Leadership as it Is Expressed

¶ … leadership as it is expressed through the motion pictures Twelve Angry Men (1957) and Dead Poets Society (1989). Peter G. Northhouse's "Leadership: Theory and Practice (Fifth Edition)" and Nicollo Machiavelli's "The Prince" attempt to describe effective management and all the factors regarding it. As it is shown in the two films, leadership cannot be described from an objective point-of-view, given that it does not have a standard that everyone can relate to in attempt to understand it.

John Keating and Juror #8 succeed in demonstrating that leadership does not necessarily have to exist in accordance to particular elements. Leadership typically involves mobilizing people with the purpose of having them agree or perform something that the one who takes on the role of a person in charge wants them to. The masses are accustomed to coming across traditional approaches regarding leadership, with approaches that are innovative in character being either ignored or isolated.

The influence of leadership is especially stressed when it is exploited by an individual or a group that is unlikely to undertake the position of a leader. The choice Juror eight made at the time when he decided to come against the majority of voters at the first ballot is certainly surprising for the audience and for the characters in the motion picture alike. Moreover, most people are very probable to consider this choice as being irresponsible and in opposition to that seemed natural to do.

Considering that eleven individuals who were presumably previously prepared to deal with such conditions all decide on a particular verdict, it appears that the decision is already made. In order to attempt to contradict what otherwise gave the impression of being a clear outcome; one obviously has to employ harsh leadership abilities, mainly considering that it would by and large be abnormal and unethical for an individual to assume a leadership role in a board of juries.

In its basic form, leadership is a form of bettering "personal, social, and professional lives" (Northhouse, 1). It would thus be uncharacteristic to adopt behavior related to ethics in attempt to become a leader, since the three areas described by Northhouse are unlikely to result in behavior based on moral reason. Juror eight managed to impose his standpoint through using emergent leadership, considering that he was not initially expected to have any leadership abilities.

Even if he would have been expected to express leadership attributes, the context seemed like one where he would be unlikely to implement them. Considering that all of the jurors had a somewhat similar social status, it would only be natural for them to want to behave similar to the others around him.

If one were to generate a situation where he would contradict the others, the respective person would be likely to encounter harsh resistance, eventually being put down and having to agree to the final verdict, regardless of the circumstances. Juror eight demonstrated his leadership abilities from the very start, as he chose to behave different from the others, even if he indirectly risked his social and professional exclusion through doing this.

Being a member of a particular group and choosing to behave differently from the rest makes it likely for one to become the victim of personal attacks, thus being absolutely necessary for the respective individual to possess abilities that will assist him in dealing with these harassments. Juror eight was immediately condemned because of his thinking, since it seemed absurd for him to want to hinder the verdict when all the factors involved made the suspect predisposed to be legally responsible for the killing of his father.

Aware that conditions pressured him, Juror eight again proved to have exceptional leadership abilities through the fact that he called for other two ballots. It is normal for leaders to take actions that would benefit the general purpose of their group and themselves. However, in trying to achieve success for the group as a whole, juror eight directly put himself at risk, given that it was very likely for the others to disregard and even to condemn his line of attack on the matter.

His intention was obviously that of getting the whole board of juries to join him in his decision. Not only did he want to influence them in reaching a conclusion, but he wanted them to change their opinions in favor of adopting his, even with the fact that the majority was still likely to maintain their position. It is particularly important for one to know how far she or he can go in attempting to take on the position of a leader (Northhouse, 280).

Juror eight was certainly daring in his enterprise, but the fact that he approximated the intensity of his actions prevented him from reaching a phase where all the others would be reluctant to consider his standpoint. Although the standard image of a leader relates to how he would be sensible to criticism, juror eight did not allow himself to fall victim to the mockery transmitted by the rest of the board, preferring to maintain and attempt to explain his beliefs.

Peter Weir's Dead Poets Society is also notable in understanding leadership because it presents a case of management seen from an unordinary perspective. In a way that is rather similar to juror eight's, Professor John Keating wants his students to change their point-of-view regarding a particular matter-English in this case. The professor breaks away from traditionalism in doing this, as he does not want the adolescents to risk understanding English imperfectly.

He is aware that one can easily get bored as he or she gets acquainted with poetry and in spite of his role as a professor, Keating endangers his position through doing his job different from how it should conventionally be done. Keating demonstrates his leadership attributes from the opening scene of the film, bringing into play his position as a guide in English.

However, this ability to guide is merely a small part of being a leader, with Keating being responsible for making his students achieve what they understand as being their aspiration. In contrast, Mr. Nolan, the school director, assumes an authoritarian role, wanting to control students through exploiting his position and disregarding their personal interests. Keating inspired and motivated his students whereas Mr. Nolan did none of these two (in spite of the fact that he was also in charge of Keating).

Judging from this, it is clear that Keating's influence over the students gradually increased and that they did not manage to see this coming. It is essential for a leader to be loved by those following him, as it is not sufficient for them to obey his word (Machiavelli, 148). Professor Keating's method of teaching is equivalent to transformational leadership, as he has the ability to encourage his students in doing something most of them would otherwise find less interesting.

The students in the English class are confused as regards their appreciation of English and are in search of something to trigger their inspiration. Keating turns to the adolescents' "emotions, values, ethics, standards, and long-term goals" (Northhouse, 171) in an attempt to get them to enjoy English. While certain leaders tend to favor some of their subordinates (particularly those believed to be better able at doing some tasks), Keating is reluctant to focus on the best students in his class.

He goes through each student's strong points and flaws, trying to highlight the best in each individual. Unlike a typical leader, Keating is also interested in learning from his students, aware that this will assist him in becoming a better and more effective teacher.