Comment on the summary provided on the idea of solid performance with poor leade
ID: 425835 • Letter: C
Question
Comment on the summary provided on the idea of solid performance with poor leadership and also the summary of " Going to war in Iraq" in a minimum of 150 words.
Can there be a solid performance with poor leadership? There is evidence of this every day in many organizations. Is quality leadership a catalyst for good performance? Certainly. Timely and adequate knowledge dissemination is one way that a leader keeps a team from repeating mistakes. Leaders take the effort to evaluate the performance of their program or the services provided. Collecting performance data is a tool by which public managers can learn about what is working and what is not, and make appropriate changes to improve an organization (Holzer & Schwester, 2016, p. 201). Prudent leaders assess effectiveness from multiple angles, not just financial. Holzer & Schwester refer to this as the balanced scorecard (2016, p. 207).
There are several effective leadership models, each employing a different approach. Leadership is simply influencing. It’s what we do with that influence that deems us, good leaders. Leaders use their influence to build relationships, improve production and efficiency, and develop the people they lead into quality leaders. Often, people and teams that are performing well and succeeding are doing so as a result of intentional motivation. They are also often responding to some type of leadership power, such as reward and punishment, that improves performance.
Egon Guba’s indication that policy has three distinct levels has been manifest in many policy-related scenarios. What does the policy intend to accomplish? How is the policy best implemented or delivered? Who all is truly impacted by the enforcement of the policy? Policy analysis is steeped in values. The war with Iraq has many facets, one of which is the United States value of innocent life. It seems to be an oxymoron that people, United States armed forces, would sacrifice their lives to protect our freedoms and safety. Much disagreement and controversy existed among the policy makers and implementers. Secretary of State Colin Powell indicated that targeting Saddam Hussein and Iraq would result in diminished influence with other nations. General Norman Schwartzkopf was concerned that the intelligence was insufficient to invoke a military strategy in Iraq. Others such as Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld were confident that Iraq posed a serious threat to the United States, and that delaying action would increase the possibility of another attack against our country. There can be argument that the overall decision making process by President Bush followed the Obsolescent Inquiry Paradigm in which the administration shaped their own reality. There was no evidence, or at least weak evidence, for some of the intelligence assumptions. The outcomes of our policies regarding Iraq will come to light over time. Is Iraq better off and America safer? I’d like to think so.
Explanation / Answer
Leadership Article:
The idea of leadership is to be influential in building relationship, improve performance and efficiency among the worker groups. And without effective leadership these could get derailed, though effective leadership ensures the performance is enhanced, lack of it means even when the team is motivated the results could be slow, there is hardly any direction for growth and improvements are not put into practice.
As it is a well know fact that leadership and team dynamics can be broken into
We see out of the above four, first one always ensures success and there is no doubt about their ability and result orientation. In case of the second one, we can see with great leadership even a poor team can get aligned to its goal and enhance performance beyond their ability and hence is useful.
But the rest two means the team even if good or bad struggles due to lack of direction and guidance. The team might get demotivated and hence poor results are bound to happen.