Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formattingExcerpt from Term Paper:
Likewise, there is evidence to suggest that Patton's disconnect with his organizational leaders was the very thing that ultimately led to him being relegated to a mostly administrative capacity, effectively putting him out to pasture as far as authority and responsibility are concerned.
Did I Ever Question the Motives of Patton
Frankly, the motives of Patton are something that I questioned, but upon fully considering the situation, I reached the conclusion that Patton's motives are worthy of questioning, but ultimately, are not completely questionable. Agreed, Patton did tend to be extreme in his methods and thinking from an organizational management perspective, but in fairness, his motives were far from being totally self-centered. Given the fact that Patton was an egomaniac to put it mildly, his ultimate motive, at least in his military career, aside from the obvious self advancement angle, was quite literally to save the world from tyranny, and as such, his motives were far from undesirable as a whole.
Did I Ever Ignore Certain Kinds of Information in a Systematic Fashion?
To say that I never ignored certain kinds of information in a systematic fashion would be highly inaccurate; what would be accurate would be to say that there are certain kinds of information that I ignore in a systematic fashion with alarming regularity. For instance, information that comes from someone who delivers it in an aggressive or threatening fashion is ignored by me universally, which in fact drives to the heart of this paper; from an organizational standpoint, the very kinds of information that I tend to ignore are in fact the kinds of information for which Patton was notorious. Needless to say, under his command, I would not have fared very well.
Was I Ever Critical of What Patton Did?
From a personal standpoint, I was critical of what Patton did in terms of his heavy handed treatment of subordinates, his tendency to be somewhat of a bully, and his organizational management style, which could best be described as leadership by intimidation. While no one can fully comprehend the responsibilities and challenges that Patton faced in his leadership role, there are others who have been in similar situation and led with a more palatable leadership style.
What I Would Have Done Differently?
Given my criticism of Patton's approach to dealing with others, I believe that I would have made the same decisions that Patton did, but I would have done so in a more diplomatic leadership style. To be more specific, I believe I would have delegated tasks to subordinates more frequently, thereby empowering them to make more decisions independently, thereby freeing up a lot of my time to be more productive and use my talents in more areas for increased effectiveness and impact. While it may be wishful thinking, it is likely to be the case that if Patton himself had followed what I envision as my organizational management strategy if I were in his position, it is entirely possible that he would have avoided many of the pitfalls that he faced in his military career, and may have advanced even farther than he did. In retrospect, it appears that his leadership skills and approach certainly helped him in many instances, but likewise they may have hurt him more than necessary as well.
Risking the use of cliche, George Patton was, and remains an enigma, defying conventional definition and of course still being examined and evaluated to this day, some six decades after his death. Organizationally speaking, his leadership skills, while unquestionably effective, were also abrasive, often offensive, and did hold back others who were subordinate to him. Whether through ego or false impressions that no one else was as talented as he, Patton was guilty of not utilizing the talented and highly trained people around him in a more effective fashion. In closing, Patton's example should serve as a dual lesson of what a leader can be and what they should not; hence, the enigmatic nature of his existence and organizational management style.
1997). The Fighting Pattons (B. M. Sobel, Ed.). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Pierce, J., & Newstrom, J. (2000). Leaders and the Leadership Process (4th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
Ryan, L. (2004). Leadership -- the Army Way. Business Week online. Retrieved December 5, 2006 from the World Wide Web: http://www.businessweek.com/careers/content/mar2006/ca20060314_273725.htm?chan=search
Patton the Leader[continue]
"Patton The Leader George S " (2006, December 08) Retrieved October 26, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/patton-the-leader-george-s-41133
"Patton The Leader George S " 08 December 2006. Web.26 October. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/patton-the-leader-george-s-41133>
"Patton The Leader George S ", 08 December 2006, Accessed.26 October. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/patton-the-leader-george-s-41133
Patton, directed by Franklin J. Schaffner. Specifically, it will contain a critical review of the film, which will briefly summarize the film and provide some analysis, which will look at the historical accuracy of the film and George C. Scott's portrayal of General George S. Patton, Jr. Patton is as accurate as any Hollywood film can be, while still entertaining an audience. Scott's portrayal of Patton is deadly accurate
Military Leadership Merits of General George S. Patton, Jr. One aspect of cultural development which seems to be universal throughout the course of humanity's history is the innate desire of society to lionize the accomplishments of triumphant military leaders. Perhaps owing to a subconscious desire for the implicit protection provided by effectual wartime figures, nearly every civilization from the ancient Greeks to contemporary suburban Americans has placed its generals, admirals, and
General George S. Patton: General George Smith Patton who was born in November 11, 1885 is arguably one of the most sophisticated military men in history. General Patton is renowned for possessing pistols with handles made of ivory and for his immoderate manner. His success and popularity is attributed to his tendency to constantly strive in ensuring that his troops obtain training to the highest possible standard of excellence. As
Patton, no doubt had loyal subordinates that worked as a team to carry out his orders making them successful. This is another thing that made him such a great leader. He had the favor of his superiors and the respect and loyalty of his subordinates. Some may view his manner of speech as unorthodox, but overall it worked for him. He was aggressive and tenacious and did not give
Malcolm X: Director Spike Lee's Portrait Of An American Hero Malcolm X was not a man who could be easily characterized and the same is true for Spike Lee's 1992 film. Malcolm X was a labor of love for Lee, who was only thirty-five at the time of the film's release. Lee had been a young child when Malcolm X was assassinated, so his knowledge of the man was not based
Indeed, the cantankerous and authoritarian general would operate with what was necessarily a sense of his individual capacity to lead his men into battle. To Patton, leadership does require some degree of extraordinary confidence, if not outright vanity, if one is to engage organizational goals with the sense of entitlement to exact decisions impacting the lives of so man. Such is also true if one is to contend with
DOTMLPF system of analysis provides defense leaders of the 21st century a holistic interpretation of today's battlefield by identifying and grouping the most important factors into an understandable and complete model. Doctrine, organization, training, material, leadership, personnel, and facilities compose this acronym's structure and are partnered together in a unique pneumonic while adhering to the systematic traditions of the American army and it's defense partners around the globe. The purpose of