This is a strange take. A natural leader is a leader without a title. They have they have the qualities needed to be a good leader. People gravitate to them because they have all the prerequisites and skills of leadership.
They lead people because of the relationship they have built without having to resort to institutional authority. This makes natural leaders better than a boss who is given a title sometimes without the attributes or even the skills of leadership.
Your take seems to be someone who is born a leader doesn’t necessarily have the skills. Like they are charismatic but don’t have good listening skills. These people are not natural leaders though. Natural leaders by definition posses the attributes and skills of leadership.
This is not saying every natural leaders has all the skills or attributes of leadership as that would be a ridiculous bar to expect. It really just feels like you could just say leadership is often confused with charisma.
This is a strange take. A natural leader is a leader without a title. They have they have the qualities needed to be a good leader. People gravitate to them because they have all the prerequisites and skills of leadership.
They lead people because of the relationship they have built without having to resort to institutional authority. This makes natural leaders better than a boss who is given a title sometimes without the attributes or even the skills of leadership.
Your take seems to be someone who is born a leader doesn’t necessarily have the skills. Like they are charismatic but don’t have good listening skills. These people are not natural leaders though. Natural leaders by definition posses the attributes and skills of leadership.
This is not saying every natural leaders has all the skills or attributes of leadership as that would be a ridiculous bar to expect. It really just feels like you could just say leadership is often confused with charisma.
Your last sentence should’ve been what OP posted, you’re right. 👍