Movie Reflections
It's a Wonderful Life
“It’s a Wonderful Life” Response
1. How did George’s actions & words reflect themes commonly appearing in definitions of leadership? What scenes or interactions lead you to think so?
George was a man that would put others far in front of himself, not just by his words but mostly by his actions. For example, during the crisis at the bank George was able to convince his followers to stay a part of the Building and Loan and not take their business to Potter. He also showed his character and his appreciation for them by loaning them his own money to get them by. He showed compassion and mercy in this case at the bank. He also demonstrated leadership with his confidence and poise when he stood up to Mr. Potter after his father died which resulted in him becoming the new head of the Building and Loan.
2. Contrast George’s actions & interactions with those of Mr. Potter. Did you see examples of “bad” leadership, as discussed in Chapter 1 of the text? Did you see contrasts in management versus leadership in these two main characters?
George Bailey and Mr. Potter were very different examples of leaders. Where George was kind and generous, Mr. Potter was bitter and greedy. George was always trying to help those around him and Mr. Potter was only trying to help himself. Mr. Potter was a walking, breathing example of bad leadership. While Mr. Potter showed moments of being an insular leader (living in a town full of very poor citizens) or evil leader (taking the Building and Loan’s 8000 dollars, causing the grief of George and his uncle), his most prevalent form of bad leadership was his callousness. Mr. Potter was callous and uncaring to the problems of the people around him. He often referred to the people’s money or personal problems as “no problem of mine” or “not of my concern”.
George was completely the opposite of the antagonizing Mr. Potter. George was always giving whatever he could to make sure his business or his friends were flourishing and happy. He also went out of his obligations as a business owner or as a friend to make sure that people were happy and safe. The best example of this was the occasion at the bank when he gave away money, but he also risked his own life on multiple occasions. Once to save his little brother from freezing waters, and once again to save Clarence, a man he didn’t even know. There is no indication that this thought would even cross the mind of Mr. Potter.
3. What were some examples in the movie where emotional intelligence skills were displayed? What characters seemed emotionally intelligent? What characters did not seem emotionally intelligent? How did this play out in their leadership or lack of leadership throughout the movie?
Again, the scene at the Building and Loan is the best example of emotional intelligence in the movie. George is able to recognize that the mob is angry, but is also scared. They are angry that the Building and Loan doesn’t have their money, but they are scared that they will never get their money back. George is able to recognize their fears and compromise with the mob; giving them the money they need with the promise that the rest will be available to them in just a few days. By doing this, George creates resonance with not only his previously disgruntled customers, but also all of employees who were able to see him put the fate of the business ahead of himself, and even his wife (on their honeymoon, no less).
Clarence is also a good example of someone with emotional intelligence. Clarence could see the distress that George was in when he was on the bridge and knew that he needed to stop him from doing the unthinkable. He also knew about George’s character, and that he would never let another man drown in the river. Clarence also used his emotional intelligence to show George how important he was to the world and used it to cause George to appreciate himself.
Mr. Potter either did not have emotional intelligence, or lacked the ability to care about the emotions of others. As mentioned before, he was a very callous leader who was not open and aware to the emotions or needs of others and therefore was not using them to help his decision making.
4. Discuss how you saw “storytelling as leadership” (as discussed in Chapter 1) in the movie. Who did it? How? Did the storyteller display ineffective or effective leadership through storytelling? What story category(ies) appeared in the movie? How?
George used storytelling to help his case in the scene shortly after his father had a stroke. When they are sitting in the room deciding what the company will become, George uses the form of storytelling “transmitting values” to declare that the Building and Loan was more than just an opportunity to make money. He reinforced that his father knew that it stood for more than that. They were there to help people, not simply to make a profit off of them. He was very effective with this category of storytelling, because it caused the board to agree with him and give him the control of the Building and Loan.
Mr. Potter also used storytelling in the form of “leading people into the future”. He offered George a three year contract worth 20,000 dollars a year to give him control of the Building and Loan when it seemed it was suffering. He described George’s future lifestyle as lavish, with fancy clothes, elaborate houses, and expensive business trips to New York City or possibly even Europe. He led George in with the promises of wealth and happiness for himself, his wife, and his future children. Ultimately, he failed at this attempt because George was able to see through his plan and told him that he didn’t want that money or that life if it meant that he would be giving away his values.
1. How did George’s actions & words reflect themes commonly appearing in definitions of leadership? What scenes or interactions lead you to think so?
George was a man that would put others far in front of himself, not just by his words but mostly by his actions. For example, during the crisis at the bank George was able to convince his followers to stay a part of the Building and Loan and not take their business to Potter. He also showed his character and his appreciation for them by loaning them his own money to get them by. He showed compassion and mercy in this case at the bank. He also demonstrated leadership with his confidence and poise when he stood up to Mr. Potter after his father died which resulted in him becoming the new head of the Building and Loan.
2. Contrast George’s actions & interactions with those of Mr. Potter. Did you see examples of “bad” leadership, as discussed in Chapter 1 of the text? Did you see contrasts in management versus leadership in these two main characters?
