| Course | PS391 Psychology of Leadership |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 1 |
| Paper type | Discussion board post |
| Length | About 450 words, 2 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 discussion post |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Psychology |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for PS391 Unit 1
Fastest Picker, Worst First Month: A PS391 Unit 1 Discussion Board Post on Born and Made Leaders
PS391 · Unit 1 Discussion Board Post
Posted by [Student Name]
The writer, the warehouse, the coworkers and the classmates are composite; the sources cited are real.
Initial Post
For three years I was the fastest picker on the night shift at a regional distribution warehouse in Columbus, Ohio, pulling cases for grocery stores across three states. In March, the operations manager promoted me to night-shift supervisor over twenty-eight people I had worked beside, joked with and, in a few cases, complained about management with. My first month was a disaster. I kept jumping onto the line to pick orders myself when we fell behind, which left nobody watching the dock. Two of my closest friends on the crew stopped talking to me after I wrote one of them up for a safety violation.
My manager told me I was "a natural leader who needs time." I am not sure there is such a thing, so I looked at the research.
Judge et al. (2002) pooled the published work linking the Big Five to leadership, and the five traits together tracked two things fairly well: which people a group ends up treating as its leader, and how well those people are rated once they hold the role. Extraversion showed the strongest link, with conscientiousness and openness also related and emotional instability linked to weaker leadership. Traits matter, but they left much of the picture unexplained.
Day et al. (2014) looked back over a quarter century of writing on how leaders grow and concluded that the growth is slow: hard assignments, honest feedback, time to think and people who back you shape it across years, and a single workshop rarely does.
My personality got me noticed; it did not tell me what to do when the dock went unwatched.
My answer, so far, is that traits may help a person get the job, but the skills of the job are learned, often painfully. In my second month, I stopped picking and started walking the floor, and I asked my manager for weekly feedback.
Who in your experience was promoted for being great at the work, and how did they handle leading it?
Reply to Andrea
Andrea, your story about the charge nurse who never let go of patient care sounds like my first month. Day et al. (2014) would see that as a stage in development, not a fixed trait.
Reply to Malik
Malik, I agree that some people seem comfortable leading from the start. Judge et al. (2002) found personality matters, but it explains only part of who leads well.
References
Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 63-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.004
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765-780. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.765
What the PS391 Unit 1 assignment asks for
PS391's opening board asks whether leaders are born or made, answered through one real or composite example. Describe someone who moved into a leadership role, including what went well and what did not. Summarize research on personality traits and leadership, and research on how leaders develop over time, and use both to answer the question for your example. Say what the person changed, or could change, as a result. Avoid choosing a side without evidence. End the post by asking peers about someone promoted for excellent work who then had to lead it. Around 400 words for the opening, then two replies that each complicate a classmate's answer with evidence or an example.
How this PS391 Unit 1 example is built
The post opens with a top picker promoted over her former coworkers. A paragraph describes her first month: picking orders herself, an unwatched dock and a write-up that cost two friendships. A paragraph relays her manager's "natural leader" comment and her doubt. A paragraph summarizes Judge and colleagues on the Big Five and leadership. A paragraph summarizes Day and colleagues on development over years. A highlighted line says personality got her noticed but did not tell her what to do. A paragraph gives her answer and the changes she made in month two. Replies connect a charge nurse's story to development stages and note how much personality leaves unexplained. The answer stays tied to what she did differently in month two.
Where the points sit in the PS391 Unit 1 rubric
Strong opening posts answer the born-or-made question with evidence from both sides rather than a slogan. Accurate summaries of trait research and development research earn credit, especially when they are applied to what one leader actually did. Naming specific mistakes and changes keeps the post concrete. A balanced conclusion, that traits matter and skills are learned, shows careful reading. Replies should complicate a classmate's view rather than agree. Use APA citations for both sources and describe people as composites. Stating one leadership skill the person still needs to build often strengthens the post, because it shows development as continuing rather than finished. Naming the leader's specific early mistakes, and what replaced them, makes the argument concrete for graders.
Common PS391 Unit 1 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Born-or-made posts often pick one side and cite a famous leader with no evidence. Others describe leadership theories without a person to apply them to. Students frequently treat personality findings as proof that leaders are born, overlooking how much the traits leave unexplained. Development is commonly described as a single training course rather than years of experience. Replies tend to share opinions instead of examples. Before posting, write one sentence on what traits explain and one on what they do not. Describe one change your example made. In replies, offer a case that complicates the classmate's answer. Keep everyone composite and avoid naming real employers.
Get a PS391 Unit 1 example written to your instructions
Send the Unit 1 prompt and the rubric. A custom post weighs born versus made leadership through one example. The first is free and comes back in 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More PS391 papers and BS in Psychology samples
- PS391 Unit 2: Leadership Theories Paper
- PS391 Unit 3: Leading Self Paper
- PS391 Unit 4: Developing Others Paper
- PS391 Unit 5: Leading Performance Paper
- PS391 Unit 6: Leading Change Paper
- PS391 Unit 7: Discussion Board Post
- PS391 Unit 8: Ethical Leadership Paper
- PS391 Unit 9: Crisis Leadership Paper
- PS391 Unit 10: Leadership Development Plan
- PS440 Unit 1: Defining Abnormality Board Post
- PS390 Unit 1: I/O History Post
- PS450 Unit 1: Case Management Role Board Post
- PS380 Unit 1: Clinical Psychologist Role Board Post
PS391 Unit 1 questions, answered
Are leaders born or made?
Research suggests both: traits matter, and leadership skills can be developed.
Why do good workers sometimes struggle as supervisors?
The skills that make someone excellent at a task differ from those needed to lead others.
What should replies add?
Evidence or an example that complicates a classmate's answer.
Where can I find a free PS391 Unit 1 sample paper?
This page holds the complete PS391 Unit 1 post on whether leaders are born or made, through a composite warehouse supervisor, with replies.
What answer does the PS391 Unit 1 sample give?
Traits help people get noticed and promoted, but the skills of leading are learned through experience and feedback.