....no, it's pushing them out of their comfort zone.

Nah, it's important for everyone to have experience taking the lead and the risk for doing so is much lower when you're younger. It's the best time to train that skill set.

Your apprehension to the concept is one of the reasons most leaders are selfish dicks, since those were the only people who wanted to practice being a leader growing up (cause they like the power of it)

Even with as many downvotes and with as much disagreement as you're getting, I do believe there's more merit to the what you're saying than others are allowing for.

Not all "pushing them out of their comfort zone" is beneficial. A lot of child actors/performers have a great amount of trauma from being forced to perform as children, for instance. I struggle with such trauma myself.

And I'm not sure I can nutshell exactly the difference between abusive coercion and encouraging personal growth, but maybe some rules of thumb:

• If it's motivated by some deep-seated emotional need of your own rather than for the benefit of the child, that's harmful for sure.
• If you're already thinking about it as "forcing" the kid even from the get-go, that's a huge red flag.
• If you're pushing them into something they have no interest in (as opposed to encouraging them to stretch to achieve some of the passions/wishes/desires/goals they themselves authentically express) I think that's problematic. Especially if it hampers the kid's ability to engage in what they are interested in.
• The child's temperament and environment in which they have to operate is also important. e.g. If they're super introverted and have to extravert way more than they're comfortable with even without being pushed socially, I think giving the kid more room to self-regulate is more helpful than trying to force them to be more extraverted or whatever. (And similarly with the reverse. And there are plenty of other examples one could come up with.)
• If someone's guilting you into making your kids do stuff (a church pushing you to get your kid more involved or whatever), that's shitty too.

The wholesome flip side way of encouraging personal growth in social areas might be something more like playing chess with your kid when they start showing an interest, then suggesting they join a local chess club. Or maybe their thing is debate (debate club). Or writing software (LUGs and user groups for whatever language or whatever). Or art (lots of libraries and art museums put on things that might apply). Or music (local orchestras or whatever). Or drama (drama clubs, improv classes, etc).

The leadership part comes later. Maybe they take on some responsibility at whatever club. Maybe they get good enough at their craft to start teaching one-on-one lessons/tutoring. Maybe they get some of their works displayed in museums or contests and get some notoriety that way. Maybe they give talks at school in public speaking classes about their areas of expertise.

But let the kid engage in what they're authentically interested in engaging in. Don't be throwing some kid arbitrarily in a chess club if they couldn't give a fuck. Especially if you're weirdly invested in them being good at some particular thing. I think it happens more and can be more damaging than a lot of people realize.