Burns explained the impact of a childs upbrining on how they approach authority:” , parents believed that it was most important to teach their children to respect authority, to respect the church, to respect one’s government, and to avoid questioning authority. Today parents believe it is most important to teach their children to accept responsibility for their own actions, to be willing and confident in accepting challenges, and to question authority when necessary.” I thought this was really interesting; how one is raised effects the way they act in leadership-follower relationships in their future.
This is also interesting how this has evolved over time due to international events. The effect of what is needed from a worker/ the average worker revolves around what is needed by that nation as a whole. As discussed by Burns, after the cold war the main type of worker needed was someone that is more specialized, more educated and trained. I feel like this shows the important role the follower plays in the type of leader.
I think its really cool how you touched on the idea of nature vs nurture. In class and through readings we learned that leaders might be 1/3 born and 2/3 made. This kind of talks about what creates that 2/3 made. The way that the parents teach their kid about authority is part of that 2/3
I agree that a lot of how kids approach authority is how they grew up and how they were taught. I also found it interesting that you said it can also be affected by international events. I wouldn’t have thought that international events played a role in how a leader acts.
So much of what we’ve talked about in class has to do with psychology. I think it’s fascinating how much of a role it plays in leadership, but it’s also concerning how little we know about it. How much of our personalities is learned versus how much we’re born with can only be explained by theory.
I think that the evolution of parenting that you mentioned is really interesting because it reveals how much influence parents have on their children, thus fostering the question of nature v. nurture. I wonder if our views on leadership and followership will change again in how ever many years thanks to new perspectives valued by our parents.
I think a lot of what our discussions entail psychology. How much our personalities has to do with what our leadership roles are and how they ties into what we learn and don’t learn about each other is extremely interesting but scary because we still are unaware of what really goes on in our brains and how they develop with personality traits.
I think it was a very interesting point to bring up how someone is raised can effect their future in leader relations.
I also found it interesting that he thinks kids are raised to question authority. I think that I relate a lot of things to race but it hink its an interesting lens to look through. I think kids of color are taught the opposite in fear of their lives and I wonder if these changes or has a na effect on their leadership-follower relationships in the future.
I like that you included the idea of nature vs nurture. How someone is brought up can affect what they do in leadership terms in the future
I also think the connection between how someone is raised as a child and their reaction to authority as an adult is interesting. I think that with leadership, like many other aspects, an individual’s upbringing is crucial as it provides a different look into why a person behaves the way they do. I’ve never thought about it this way before.