I hate it when people think leadership is getting a grades or going to the best schools. Despite what institutions say it is hard to teach leadership. You can't

I hate it when people think leadership is getting a grades or going to the best schools. Despite what institutions say it is hard to teach leadership. You can't pass a course module on leadership and become leader, nor will getting a in maths make you leader. Leaders emerge in groups as and when they are needed. There will often be the natural leader, and the guy with authority. Most institutions don't like that idea. The natural leader is not always the guy with best education, it is not always the guy who has gone through a leadership program, it is not always the guy with the commission, it is not always the guy with huge amount of extra-circulars(which he joined on purpose to gain a leadership role...) It is the guy with the vision, and the ability to get people to rally around him. This sometimes causes huge conflicts in hierarchies, with an enlisted commanding the hearts, minds and actions as opposed to a commissioned officer which they follow because of fear. It's why I find it funny when elite institutions seem to imply they have a magical ingredient that makes people into leaders, they don't. They dispense authority not leadership and that's why people HAVE to follow them. It is self-fulfilling really. They fast track people into senior positions. Since they are in a senior position it sounds as if they have leadership ability, when really someone else could of been just as good in that position without necessarily having been to that elite institution. It was being in a senior position that made people listen, and not because of leadership skills. When people say stuff like naturing the best students because they going to be the future leaders I face-palm. I'm good at maths and cs, but that doesn't really qualify me for leadership but for some reason it qualifies me to apply for a commission to 'lead' men... When those men themselves may have been better applicants for the leadership role. Leadership to me is the ex-prisoner who reforms and becomes a social entrepreneur and transforms his community. It is the guy who builds an organisation that gets disenfranchised youth on the right track. These people have undisputed leadership skills. They have no amount of conferred authority, and yet they built organisations from nothing and people follow them. People follow them not because of a Army commission or a Yale degree or whatever but because they want to. For some reason they just emerged, and they're not always the best academically. I have seen organisations try to replicate natural leadership like the ones I mentioned. I have seen company graduate schemes that tell people to go out and start a charity for blind people, raise money for the orphanage or something. However being told to do it by your boss kind of eliminates the point... Because your recruiting from ivy league universities, it does not mean your getting leaders.