Autocratic Democratic And Laissez Faire Management Essay

Autocratic Democratic And Laissez Faire Management Essay In the past twelve months I have witnessed quite a few leadership styles. When i was working in one of the diamond manufacturing companys the leader of the firm was the owner himself. He was a democratic leader he used to lead us by setting examples himself. All the decisions concerning the firm was always taken after consulting the employees of the company. Opinions of all the employees were duly considered before setting goals and targets which were to be achieved. But once the target were set he made clear that it has to be achieved under all circumstances because no targets were set without consulting the employees and above all targets which were set were realistic targets. This type of leadership behaviour is termed as job-centred behaviour by (Buchanan Huczynski 2010, p.598) the company in which I was working was a small size firm with only twenty employees working in it. He had no assistants and use to manage all the employees all by himself. Being a leader he had to deal wi th individual, group and organizational goals which he did it very efficiently and effectively. As mentioned in Buchanan Huczynski(2010)Managers do the things right but leaders do the right things he always did the right things at the right time as a true leader. According (Feilder 1996, cited in Hellriegel, et al. 2010, p.333) Group atmosphere is defined as the level at which a leaders control is accepted. Here in this case the group atmosphere was not at its peak. And the task structure was more of a routine one where goals were clearly defined by the leader to all the employees. According to Burns (1978), cited in Dawson(1996, p.227) he distinguishes leaders in two categories one as transformational leader and other as an transactional leader. the leader of our group was a transactional leader the one who gives what the employee desires and in return ask employees to full fill leaders desires. Here the employees wants were to earn money this was satisfied by giving their hard work and time to the company, an in return employees desires were fulfilled by getting the job done by paying the money to the employee. All employees were satisfied under his leadership style and behaviour including me which led to an comfortable organizational atmosphere to work in to and in this way enhanced organizational performance. The other example which I have noticed is an example of my father when I used to work in our family business. Here the relationship between me and my father was that of a leader, follower relationship. Here the leadership style which I observed was an autocratic one. As I was still a learner into the business I dint have much of knowledge and experience to take decisions. Here the group atmosphere was at its peak and the task structure was a non-routine one because here in this case the leader knows the better than the employee to perform a particular task (Feilder 1996, cited in Hellriegel, et al. 2010, p.333). The organisational goal were common that to increase the sales and thereby increasing the profits of the company. The leadership behaviour observed here was of employee-centred leadership behaviour. This means that the leader focuses on the relationship between the leader and the employee and he also focuses on the need of the employee (Buchanan and Huczynski 2010, p.606) as per James McGregor Burns(1978) the leader here was a transformational leader which means that the followers treated here with relationship in terms of motivation and commitment, and inspiring the followers to give more than the expected to improve organizational performance. The leadership style changes with the same person when it comes to different organization. For example when I am with my father during the office hours he is an autocratic leader, but as soon as we come back from work the leadership style changes. This is supported by Vroom and yettons (1973), cited in Rosenfeld and Wilson (1999, p.201) describes normative theory of leadership effectiveness, which says that the leadership style changes according to different situations. My father is the leader of our family also, here a different style of leadership is observed. Laissez-faire type of leadership is adopted here where all the members of the organization has the freedom to do whatever he wants to do. Here the decisions are not forced upon anybody and everyone has the full freedom to do whatever one wishes to do. Here the common organizational goal is to run the house effectively which the leader has to take care of. Which is fulfilled under this style of leadership. The leadership which I have noticed in the past twelve can also be termed as participative leadership in the first case and supportive leadership in the second and third case (Luthans 2002, p.587).Thus in the end we can say that leadership style and behaviour changes with different organization. From the above given examples also we can state that an effective leader always leads to an effective organizational. And thus in the end according to my own personal experinces I can say that there is a strong relationship between leadership style and behaviour to organizational performance. Refernces:- Buchanan, A.D. and Huczynski, A.A. 2010, Organizational Behaviour. 7th Edition. Essex: Pearson Education. pp. 596-622 Dawson.S.1996,Analysing Organisations. 3rd Edition. Essex: McMillan Press. pp.227-230 Hellriegel, D. et al. 2001, Organizational Behaviour.9th Edition. Essex: South-Western College Publishing.pp.322-354 Luthans, F. 2002, Organizational Behaviour. 9th Edition. Essex: McGraw Hill Higher Education. pp.587 Rosenfeld, R.H. and Wilson, D.C.1999, Managing Organization. 2nd Edition. Essex: McGraw hill publishing company. pp. 201