George Bailey and Mr. Potter were very different examples of leaders. Where George was kind and generous, Mr. Potter was bitter and greedy. George was always trying to help those around him and Mr. Potter was only trying to help himself. Mr. Potter was a walking, breathing example of bad leadership. While Mr. Potter showed moments of being an insular leader (living in a town full of very poor citizens) or evil leader (taking the Building and Loan’s 8000 dollars, causing the grief of George and his uncle), his most prevalent form of bad leadership was his callousness. Mr. Potter was callous and uncaring to the problems of the people around him. He often referred to the people’s money or personal problems as “no problem of mine” or “not of my concern”.
George was completely the opposite of the antagonizing Mr. Potter. George was always giving whatever he could to make sure his business or his friends were flourishing and happy. He also went out of his obligations as a business owner or as a friend to make sure that people were happy and safe. The best example of this was the occasion at the bank when he gave away money, but he also risked his own life on multiple occasions. Once to save his little brother from freezing waters, and once again to save Clarence, a man he didn’t even know. There is no indication that this thought would even cross the mind of Mr. Potter.
3. What were some examples in the movie where emotional intelligence skills were displayed? What characters seemed emotionally intelligent? What characters did not seem emotionally intelligent? How did this play out in their leadership or lack of leadership throughout the movie?
Again, the scene at the Building and Loan is the best example of emotional intelligence in the movie. George is able to recognize that the mob is angry, but is also scared. They are angry that the Building and Loan doesn’t have their money, but they are scared that they will never get their money back. George is able to recognize their fears and compromise with the mob; giving them the money they need with the promise that the rest will be available to them in just a few days. By doing this, George creates resonance with not only his previously disgruntled customers, but also all of employees who were able to see him put the fate of the business ahead of himself, and even his wife (on their honeymoon, no less).
Clarence is also a good example of someone with emotional intelligence. Clarence could see the distress that George was in when he was on the bridge and knew that he needed to stop him from doing the unthinkable. He also knew about George’s character, and that he would never let another man drown in the river. Clarence also used his emotional intelligence to show George how important he was to the world and used it to cause George to appreciate himself.
Mr. Potter either did not have emotional intelligence, or lacked the ability to care about the emotions of others. As mentioned before, he was a very callous leader who was not open and aware to the emotions or needs of others and therefore was not using them to help his decision making.
4. Discuss how you saw “storytelling as leadership” (as discussed in Chapter 1) in the movie. Who did it? How? Did the storyteller display ineffective or effective leadership through storytelling? What story category(ies) appeared in the movie? How?
George used storytelling to help his case in the scene shortly after his father had a stroke. When they are sitting in the room deciding what the company will become, George uses the form of storytelling “transmitting values” to declare that the Building and Loan was more than just an opportunity to make money. He reinforced that his father knew that it stood for more than that. They were there to help people, not simply to make a profit off of them. He was very effective with this category of storytelling, because it caused the board to agree with him and give him the control of the Building and Loan.
Mr. Potter also used storytelling in the form of “leading people into the future”. He offered George a three year contract worth 20,000 dollars a year to give him control of the Building and Loan when it seemed it was suffering. He described George’s future lifestyle as lavish, with fancy clothes, elaborate houses, and expensive business trips to New York City or possibly even Europe. He led George in with the promises of wealth and happiness for himself, his wife, and his future children. Ultimately, he failed at this attempt because George was able to see through his plan and told him that he didn’t want that money or that life if it meant that he would be giving away his values.
The Devil Wears Prada
“The Devil Wears Prada” Response
1. How did Miranda meet the challenge of privilege that leaders often face? Use scenes from the movie to support your answer.
Miranda had the privilege of having many things including money, gifts from designers, and even worship to some level. She accepted her lavish gifts and accolades easily with very little recognition for anyone who worked for her during her hellish work weeks. She also knew that she alone was entitled to these privileges not only at Runway, but in the entire fashion industry. She demonstrates this in many ways, one of which was when she is in Paris with Andy and she tells her that nobody could do what she does at Runway and any attempt to do so would just cause the magazine to suffer, making her deserving of what she has been given. One of the greatest privileges that she had however was that of absolute dedication from her servants. Everyone at Runway Magazine, seen mostly from the eyes of Andy and, in a lesser form, Emily, acted on her whims as soon as she had them. She knew she was deserving of this from the very beginning of the film when she describes her previous assistants as incompetent and disastrous. She also criticizes Andy for not caring about fashion and not wanting the job that “a million girls would kill for”, even though she is giving all of her effort and destroying her social life. The challenge of privilege was met by Miranda with full acceptance of those privileges, ethical or not.
2. How did Miranda display the shadow of power? What scenes of aspects of the movie provided examples of that?
There were countless examples of Miranda’s display of the shadow of power. From things as little throwing her jacket and purse on the desk of her assistants without question or often even a word to the ability to have a designer completely start over and redesign his collection because she didn’t particularly like it. To me, there are two extreme examples of this. First, she used her power as Editor-in-Chief at Runway Magazine to pull Nigel, a designer and associate of hers, out of a job he deserved, and put a competitor of hers in his position in order to give herself better job security. Ethically this is a nightmare because she used her power to give herself an advantage while directly removing an employee from a promotion he clearly wanted and deserved. The other example was her power to get the last Harry Potter book even though it was still an unpublished manuscript. She used her power of connections through Andy to get the book, even though it was a seemingly impossible task. Her power over others spanning multiple industries allowed her to get something that nobody else in the world had the ability to get.
