There Is No Leadership Gene
By Tracy Staedter,
Seeker
| 10. 25. 2016
Science hasn't been able to reliably sort through the biological and environmental variables that distinguish what makes a person unique.
Despite internet applications, LinkedIn profiles, social media networking and hiring algorithms designed to crunch employment variables and spit out the perfect candidate, employers still spent 44 days on average in 2015 working to fill a job opening. Time is money, people. And 44 days spent choosing the exact wrong candidate is money out the window. If only there was a better way.
Last week, Gartner analysts David Furlonger and Stephen Smith presented an idea at a symposium for information technology executives that the company itself acknowledges as "maverick" — a future where genetics plays a bigger role in the hiring process.
Although federal and states laws prohibit employers from requesting or using an employee's genetic information, genetic testing is mainstream. Millions of people voluntarily pay to have their genomes analyzed thanks to inexpensive DNA kits available from companies like Ancestry DNA , Genome , 23andMe, Family Tree, to name a few. And research is moving forward in fields...
Related Articles
By Darren Incorvaia, Fierce Biotech | 07.16.2026
Jennifer Doudna, Ph.D., the Nobel Laureate best known for co-inventing the CRISPR system that has become the foundation for gene editing, is dipping her toes into a new, buzzy field: AI-powered protein design.
In a new paper, published today...
By Risa Cromer, The Conversation | 07.17.2026
By Emily Packard Dawson and Lainie Friedman Ross , The Hastings Center for Bioethics | 07.16.2026
Major news outlets recently reported – based on a bioRxiv preprint – that scientists had edited genes in human embryos with “startling precision.” The scientists’ decision to release this work ahead of peer review, coupled with the extensive media coverage...
Media coverage of recent developments in embryo gene editing might seem to suggest that gene-edited babies are close to becoming a reality. As tech billionaires eager to profit off of techno-eugenics invest in “designer baby” technologies, attempts to normalize heritable genome editing – which remains unsafe and raises significant ethical and societal concerns – are especially dangerous. It’s worth taking a closer look at these developments and what they mean, in a way that pushes back on narratives normalizing the...