This morning I came across this article from an astrologer who suggests that certain astrological signs are associated with being a leader, and other signs mean that you are a follower. As a leadership scholar, I have three problems with this:
First, there is scientific evidence, from studies of identical and fraternal twins, that has determined that leadership is more “made” (a product of development of skills, competencies and experiences), than it is “born” (temperament, personality, etc.). You can read more about this research here.
Second, if birth is destiny, then why work to develop your leadership potential? The qualities that we admire in the best leaders are the same qualities we admire in anyone – honesty, trustworthiness, competence, achievement, and good at communicating and maintaining relationships. This would also mean that all of the money spent on leader development is a waste. If astrology is true, we should just select leaders based on birthdates.