3. What ethical challenges to followers did Andy and others face? Did they meet those challenges well or poorly? Why do you think so? How did their interactions, with Miranda and/or others, communicate their ethical and/or unethical followership?
All of the followers in the film experienced ethical challenges, but Andy and Emily experienced them most often because they worked so much with Miranda. Both Emily and Andy had challenges of obedience and cynicism. Those two obediently followed every order or directive from Miranda, no matter how ridiculous or difficult it may have been. Often times they followed these orders whether they were ethical or not. Andy showed cynicism when should would complain about her job to her boyfriend or to Nigel in his studio, where it seemed she was mostly agreed with. Andy’s best example of an ethical challenge of followership is that of bad news. She had to give Emily, who was a leader of hers at the time, the bad news that Andy would be taking her place in Paris, something that Emily had been looking forward to for a very long time. She had to wrestle with giving Emily the bad news that she would be taking her place, even though she wanted it more, had worked for it longer, and had just been hit by a car no less.
Multiple challenges were included here, including her obedience to Miranda, her dissent to not be able to convince Miranda otherwise, as well as the bad news giving itself. Given the situation, Andy met those challenges well. She showed loyalty to her employer and leader by doing what she was told, and she told Emily that she would no longer be going to Paris very sympathetically and with Emily’s feelings completely in mind. In this situation, this showed Andy’s ethical obligation to do as she was told, even if it was very hard for her to do because she knew it would not be something that Emily wanted to hear, and that she would in turn resent her for it.
4. Pick one ethical perspective presented in Chapter 11 (Kant’s categorical imperative, utilitarianism, virtue ethics, altruism, or servant leadership) and use its main principles to evaluate actions and interactions of the two main characters, Andy and Miranda. From your chosen perspective, who is “more ethical” and why do you think so?
The ethical perspective I chose to analyze was utilitarianism. There are many situations that these two see to use this perspective in throughout the movie, but there are two that stand out to me. Utilitarianism is more or less weighing out what is good and bad about a situation and which decision will help do the most good. It can even be seen as a type of a general pros and cons analysis. Andy demonstrates this when she is with her friends or with her father at dinner. She justifies the bad by expressing the good. She acknowledges that she is unhappy there and that there is a lot of work that is being done for little pay, but she continues to say that this is the best thing for her career. No matter how bad the work is she weighs that the opportunity for her career to advance more quickly because of this job is worth what unethical behavior she must perform. In order to advance her career, she makes decisions to help those around her at work, even if she is betrayer trust from her friends, other companies, or her coworkers. When she has the copy of the Harry Potter manuscript (which she should not have had), she makes three copies (which is illegal), and then distributes those copies (which is unethical and illegal). Regardless though of what unethical behavior she has she knows that it will benefit her long term.
Miranda does this quite often as well, but to me it stands out again when she is telling Andy about her plan to keep her job as Editor-in-Chief at Runway Magazine. She knows that if she recommends someone else for the job the Nigel would be receiving, that she will be able to keep her job which is better for the magazine’s future. Regardless of the consequences she changes Nigel’s fate because she determined that it would not only be better for herself, but for the company as a whole. In her eyes, the pros outweighed the cons, even though Nigel was left to suffer and her ethics were entirely in question.
I think that in these cases neither Andy nor Miranda were acting ethically. I would argue though that Andy was acting more ethically than Miranda, simply because she was pulling strings that didn’t only affect her but many others. Also, most of the unethical things that Andy did were committed at the orders of Miranda. Part of the unethical blame can easily be shifted to Miranda, even though Andy should have challenged these orders. It is safe to say that The Devil Wears Prada is lacking very many ethics, but was a great example of many of the concepts we have learned in class, specifically from chapter 11 of our textbook.
1. How did Miranda meet the challenge of privilege that leaders often face? Use scenes from the movie to support your answer.
Miranda had the privilege of having many things including money, gifts from designers, and even worship to some level. She accepted her lavish gifts and accolades easily with very little recognition for anyone who worked for her during her hellish work weeks. She also knew that she alone was entitled to these privileges not only at Runway, but in the entire fashion industry. She demonstrates this in many ways, one of which was when she is in Paris with Andy and she tells her that nobody could do what she does at Runway and any attempt to do so would just cause the magazine to suffer, making her deserving of what she has been given. One of the greatest privileges that she had however was that of absolute dedication from her servants. Everyone at Runway Magazine, seen mostly from the eyes of Andy and, in a lesser form, Emily, acted on her whims as soon as she had them. She knew she was deserving of this from the very beginning of the film when she describes her previous assistants as incompetent and disastrous. She also criticizes Andy for not caring about fashion and not wanting the job that “a million girls would kill for”, even though she is giving all of her effort and destroying her social life. The challenge of privilege was met by Miranda with full acceptance of those privileges, ethical or not.