Oppression in A Tale of Two Cities Essay

In the book A Tale of Two Cities, one of the many themes present is that of oppression. There are many examples of this throughout the book, some more obvious than the others. We can see right away in the beginning that the French peasants are under a hideous oppression by the French aristocracy. All the people of the towns that are described are starved and in great pain, they are depressed and slinking about, gaunt skeletons of human beings. Their desperation is clearly evident in Chapter 5, when everyone nearby rushes to lick wine off of the city street when a barrel of it bursts after being dropped. As this is occurring, the wealthy French citizens are reclining indoors and use a ridiculous number of servants just to prepare a cup of hot water. When a poor man’s son is run over and killed by the rich Marquis’s carriage, the Marquis makes no apology, and tosses a couple coins at the grieving father. The aristocrats did not even think the peasants human; they treated them as animals, without a thought to their happiness or well being. Another example of oppression is in Mrs. Cruncher’s relationship with her husband. Mr. Cruncher orders her about, and treats her like a piece of property, just there to do his will and stay out of his way. When Jerry Cruncher catches his wife praying for his thieving soul, he takes it to mean that she wants him to be caught and punished, so he will stop grave robbing. His son sees him the next morning bashing his wife’s head into the headboard of their bed as a punishment for her prayers. Mrs. Cruncher lived in a constant oppressive atmosphere as she tried to conform to her husband’s wishes, but was never good enough for him, as he abused her pretty much every day. A more prominent example of this theme is shown in relation to Dr. Manette. The memory of the eighteen years he spent locked up in the Bastille constantly hangs over his head as a burden. His experience in that atmosphere was so awful that the mere memory of it oppresses him. The Doctor tended to fall back into his half-crazed childlike state throughout the book  because his experiences were more than his mind could deal with. Finally, a major example of oppression taking place is with Sidney Carton. He is oppressed by an addiction to alcohol. His life had taken several bad turns, making him a depressed, almost broken man. When he met Lucy Manette, he felt as though his life now had a purpose again, because he loved her so much. However, Carton realized that with his character and lifestyle, he would never be able to make her happy. The alcohol he had turned to for comfort, which had been his only friend for years, was now working against him. Carton was so far gone that he was no longer able to give up drinking, no matter how much he wanted to. Alcohol now virtually controlled his life, dictating what he could or could not do. This was an awful example of self-induced oppression. Oppression is such a powerful theme in A Tale of Two Cities, probably to demonstrate how people can put it upon themselves, and how they can break free from it if they believe in their cause enough.

John Romanos Coming Home to Television A Review

John Romano writes about the transition from erudite academic writing to writing for the masses in popular television in Coming Home to Television. The essay addresses the differences between what is considered highbrow versus what is considered lowbrow art and creative expression, especially in the realm of literature. Ironically, Romano writes about television from a scholarly perspective. He is only somewhat sarcastic when Romano notes that the transition from academia to television script writing was a step down. Walter Karp does not address the differences between writing for school and writing for television. However, Karp does harp on the inefficiencies of the American public school system. Karp focuses more on class issues related to education, such as unequal access to gifted education between lower-income versus higher-income families. Karp also incorporates issues related to educational tracking in his essay, Why Johnny Cant Think. What the two articles have in common is t he way the authors expose the divide between highbrow and lowbrow culture in America, although they address these matters from completely different perspectives and points of view. Both writing for academic audiences and for television audiences requires mastery of certain jargon, style, technique, and approach. For example, writing for television requires understanding of what audiences want. Romano needs to know what his audiences like, and needs to write so that the viewer keeps coming

