to more reflection and additional
insights. This cycle of learning leads to deeper levels of engagement and ensures action steps are
precise and laser focused on the new thinking and behavior that supports goal achievement.
5. Develop new behavior- New habits of behavior need reinforcement for sustainable change to occur.
Physical changes in the brain that correlate with changes in habits depend on the mental state of
attention. When a leader or coach reinforces new habits, attention is maintained and new pathways
in the brain are developed and expanded. The persistence of continuous and repeated attention to
the desired change strengthens the hard-wiring of newly created habits.

Leaders are Born or Made?

Leaders are made, they are not born. They are made by hard effort, which is the price which all of us must
pay to achieve any goal that is worthwhile (Lombardi, 2009). An effective leader is one who possesses both
the innate talents of one who will supervise with influence over others and the learned skills that come with
education, training and experience.
A crisis or important event may cause a person to rise to the occasion, which brings out extraordinary
leadership qualities in an ordinary person. This is the Great Events Theory.
People can choose to become leaders. People can learn leadership skills. This is the Transformational
Leadership Theory. Effective leadership is neither a product of being born with the right characteristics nor
about having the right experience and expertise-and is largely available within today's organizations.
In fact, it is possible to empower and develop successful leaders at all levels within an organization and
satisfy the organizational imperative for successful leadership that is a match for an organization‘s most
critical business challenges.
Example: When we look at sports leaders like Michael Jordan, it is clear that he embodies the combination
of those two extremes. He is one of the world's most extraordinary physical leaders of all time. However,
despite his talents, he could not lead his basketball team to its first NBA title until he learned to help recruit,
work with, and mold other key players into a winning team. Over the course of six years, Jordan learned
how to develop his team to its greatest achievement -- a league championship in 1990.
Some people seem to have been born with an “extra something,” a trait of tenacity and take-over-ship that
makes them “natural born leaders.” But, as with people like Winston Churchill or Franklin Roosevelt, those
who exhibit leadership traits early on — even when born into a privileged lifestyle — don’t become leaders
by accident.

15 | P a g e
16 | P a g e