2. How did Miranda display the shadow of power? What scenes of aspects of the movie provided examples of that?
There were countless examples of Miranda’s display of the shadow of power. From things as little throwing her jacket and purse on the desk of her assistants without question or often even a word to the ability to have a designer completely start over and redesign his collection because she didn’t particularly like it. To me, there are two extreme examples of this. First, she used her power as Editor-in-Chief at Runway Magazine to pull Nigel, a designer and associate of hers, out of a job he deserved, and put a competitor of hers in his position in order to give herself better job security. Ethically this is a nightmare because she used her power to give herself an advantage while directly removing an employee from a promotion he clearly wanted and deserved. The other example was her power to get the last Harry Potter book even though it was still an unpublished manuscript. She used her power of connections through Andy to get the book, even though it was a seemingly impossible task. Her power over others spanning multiple industries allowed her to get something that nobody else in the world had the ability to get.
3. What ethical challenges to followers did Andy and others face? Did they meet those challenges well or poorly? Why do you think so? How did their interactions, with Miranda and/or others, communicate their ethical and/or unethical followership?
All of the followers in the film experienced ethical challenges, but Andy and Emily experienced them most often because they worked so much with Miranda. Both Emily and Andy had challenges of obedience and cynicism. Those two obediently followed every order or directive from Miranda, no matter how ridiculous or difficult it may have been. Often times they followed these orders whether they were ethical or not. Andy showed cynicism when should would complain about her job to her boyfriend or to Nigel in his studio, where it seemed she was mostly agreed with. Andy’s best example of an ethical challenge of followership is that of bad news. She had to give Emily, who was a leader of hers at the time, the bad news that Andy would be taking her place in Paris, something that Emily had been looking forward to for a very long time. She had to wrestle with giving Emily the bad news that she would be taking her place, even though she wanted it more, had worked for it longer, and had just been hit by a car no less.
Multiple challenges were included here, including her obedience to Miranda, her dissent to not be able to convince Miranda otherwise, as well as the bad news giving itself. Given the situation, Andy met those challenges well. She showed loyalty to her employer and leader by doing what she was told, and she told Emily that she would no longer be going to Paris very sympathetically and with Emily’s feelings completely in mind. In this situation, this showed Andy’s ethical obligation to do as she was told, even if it was very hard for her to do because she knew it would not be something that Emily wanted to hear, and that she would in turn resent her for it.
4. Pick one ethical perspective presented in Chapter 11 (Kant’s categorical imperative, utilitarianism, virtue ethics, altruism, or servant leadership) and use its main principles to evaluate actions and interactions of the two main characters, Andy and Miranda. From your chosen perspective, who is “more ethical” and why do you think so?
The ethical perspective I chose to analyze was utilitarianism. There are many situations that these two see to use this perspective in throughout the movie, but there are two that stand out to me. Utilitarianism is more or less weighing out what is good and bad about a situation and which decision will help do the most good. It can even be seen as a type of a general pros and cons analysis. Andy demonstrates this when she is with her friends or with her father at dinner. She justifies the bad by expressing the good. She acknowledges that she is unhappy there and that there is a lot of work that is being done for little pay, but she continues to say that this is the best thing for her career. No matter how bad the work is she weighs that the opportunity for her career to advance more quickly because of this job is worth what unethical behavior she must perform. In order to advance her career, she makes decisions to help those around her at work, even if she is betrayer trust from her friends, other companies, or her coworkers. When she has the copy of the Harry Potter manuscript (which she should not have had), she makes three copies (which is illegal), and then distributes those copies (which is unethical and illegal). Regardless though of what unethical behavior she has she knows that it will benefit her long term.
Miranda does this quite often as well, but to me it stands out again when she is telling Andy about her plan to keep her job as Editor-in-Chief at Runway Magazine. She knows that if she recommends someone else for the job the Nigel would be receiving, that she will be able to keep her job which is better for the magazine’s future. Regardless of the consequences she changes Nigel’s fate because she determined that it would not only be better for herself, but for the company as a whole. In her eyes, the pros outweighed the cons, even though Nigel was left to suffer and her ethics were entirely in question.
I think that in these cases neither Andy nor Miranda were acting ethically. I would argue though that Andy was acting more ethically than Miranda, simply because she was pulling strings that didn’t only affect her but many others. Also, most of the unethical things that Andy did were committed at the orders of Miranda. Part of the unethical blame can easily be shifted to Miranda, even though Andy should have challenged these orders. It is safe to say that The Devil Wears Prada is lacking very many ethics, but was a great example of many of the concepts we have learned in class, specifically from chapter 11 of our textbook.
Coach Carter
"Coach Carter" Response
1. What are some examples in the movie of a leader focusing on terminal values (e.g., freedom, self-respect, etc. – see p. 117)? What are some examples in the movie of a leader focusing on instrumental values (e.g., honest, responsibility, etc. – see p. 117)? How were those terminal and instrumental values communicated?
There were many different examples of terminal values in the movie Coach Carter. The most obvious of these were self-respect, a sense of accomplishment, and wisdom. Ken Carter taught the students to respect themselves so that others would learn to respect them in return. The best example of this was when the players on the team would refer to each other using the “N word”. He tells them that when they use that word, it allows the racist white man to use it as well. If they did not respect themselves, they would never be respected by others. The value of a sense of accomplishment was also a recurring theme in the movie. The boys were repeatedly taught to set high expectations for themselves in school, basketball, and life. If they aspired higher, they would be able to graduate high school, attend college, and become better people in return. Kenyon had a strived for the sense of accomplishment when he wanted to go to college in order to improve his life. He ultimately achieved this by being accepted to Junior College in the state. The last terminal value I will focus on is wisdom. Ken Carter had displayed his own wisdom that he had gained during his life as an attempt to change the lives of his players. He was trying to teach the boys to live wisely because he had gained more experience in his life after high school that he wanted them to benefit from. He repeatedly gave the students bits of wisdom that, more often than not, were ignored by the students.
