What's new

(SOLVED) Magaling sa english pa help po.

_Big Boss_

Forum Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2020
Posts
699
Reaction
4,090
Points
705
Pa help naman po dito sa questions nato. Medyo gets ko naman po. Pero gusto kopo sana na mas maayos po sagot. E mahina po ako sa english baka po masagot nyo po ito. Salamat po.

1. What is the difference between natural born leader and a trained leader?
2. If you were to choose natural born leader, or trained leader?
 
[XX='jncndlcpa, c: 1246986, m: 1832526'][/XX] andiyan na si boss ledin sa baba. Yan ang savior ni TS.
 
For me, natural born leader is a person who already have the innate ability to lead or influence people though he or she might not be aware of it.
Trained leader is a person who acquires leadership by way of training himself or attending seminars.

Para mas maintindihan natin, ilagay natin yun sa situation. Leadership is defined depending on your views about leadership—that is, your standards. You might call a person a leader, but to someone he or she is not.

Example, a manager is expected to acquire leadership skills; however, you find him/her not having those qualities while others do.

Next, saan yung mas pipiliin ko sa dalawa?

I choose natural born leaders kasi it will save him/her some time. You don't need to urge motivation on him/her.

However, that may be ideal, kasi wala naman talagang natural born na leaders, kasi kung ano man tayo ngayon ay naka hulma talaga sa experiences natin. Therefore, leaders are made not born. A natural born leader should not be an option in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Since nasagot ko na si TS kanina heto naman ang insight ko. Hehe.

I find the questions somewhat flawed.

Walang pinanganak na automatically paglabas sa sinapupunan ng ina nila e matik may leadership skills na agad. Maaaring title meron na agad sila pero yung skills? Wala pa. Lahat ng magagaling na lider ay dumaan sa matinding training at pag-aaral.

Isa pa, para sa akin, masyadong malabo at unfair ang term na "natural born leader". Ano bang criteria? Kung magpapakatotoo tayo bale, in a sense, leadership requires opportunity. How can you lead if you've never had the opportunity to do so in the first place? Also, how would you know if you are/you aren't a "natural born leader" if you've never been given the opportunity to train?

Let's take the presidential race as an example. Kapag galing sa isang influential o political family, they have higher chances of being tagged as "official candidates" pero kapag galing sa hindi kilalang sektor o kung saan man, diba tina-tag sila as "nuisance candidates"? E who is to say ba talaga na lahat ng mga na-tag as nuisance candidates ay wala talagang potential or skills to lead? Who's to say na hindi sila "natural born leaders"?

So, you see, doon pa lang na-cancel out na yung konsepto ng "natural born leaders". People will always prefer TRAINED LEADERS. And these "trained leaders" are usually BORN WITH THAT OPPORTUNITY. Kapag sinabi kong opportunity, I meant opportunity para makapag-aral at makapag-train.

Yun lang naman insight ko. HAHAHAHA pwedeng tama ako pero pwede rin mali ako. :)
 

Similar threads

Back
Top