Skip to content
1. Which, if any, style differences have you noticed between men and women leaders?
2. How would a manager know which variables in a given situation should influence which approach to leadership he or she should take?
3. In this chapter we have discussed ethical problems mostly in business. For sake of fairness and balance identify a few ethical problems you have observed among lawyers, physicians, politicians, or sports figures.
Identify two Business leaders, who made a significant impact on the business world in 20th century and twoBusiness leaders in 21st century:The four business leaders picked are; 1- Walt Disney, 2-Elon Musk, 3-Bill Gates, 4- Jeff Bezos. Priority should be on Walt Disney please, you do not need to do anything on the other leaders, just Walt Disney; However you will need to still be able to know someinformation to be able to complete point 2 from below, which is why i added all the leaders name we will use for the presentation. So you will need to complete the below.Dont worry about the title page, the contents page, only focus on the Introduction (purpose of the presentation), focus on Walt Disney buy completing the below request/instructions and a conclusion which will be for Point 2 in the below insruction and finally the references. Any images used should have a reference too place and any information referenced should be able to be checked online to prove it ligitmate. Academic references pleaseSee below instructions on what is expected.1. Critically analyse each leader in terms of their:a) Leadership styleb) Leadership Behaviourc) Followers Appeal2. Evaluate whether there are similarities and differences between the leaders characteristics thatcontributed to the successful impact of their leadership in the Business world.
What Makes a Good Leader: A Transformational Leadership Perspective
The paper required include these four main parts: introduction (500 words), literature review (1500 words), case analysis (1500 words), and discussion (500 words).
Write a 3000-word essay to define and demonstrateunderstanding of the importance of leadership skills in healthcare management
Review the leadership theories you have learned about over the past few modules. Relate the leadership theories to your own Personal Leadership Conceptual Framework. Do one or more of these approaches fit with your leadership style? Explain how and give examples. Use your insights from this journal assignment to add to your Personal Leadership Framework.
Explain how strategy and leadership are integrated
Political Culture in Education Policy
one of the political cultures (pages 81-89 in Fowler) and develop a 150-200 word position statement suggesting how organizational leaders should work within it.
Political Culture and Education Policy
In the late 1980s, Marshall, Mitchell, and Wirt (1989) conducted a cross-state comparative study of education policymaking, using a cultural framework for their analysis. One portion of their research specifically explored the impact of political culture on both policymakers and education policy. Indeed, they selected the six states for their study to include two states with a predominantly traditionalistic culture (Arizona and West Virginia), two with a predominantly moralistic culture (California and Wisconsin), and two with a predominantly individualistic culture (Illinois and Pennsylvania). Marshall et al. (1989) made two major findings with regard to political culture and education policy. First, they discovered that powerful national policy movements can overwhelm the importance of political culture in state-level policymaking. For example, the impact of national movements in such policy areas as school desegregation and special education was apparent in all six states, regardless of their political cultures. Their second major finding, however, was that in the absence of a national movement, policy differences related to political culture do emerge. For example, policymakers in the traditionalistic states reported that their legislatures were considering reforms in areas such as student testing, stronger student discipline, and weakening the power of education professionals.
More recently, Karen Seashore Louis and her colleagues studied how the political culture in ten states shapes both their education policies and their policy processes. They found that political culture exercises a considerable influence in both areas. For example, traditionalistic states like Texas, Mississippi, and North Carolina had relatively closed policy processes, dominated by elite insiders, and policymaking tended to be centralized. In contrast, moralistic Oregon and Iowa used open processes that involved numerous participants. Differences in political culture also influenced how states constructed their policies. Both North Carolina and moralistic Minnesota adopted accountability policies. However, the approach in North Carolina was centralized, in contrast to that used in Minnesota, which gave schools considerable freedom to interpret and use test score data as they wished (Febey & Louis, 2008; Louis et al., 2006, 2008). The authors concluded that in order to understand state education policy, it is necessary to “move beyond descriptive reports . . . by using the lens of political culture to interpret the types of policies . . . , stakeholders involved, and the specific mechanisms . . . employed” (Febey & Louis, 2008, p. 69). Thus, political culture seems to be an important variable in education policymaking at the state level, but it is constrained by the national education policy agenda.
one of the political cultures (pages 81-89 in Fowler) and develop a 150-200 word position statement suggesting how organizational leaders should work within it.
Individualistic Political Culture
The individualistic political culture developed in Middle Atlantic states such as Pennsylvania and New Jersey; settlers from this area spread it westward. Moreover, in the twentieth century, its influence spread into southern New England, changing the flavor of politics in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut. In the individualistic culture, politics is understood as a type of marketplace in which the government should serve utilitarian—primarily economic—purposes. Members of this culture believe government should keep to a strict minimum its intervention in “private” spheres such as business, the family, and churches; however, they do want it to provide the framework needed to keep the economy working efficiently. In this culture, politics is seen as a business like any other; individuals enter it in order to advance themselves socially and financially. The political process is based on an exchange of favors that exists within a system of mutual obligation. For example, in exchange for a large campaign contribution from a corporation, a state representative may vote against a law that the corporation opposes. Or, at the local level, a city councilman may help the son of a loyal party worker get a job teaching in the city schools. The party machine—based on a complex system of mutual obligations and strong party loyalty—is an institution typical of this culture. Issues, ideas, and ideology are unimportant in it, as is tradition. and strict respect for the system of mutual obligation are what really count. At its best, politics in this culture operates in a smooth, efficient, and businesslike manner; at its worst, it becomes corrupt. The individualistic culture is more susceptible to corruption than are the other two cultures, which is perhaps why people in the individualistic culture frequently consider political activity morally questionable or “dirty.”