Along with the terminal values in Coach Carter, there were also many examples of instrumental values. Three of these were helpfulness, politeness, and responsibility. Helpfulness was something the Ken Carter always stressed. He told the players that everything they did they did as a team. Whether that was winning or losing a basketball game, or how they performed in the classroom. They were taught to always be helpful to their teammates. Politeness was also a part of the instruction that Ken gave his players to be better men. They were told not to insult or demean other players, coaches, or officials. They were also taught to call each their superiors “Sir” and treat them with respect. Responsibility was probably the most often seen instrumental value. Everything they did on the court they were held responsible for. Whether that was poor behavior, attendance, language, or attitude; the players were given responsibility and accountability. If their responsibilities were not met, the students would be punished. Most often, this punishment was running or pushups before or after practice.
2. What are some examples in the movie of a leader empowering followers? How was that empowerment communicated?
There are multiple examples of a leader empowering his followers in Coach Carter. The best example of this is Ken Carter’s push for his students to have more involvement in their school lives. He does this very directly by making them sign contracts in order to stay on the basketball team. They empower the students to be in charge of their own personal lives. The students are then supposed to maintain their grades on their own. Whether or not the students maintain their grades is a different story.
Another example of this is how Ken Carter tells empowers his team on the court. They had a problem of players not being engaged in the game of basketball. He tells them that they deserve to be winners and that they have the power and the ability to do whatever they want to on or off of the basketball court. The players are able to make more of their own decisions on the court and they become better teammates and better people because of it.
3. How was intellectual stimulation (e.g., creativity, innovation, problem-solving, etc.) communicated and enacted in the movie? Were there examples of missed opportunities for intellectual stimulation? What were differences in outcomes, if any, of when intellectual stimulation was present and when it was absent?
The movie had a lot of intellectual stimulation communicated. There are multiple examples of this intellectual stimulation in innovation and problem-solving. Coach Ken Carter uses these things most often, but there are also occasions in which the players use intellectual stimulation as well. This intellectual stimulation was a pivotal part in making their season and their high school lives much better.
Innovation is something that Ken Carter used from the very beginning of the movie. As soon as he took over as coach he implemented and innovated the way that the team was run. In the seasons prior to his coaching, the team had absolutely no discipline. The previous coach was completely overwhelmed by the players and their attitudes. He didn’t give the students a reason to do what they were told and he was unable to control them when they rebelled against him. Coach Carter changed the thinking of the basketball team. He created a system of discipline and of authority that the players had never had before. The team began to focus in practice and respected their coach like they never did before. Even though the team lost most of their talent on the first day of the new season, the team was significantly better because they had work ethic, determination, and discipline. All of those things are thanks to Coach Carter innovating the structure and discipline on the team.
Another example of the intellectual stimulation in the movie was the examples of problem solving. There were many instances of this including team conditioning, removing detrimental players from the roster to improve efficiency, and when Ken Carter is coaching and addresses current problems to help the players succeed. To me though, the best example is Coach Carter’s ability to solve the problems of the students not attending class and getting bad grades. When he locked up the gym, he was not only giving himself more credibility by living up to his word, but he made the players reexamine the choices they were making as students. Even though the previous coach knew that the students weren’t attending their classes, he didn’t do anything to stop it. This not only didn’t stop their poor school habits, but it also made them believe that it was okay. The players also began to realize that their grades were important because of Coach Carter’s influence and discipline and took their own measures in order to play basketball and get better grades.
4. How would you rate and evaluate leadership communication ability in the movie? When were there examples of open communication? When were there examples of poor leadership communication? What were differences in outcomes, if any, of when open communication was present and when it was absent?
There are examples of both good and bad leadership in the movie, even from the primary protagonist and leader, Ken Carter. Coach carter was a very emotional leader who was very authoritarian. He told his players what their punishments would be and there was no discussion or negotiation available. However, he also was an excellent motivator and showed each of his players a lot of respect, provided that they gave him equal respect.
The players and coaches openly communicated with each other throughout the movie, but there were also examples of a lack of communication. For instance, when Kenyon was apart from his girlfriend, it seemed that he was very distant and did not want anything to do with her. However, later in the movie, he showed her his commitment to her and her baby and told her that he loved her. It is possible that their relationship would have been able to survive and be stronger if there would have been more open lines of communication between them.
Another example of good leadership communication and leader-follower relationships was how Coach Carter responded and attended to the emotions of his players. The best example of this was when Tino showed up at his house after his cousin had been killed in the shooting. He did not ask any questions or give him more ridiculous standards for earning his way back on the team. He saw that Tino was hurting and that he knew the problems he was facing and accepted him into his house and his arms.
Coach Carter was a great example of many of the concepts we have learned in class. Some of them were examples of poor leadership, but most of them provided a good example of what a good leader can do to a group of people when he has the tools to lead. While the players also did some of the leading, Coach Ken Carter was the best example of how a leader should lead. The coach used his personal wisdom, his care and respect for the players, and his ability to lead and empower them to shape their lives in basketball and in their school careers.
