MGT Case
Xinghan Qi
Case 4 Leadership Mettle Forged in Battle
MGT 304-KY
Q1: Do you think leaders in military contexts exhibit the same qualities as organizational leaders? Why or why not?
Leaders in military contexts don’t have same qualities as organizational leaders. Based on what we learned last week, we knew the Traits associated with successfully leaders. For example energy and adjustment or stress tolerance means Physical vitality and emotional resilience. Flexibility means ability to respond appropriately to changes in the setting. However, according to the fact in Case 4, ‘Military leaders are used to having to make due in less than optimal conditions , negotiate across culture, and operate under extreme stress’. All these fact show leaders in military have different qualities compare to Organizational leaders. And also, Leaders in military are more focusing on employees’ performance which is a production-centered supervisors. Unlike leaders in military, the organizational leaders concern more about relationships with employees which is employee-centered supervisors.
Q2: In what ways not mentioned in the case would military leadership lessons not apply in the private sector? What might military leaders have to re-learn to work in business?
In my points, Leaders in military should learn more Gargen’s Leader-Member Exchange theory which emphasizes the quality of the working relationship between leaders and followers and the levels of mutual respect. Because, in military, Obedience is the first duty of a soldier. Leaders in military will not concern more about solder’s feeling. However, in company, effective communication with employees is a very important to leaders. Leaders in military should learn to care about employees’ emotion and feeling.
Q3: Are specific types of work or situations are more likely to benefit from the presence of “battle-tested” leaders? List a few examples.
For those leaders, who are battle-tested, always make decision under
Case 4 Leadership Mettle Forged in Battle
MGT 304-KY
Q1: Do you think leaders in military contexts exhibit the same qualities as organizational leaders? Why or why not?
Leaders in military contexts don’t have same qualities as organizational leaders. Based on what we learned last week, we knew the Traits associated with successfully leaders. For example energy and adjustment or stress tolerance means Physical vitality and emotional resilience. Flexibility means ability to respond appropriately to changes in the setting. However, according to the fact in Case 4, ‘Military leaders are used to having to make due in less than optimal conditions , negotiate across culture, and operate under extreme stress’. All these fact show leaders in military have different qualities compare to Organizational leaders. And also, Leaders in military are more focusing on employees’ performance which is a production-centered supervisors. Unlike leaders in military, the organizational leaders concern more about relationships with employees which is employee-centered supervisors.
Q2: In what ways not mentioned in the case would military leadership lessons not apply in the private sector? What might military leaders have to re-learn to work in business?
In my points, Leaders in military should learn more Gargen’s Leader-Member Exchange theory which emphasizes the quality of the working relationship between leaders and followers and the levels of mutual respect. Because, in military, Obedience is the first duty of a soldier. Leaders in military will not concern more about solder’s feeling. However, in company, effective communication with employees is a very important to leaders. Leaders in military should learn to care about employees’ emotion and feeling.
Q3: Are specific types of work or situations are more likely to benefit from the presence of “battle-tested” leaders? List a few examples.
For those leaders, who are battle-tested, always make decision under