Definitions and Examples of Anthypophora in Rhetoric

Anthypophora is a  rhetorical term for the practice of asking oneself a question and then immediately answering it. Also called (or at least closely related to) the  figure of response (Puttenham) and  hypophora. The relationship between anthypophora and hypophora is confusing, says Gregory Howard. Hypophora is seen as the statement or question. Anthypophora as the immediate reply (Dictionary Of Rhetorical Terms, 2010). In Dictionary of Poetic Terms (2003), Jack Myers and Don Charles Wukasch define anthypophora as a figure of argumentation in which the speaker acts as his own foil by arguing with himself. In Garners Modern American Usage (2009), Bryan A. Garner defines anthypophora as a rhetorical tactic of refuting an objection with a contrary inference or allegation. EtymologyFrom the Greek, against allegation Examples and Observations The Cowardly Lion in The Wizard of Oz: What makes a king out of a slave? Courage! What makes the flag on the mast to wave? Courage! What makes the elephant charge his tusk in the misty mist, or the dusky dusk? What makes the muskrat guard his musk? Courage! Saul Bellow: Is our species crazy? Plenty of evidence. Orson Welles: In Switzerland, they had brotherly love, five hundred years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock. Winston Churchill: You ask, what is our policy? I will say it is to wage war, by sea, land, and air, with all our might and all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalog of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory. Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror; victory, however long and hard the road may be, for without victory, there is no survival. Barack Obama: This is our first task, caring for our children. It’s our first job. If we don’t get that right, we don’t get anything right. That’s how, as a society, we will be judged. And by that measure, can we truly say, as a nation, that we’re meeting our obligations? Can we honestly say that we’re doing enough to keep our children, all of them, safe from harm? Can we claim, as a nation, that we’re all together there, letting them know they are loved and teaching them to love in return? Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in happiness and with purpose? I’ve been reflecting on this the last few days, and if we’re honest with ourselves, the answer’s no. We’re not doing enough. And we will have to change. Laura Nahmias: During his two years in office, [New York Governor Andrew] Cuomo has developed a habit of answering reporters queries by asking his own questions. He sometimes engages in a lengthy back-and-forth, asking four or five questions and replying in a single response. For instance, at a news conference in October, Mr. Cuomo was asked about the plight of financially strapped upstate cities. The Democratic governor reframed the question to show how he had set a budgetary example that others could follow. The days of wine and roses are over? No, Mr. Cuomo said about upstate cities before a segue into his own accomplishments. Can you close a $10 billion deficit? Yes. Does the place operate? I think better than before. Did the walls crumble? No. Was it hard? Yes. Was it unsettling? Yes. But did we do it? Yes. I think you can bring costs in line with revenue. It was an expansive example of Mr. Cuomos frequent Socratic soliloquies, which he has employed to make points on issues rang ing from overhauling Medicaid to changing how teacher performance is judged to passing new gun-control laws. Sometimes they take the form of question-and-answer sessions, while other times Mr. Cuomo holds a mock debate, taking both sides of an issue. It is a classic rhetorical tactic known as anthypophora, a device found in Shakespeare, the Bible and the speeches of former presidents, linguistic scholars say... Philip Dalton, an assistant political communications professor at Hofstra University, called Mr. Cuomos approach smart rhetorically. Sometimes questions are posed to you with built-in assumptions that you dont want to affirm by answering them, Prof. Dalton said. You can bypass the whole question by asking the question yourself, and it allows you to frame the answer in way thats advantageous to yourself. Falstaff, Henry IV Part I: What is honor? A word. What is in that word honor? What is that honor? Air. A trim reckoning! Who hath it? He that died o’ Wednesday. Doth he feel it? No. Doth he hear it? No. ‘Tis insensible, then? Yea, to the dead. But will it not live with the living? No. Why? Detraction will not suffer it. Therefore, I’ll none of it. Honor is a mere scutcheon. And so ends my catechism. Letter from Guillaume Budà © to Desiderius Erasmus: Another most unfair attack I had almost forgotten to mention: in quoting the words of my letter, you make out that I put you say in the present tense instead of you will say, as though I had actually invented words from some earlier letter of yours. This is what you complain of, although in fact I was using the figure anthypophora, maintaining not that you did but that you might have said so; for everywhere in my draft it has the future tense you will say. So you have begun to attack me not merely with rhetorical subtleties, as your custom was, but with fabrications. Kevin Mitchell: Do I get annoyed when people ask themselves their own questions and answer them (rendering the interviewer irrelevant)? Yes I do. Should we allow this virus in the paper? No we shouldnt.