1. What are some examples in the movie of a leader focusing on terminal values (e.g., freedom, self-respect, etc. – see p. 117)? What are some examples in the movie of a leader focusing on instrumental values (e.g., honest, responsibility, etc. – see p. 117)? How were those terminal and instrumental values communicated?
There were many different examples of terminal values in the movie Coach Carter. The most obvious of these were self-respect, a sense of accomplishment, and wisdom. Ken Carter taught the students to respect themselves so that others would learn to respect them in return. The best example of this was when the players on the team would refer to each other using the “N word”. He tells them that when they use that word, it allows the racist white man to use it as well. If they did not respect themselves, they would never be respected by others. The value of a sense of accomplishment was also a recurring theme in the movie. The boys were repeatedly taught to set high expectations for themselves in school, basketball, and life. If they aspired higher, they would be able to graduate high school, attend college, and become better people in return. Kenyon had a strived for the sense of accomplishment when he wanted to go to college in order to improve his life. He ultimately achieved this by being accepted to Junior College in the state. The last terminal value I will focus on is wisdom. Ken Carter had displayed his own wisdom that he had gained during his life as an attempt to change the lives of his players. He was trying to teach the boys to live wisely because he had gained more experience in his life after high school that he wanted them to benefit from. He repeatedly gave the students bits of wisdom that, more often than not, were ignored by the students.
Along with the terminal values in Coach Carter, there were also many examples of instrumental values. Three of these were helpfulness, politeness, and responsibility. Helpfulness was something the Ken Carter always stressed. He told the players that everything they did they did as a team. Whether that was winning or losing a basketball game, or how they performed in the classroom. They were taught to always be helpful to their teammates. Politeness was also a part of the instruction that Ken gave his players to be better men. They were told not to insult or demean other players, coaches, or officials. They were also taught to call each their superiors “Sir” and treat them with respect. Responsibility was probably the most often seen instrumental value. Everything they did on the court they were held responsible for. Whether that was poor behavior, attendance, language, or attitude; the players were given responsibility and accountability. If their responsibilities were not met, the students would be punished. Most often, this punishment was running or pushups before or after practice.
2. What are some examples in the movie of a leader empowering followers? How was that empowerment communicated?
There are multiple examples of a leader empowering his followers in Coach Carter. The best example of this is Ken Carter’s push for his students to have more involvement in their school lives. He does this very directly by making them sign contracts in order to stay on the basketball team. They empower the students to be in charge of their own personal lives. The students are then supposed to maintain their grades on their own. Whether or not the students maintain their grades is a different story.
Another example of this is how Ken Carter tells empowers his team on the court. They had a problem of players not being engaged in the game of basketball. He tells them that they deserve to be winners and that they have the power and the ability to do whatever they want to on or off of the basketball court. The players are able to make more of their own decisions on the court and they become better teammates and better people because of it.
3. How was intellectual stimulation (e.g., creativity, innovation, problem-solving, etc.) communicated and enacted in the movie? Were there examples of missed opportunities for intellectual stimulation? What were differences in outcomes, if any, of when intellectual stimulation was present and when it was absent?
The movie had a lot of intellectual stimulation communicated. There are multiple examples of this intellectual stimulation in innovation and problem-solving. Coach Ken Carter uses these things most often, but there are also occasions in which the players use intellectual stimulation as well. This intellectual stimulation was a pivotal part in making their season and their high school lives much better.
Innovation is something that Ken Carter used from the very beginning of the movie. As soon as he took over as coach he implemented and innovated the way that the team was run. In the seasons prior to his coaching, the team had absolutely no discipline. The previous coach was completely overwhelmed by the players and their attitudes. He didn’t give the students a reason to do what they were told and he was unable to control them when they rebelled against him. Coach Carter changed the thinking of the basketball team. He created a system of discipline and of authority that the players had never had before. The team began to focus in practice and respected their coach like they never did before. Even though the team lost most of their talent on the first day of the new season, the team was significantly better because they had work ethic, determination, and discipline. All of those things are thanks to Coach Carter innovating the structure and discipline on the team.
Another example of the intellectual stimulation in the movie was the examples of problem solving. There were many instances of this including team conditioning, removing detrimental players from the roster to improve efficiency, and when Ken Carter is coaching and addresses current problems to help the players succeed. To me though, the best example is Coach Carter’s ability to solve the problems of the students not attending class and getting bad grades. When he locked up the gym, he was not only giving himself more credibility by living up to his word, but he made the players reexamine the choices they were making as students. Even though the previous coach knew that the students weren’t attending their classes, he didn’t do anything to stop it. This not only didn’t stop their poor school habits, but it also made them believe that it was okay. The players also began to realize that their grades were important because of Coach Carter’s influence and discipline and took their own measures in order to play basketball and get better grades.
4. How would you rate and evaluate leadership communication ability in the movie? When were there examples of open communication? When were there examples of poor leadership communication? What were differences in outcomes, if any, of when open communication was present and when it was absent?