The individualistic political culture has made important contributions to the nation as a whole. In particular, its emphasis on smooth, efficient, businesslike government has had a national impact, as has its preference for nonideological politics. However, it is vulnerable to the criticism that its practitioners have no principles and believe that everything is for sale to the highest bidder (Elazar, 2003). Several of the political developments of recent years, including the rise of the Religious Right, Ralph Nader’s visibility during presidential campaigns, and the Tea Party Movement can be understood in part as a rejection of individualistic politics by people from the traditionalistic and moralistic cultures.
Moralistic Political Culture
one of the political cultures (pages 81-89 in Fowler) and develop a 150-200 word position statement suggesting how organizational leaders should work within it.
Moralistic Political Culture
The moralistic political culture is dominant in New England and in areas where New Englanders settled originally. It is also dominant in areas that received large numbers of Scandinavian immigrants in the nineteenth century, such as Minnesota and Wisconsin. Members of this culture believe politics is (or should be) “one of the great activities of man in his search for the good society” and “a public service” (Elazar, 2003, p. 262). People in a moralistic political culture favor an activist government that initiates new programs when necessary. They also believe participation in politics should be as widespread as possible; the New England town meeting is typical of the participative institutions this culture tends to produce. Ideas and issues are important in this culture, and its members often debate them with great intensity. Unlike representatives of the other two cultures, members of the moralistic culture view government bureaucracies and civil service systems positively because they believe that they encourage the fair and impartial implementation of government policies. Clean government is of great importance in this culture, and political corruption is seen as a shocking betrayal of public trust.
Historically, the moralistic political culture has been the source of most of the “clean government reforms” in U.S. society, such as laws requiring the publication of campaign finance records or forbidding nepotism (the hiring of relatives in government jobs). The moralistic belief in widespread political participation has also had a positive impact on U.S. government, leading to such institutions as citizens’s advisory councils and public debates of important issues. Sometimes, however, members of the moralistic political culture become overly rigid in their beliefs or veer toward fanaticism. Representatives of the other two cultures often perceive them as too idealistic and out of touch with the realities of practical politics (Elazar, 2003).
Traditionalistic Political Culture
One of the political cultures (pages 81-89 in Fowler) and develop a 150-200 word position statement suggesting how organizational leaders should work within it.
Traditionalistic Political Culture
As suggested in Table 4.3 https://plus.pearson.com/products/debad19c-fe46-4303-934c-f231fb27dd22/pages/f5ccb083-8dcc-11ec-bb18-0f43a72fbf12.xhtml#f35cf850250ef541275f3b2df2fb4c4e, traditionalistic political culture is dominant in the South and in regions of the country where southerners originally settled. One major characteristic of this culture is ambivalence toward the market and unrestrained commercial enterprise. It is no coincidence, for example, that the first major American critique of capitalism was produced by a southern politician, John C. Calhoun, whose analysis of the social ills produced by industrialization anticipated some of Karl Marx’s ideas. A second major characteristic of traditionalistic political culture is the belief that an established elite should provide political leadership. Although the exact nature of this elite can vary—it may consist of the local “good ol’ boys” in one place and of a group of highly educated patricians in another—membership in it is achieved through family or other social ties. The overriding political goal is maintaining the established order or, if it must change because of changing circumstances, bringing about the transition with minimal disruption.
In traditionalistic political cultures, government is seen as a positive force in society—as long as it restricts its activity to maintaining the status quo. Active participation in politics is considered a privilege that should be restricted to the members of the elite and those whom they invite to become involved. Political parties and political ideology are unimportant; typically, traditionalist areas have a one-party system, and major issues are fought out between factions of the dominant party. However, kinship, social connections, and personal relationships are extremely important. In this culture, politicians are expected to have and steadily maintain a wide-ranging network of personal relationships. Although the traditionalistic political culture is not as likely to become corrupt as is the individualistic culture, domination by corrupt elites is sometimes a problem in traditionalistic areas.
Traditionalistic political culture brings several strengths to U.S. politics. Its skepticism about unrestrained commercial activity sometimes causes its representatives to raise important questions, and its concern for continuity provides needed balance in a rapidly changing society. Moreover, elite political systems occasionally produce courageous, even brilliant, leaders who probably would never succeed in politics in the other two cultures. Senators William Fulbright of Arkansas and Robert Byrd of West Virginia come to mind. Because their power was rooted in a base comprising kinship and other social ties, they were sometimes able to take unpopular stands, secure in the knowledge that they would be reelected anyway. Obviously, the traditionalistic political culture also has major weaknesses. Its resistance to change has been a major factor in perpetuating racism, and its elitism discourages widespread political participation, including high voter turnout (Elazar, 2003).