I wanted to finish off the discussion on elite individuals from my two previous posts last week, "What makes elite individuals elite?" and "The 40% rule", hopefully generating less controversy (see "Controversy") than the last time. Specifically, I wanted to re-visit the topic on whether elite athletes are born with elite skills and physiologic tools that make them markedly superior to everyone else or whether they develop those elite skills and physiologic tools with practice and training. In other words, is it "nature" or "nurture". There is also a third possibility that it's a combination of both "nature" and "nurture". The author David Epstein wrote a fascinating book on this exact subject called The Sports Gene: Inside the Science of Extraordinary Athletic Performance, which I've mentioned a few times in related posts from the past (see "What makes a champion?" and "Peak").
It would be helpful to start out with a brief discussion on something that is known as the mammalian dive reflex. I first learned about the so-called dive reflex during one of my undergraduate biology courses (I think it was a class called "Comparative Animal Physiology"). The dive reflex is a normal and protective physiologic response to water submersion. It's found in almost all mammals, which includes, of course, humans. When mammals (or humans) dive underwater, they have to hold their breath, which causes the concentration of oxygen in their bodies to decrease. That's usually not good! However, the body responds to being submerged in water by lowering the heart rate (bradycardia), slowing down or even stopping the normal breathing reflex (bradypnea or apnea), and shunting blood flow from the arms and legs to the brain, heart, and kidneys to preserve the body's core functions (increased peripheral vascular resistance). All of these responses decrease the body's consumption of oxygen, allowing mammals (and humans) to survive, for at least a time, underwater without a source of oxygen.
As you will no doubt acknowledge, some mammals are much better at diving underwater than humans (think about how long whales and dolphins can hold their breaths underwater compared to humans). These mammals evolved, through natural selection, bodily mechanisms to help them dive underwater for much longer periods of time. As it turns out, some humans are better at diving underwater than others. Dolphins and whales developed a robust dive reflex over thousands of years, but what about humans? As it turns out, two distinct populations of humans have appeared to develop remarkable adaptations over time that allow them to hold their breath underwater for much longer than most of us. These populations are the Bajau people of Southeast Asia (known as "sea nomads") (see "Physiological and genetic adaptations to diving in sea nomads") and the Haenyeo people of Korea (see "Genetic and training adaptations in the Haenyeo divers of Jeju, Korea"). Both populations have appeared to develop over thousands of years genetic modifications that allow them to dive underwater for long periods of time. In the first study, the Bajau people were shown to have increased spleen size, providing a reservoir of oxygenated red blood cells during diving. In addition, they appear to have inherited a specific gene modification that affects the so-called dive reflex. The second study showed that the Haenyeo women divers also have developed a superior dive reflex (pronounced bradycardia) compared to everyone else who lives in Korea.
The scientists in both studies suggest that their results provide convincing evidence that the Bajau and Haenyeo divers evolved their remarkable adaptation to diving underwater over thousands of years. I find these results incredibly remarkable, as it suggests that "nature" is playing a major role in their abilities. However, the studies I mentioned in the two posts last week ("What makes elite individuals elite?" and "The 40% rule"), as well as a number of studies mentioned in David Epstein's book The Sports Gene: Inside the Science of Extraordinary Athletic Performance suggest that "nurture" plays a major role as well. In other words, rather than an either/or when it comes to the "nature versus nurture" debate, it's a both/and! Elite athletes are the result of great genes and practice, practice, practice!
I mention all of this, as one of the most frequently debated topics in leadership and management is whether leaders are born with a unique ability to practice the art of leadership, or do they develop those skills with practice and training? Most of the studies and articles on leadership that I've read strongly suggest that great leaders develop their skills over time with extensive education and training. That's certainly reassuring, but given the discussion on elite athletes above, I am still left to ponder if we will ever find a so-called leadership gene. Stay tuned for more!
No comments:
Post a Comment