There are examples of both good and bad leadership in the movie, even from the primary protagonist and leader, Ken Carter. Coach carter was a very emotional leader who was very authoritarian. He told his players what their punishments would be and there was no discussion or negotiation available. However, he also was an excellent motivator and showed each of his players a lot of respect, provided that they gave him equal respect.
The players and coaches openly communicated with each other throughout the movie, but there were also examples of a lack of communication. For instance, when Kenyon was apart from his girlfriend, it seemed that he was very distant and did not want anything to do with her. However, later in the movie, he showed her his commitment to her and her baby and told her that he loved her. It is possible that their relationship would have been able to survive and be stronger if there would have been more open lines of communication between them.
Another example of good leadership communication and leader-follower relationships was how Coach Carter responded and attended to the emotions of his players. The best example of this was when Tino showed up at his house after his cousin had been killed in the shooting. He did not ask any questions or give him more ridiculous standards for earning his way back on the team. He saw that Tino was hurting and that he knew the problems he was facing and accepted him into his house and his arms.
Coach Carter was a great example of many of the concepts we have learned in class. Some of them were examples of poor leadership, but most of them provided a good example of what a good leader can do to a group of people when he has the tools to lead. While the players also did some of the leading, Coach Ken Carter was the best example of how a leader should lead. The coach used his personal wisdom, his care and respect for the players, and his ability to lead and empower them to shape their lives in basketball and in their school careers.
Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room
"Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room" Response
1. Which source(s) of power did upper management (top executives) of Enron use to get their employees/followers to do what they wanted? Use specific examples of how they used each source of power you mention.
The best example of a power source that the top executives at Enron used to get compliance was coercive power. The textbook describes coercive power as the ability to administer punishment or negative reinforcement to followers. Enron did this is the most extreme way. In the film they talked about Enron’s yearly employee performance reviews and how they were handled. If an employee was reviewed and placed in the bottom ten percent of current employees they would be fired immediately. Regardless of situation or reason they would be asked to leave immediately. Obviously, this received a lot of complaints among employees and those who were aware of the process. This did however make Enron employees constantly work their hardest to be on top, creating a survival of the fittest mentality among all of the employees. The negative reinforcement was cruel and unfair, but it did create increased production from employees.
Obviously there was also very apparent legitimate power in the Enron Corporation. Legitimate power is power based on your position. The top leaders of Enron were known as “The Smartest Guys in the Room” because the followers knew that they were the bosses running a very powerful company. The followers listened to and obeyed the men above them because they were their superiors in a company that they wanted to be a part of in the future. An example of this from the film is a scene that may be common in lots of organizations. When the top executives were telling their employees to invest in Enron’s stock with their 401ks they were displaying their legitimate power over them. They were convincing them to do something simply because they had the ability to do so. Many companies’ top executives encourage their employees to invest in corporate stock because they are in a position to do so.
The last example of power sources I recognized was a small example of expert power. Expert power is based on the person and not the position. However in this case, it goes a little bit with legitimate power in the case of Enron because the top executives were also the men who knew how to get things done. My example of expert power, however, was Fastow’s ability to convince other banks and institutions to follow him down the road of fraud in order to boost profits. He was able to show them how good of a CFO he was and that their investments and fraud would be safely concealed because of his abilities. He was recorded telling them that he was going to turn their money into large investments and was hiding behind his “Cheshire Cat grin” while he did it, indicating his own pride in his abilities. This concept is a little bit of a stretch in this case, but I do think that his expert power as CFO of a financially successful company influenced the decisions of others.
2. What were examples in the movie of how power-as-domination was constructed, maintained, and/or resisted within the Enron organization and the energy industry at large?
Some examples of this were the acquisition of the Portland power company (whose name escapes me) towards the end of Enron’s reign in the energy industry. When this happened, they were able to regulate their own prices and power limits to the entire pacific coast. They abused this power repeatedly and made millions of people very upset. Enron was dominating the people of California with their energy peaks and troughs and the prices for which they charged to the extent that the governor pleaded with the national government to do something about it. The governor at the time was fighting to free the Californians from the dominant power that Enron had over the energy industry and to make them have regulated prices and power distribution.
3. What were compliance gaining strategies evident in the Enron story, as told in the movie?
There were a couple evident examples of compliance gaining strategies in the Enron story. The first of these I want to highlight is legitimating tactics. These were used a couple of times in the film, but I first thought of the power companies and power distribution stations in California that were affected by the Enron merger with the Portland power company. The traders or executives would call a plant and give them a reason that they needed to shut off the power to a certain area of California. They would give them fake reasons or excuses in order to make them shut off the power to large sections of California so that they could then make prices much higher.
Another compliance gaining strategy in the film was added pressure given to the traders. Pressure was given in the form of persistent reminders to employees of how the company was doing and what they could do to make it better. Like I said before, the employees were strongly encouraged to invest in the company and to work very hard to make sure the stock price was always rising. Of course, they didn’t know that the stock prices were always going to rise because of the fraud being committed, but that is not the point. The pressure was given to them every day from things as simple as posting the daily stock price on all floors and in the elevators. This was a constant reminder that they needed to work to improve that number and needed to do their share of investing. Also, as I mentioned before, there was lots of pressure to perform from their yearly performance reviews. They knew that they had to perform better than their coworkers or they would be let go.
