Great Man Theory

If someone asked you to think of great leaders, who comes to mind? If asked to explain your reasoning, are there certain characteristics you would point out or choices they made that proved their leadership abilities? Do you think they were destined to become leaders from birth?

Great leaders come forward when they’re most needed to become the foundation upon which history is built. But exactly why specific leaders rise to positions of power has long been a topic of debate. Are leaders born with some inherent qualities that set them up to be visionary icons? Or are they shaped by their life circumstances, acquiring leadership skills and becoming influential because of their environment? The great man Theory suggests the former: leaders are born, not made. Essentially, according to the theory, people in positions of power deserve to lead because of characteristics granted to them at birth, which ultimately helped them become heroes.

Now considered quite outdated, this theory was a popular approach to studying history in the 19th century.¹ The great man Theory explored historical events through the acts of “great men” who, born with natural traits like superior intellect and innate leadership abilities, rose to power when needed and made significant contributions to human history. Specifically, the theory focuses on the ambitions and actions of notable figures rather than the small-scale contributions of “common folk.” 

Though historians no longer view history through the antiquated lens of the great man, we still look back on individual figures—whose actions truly did shape the course of history—as symbols of outstanding leadership. From political leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, George Washington, and Nelson Mandela to military leaders like Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Napoleon Bonaparte, these notable people remain iconic examples of “natural-born leaders.”