4. What were some “mental shortcuts” evident in the Enron story? That is, what are some examples of people being unduly influenced because they fell into the trap of being vulnerable to mental shortcut tactics?
One mental shortcut that influenced people in the Enron story is authority. Many people were charmed or convinced by the apparent social status and position of the top executives at Enron. Enron’s employees and traders saw the apparent success from the executives and saw potential of what they could strive for. If they worked hard enough or purchased Enron stock they would be able to achieve what these men had. This included many people outside of Enron as well. Many other investors and corporations were fooled by the apparent status and authority of the Enron leaders.
Another example is social proof or validation. As Enron’s stock grew and employees, companies, and investors were convinced into buying shares, thousands of others were in turn convinced that their money was best spent investing in this large energy company. Even though Enron could not even produce a balance sheet for their company, investors were convinced by other investors, banks, or other institutions that they should get themselves into Enron.
1. Which source(s) of power did upper management (top executives) of Enron use to get their employees/followers to do what they wanted? Use specific examples of how they used each source of power you mention.
The best example of a power source that the top executives at Enron used to get compliance was coercive power. The textbook describes coercive power as the ability to administer punishment or negative reinforcement to followers. Enron did this is the most extreme way. In the film they talked about Enron’s yearly employee performance reviews and how they were handled. If an employee was reviewed and placed in the bottom ten percent of current employees they would be fired immediately. Regardless of situation or reason they would be asked to leave immediately. Obviously, this received a lot of complaints among employees and those who were aware of the process. This did however make Enron employees constantly work their hardest to be on top, creating a survival of the fittest mentality among all of the employees. The negative reinforcement was cruel and unfair, but it did create increased production from employees.
Obviously there was also very apparent legitimate power in the Enron Corporation. Legitimate power is power based on your position. The top leaders of Enron were known as “The Smartest Guys in the Room” because the followers knew that they were the bosses running a very powerful company. The followers listened to and obeyed the men above them because they were their superiors in a company that they wanted to be a part of in the future. An example of this from the film is a scene that may be common in lots of organizations. When the top executives were telling their employees to invest in Enron’s stock with their 401ks they were displaying their legitimate power over them. They were convincing them to do something simply because they had the ability to do so. Many companies’ top executives encourage their employees to invest in corporate stock because they are in a position to do so.
The last example of power sources I recognized was a small example of expert power. Expert power is based on the person and not the position. However in this case, it goes a little bit with legitimate power in the case of Enron because the top executives were also the men who knew how to get things done. My example of expert power, however, was Fastow’s ability to convince other banks and institutions to follow him down the road of fraud in order to boost profits. He was able to show them how good of a CFO he was and that their investments and fraud would be safely concealed because of his abilities. He was recorded telling them that he was going to turn their money into large investments and was hiding behind his “Cheshire Cat grin” while he did it, indicating his own pride in his abilities. This concept is a little bit of a stretch in this case, but I do think that his expert power as CFO of a financially successful company influenced the decisions of others.
2. What were examples in the movie of how power-as-domination was constructed, maintained, and/or resisted within the Enron organization and the energy industry at large?
Some examples of this were the acquisition of the Portland power company (whose name escapes me) towards the end of Enron’s reign in the energy industry. When this happened, they were able to regulate their own prices and power limits to the entire pacific coast. They abused this power repeatedly and made millions of people very upset. Enron was dominating the people of California with their energy peaks and troughs and the prices for which they charged to the extent that the governor pleaded with the national government to do something about it. The governor at the time was fighting to free the Californians from the dominant power that Enron had over the energy industry and to make them have regulated prices and power distribution.
3. What were compliance gaining strategies evident in the Enron story, as told in the movie?
There were a couple evident examples of compliance gaining strategies in the Enron story. The first of these I want to highlight is legitimating tactics. These were used a couple of times in the film, but I first thought of the power companies and power distribution stations in California that were affected by the Enron merger with the Portland power company. The traders or executives would call a plant and give them a reason that they needed to shut off the power to a certain area of California. They would give them fake reasons or excuses in order to make them shut off the power to large sections of California so that they could then make prices much higher.
Another compliance gaining strategy in the film was added pressure given to the traders. Pressure was given in the form of persistent reminders to employees of how the company was doing and what they could do to make it better. Like I said before, the employees were strongly encouraged to invest in the company and to work very hard to make sure the stock price was always rising. Of course, they didn’t know that the stock prices were always going to rise because of the fraud being committed, but that is not the point. The pressure was given to them every day from things as simple as posting the daily stock price on all floors and in the elevators. This was a constant reminder that they needed to work to improve that number and needed to do their share of investing. Also, as I mentioned before, there was lots of pressure to perform from their yearly performance reviews. They knew that they had to perform better than their coworkers or they would be let go.
4. What were some “mental shortcuts” evident in the Enron story? That is, what are some examples of people being unduly influenced because they fell into the trap of being vulnerable to mental shortcut tactics?
One mental shortcut that influenced people in the Enron story is authority. Many people were charmed or convinced by the apparent social status and position of the top executives at Enron. Enron’s employees and traders saw the apparent success from the executives and saw potential of what they could strive for. If they worked hard enough or purchased Enron stock they would be able to achieve what these men had. This included many people outside of Enron as well. Many other investors and corporations were fooled by the apparent status and authority of the Enron leaders.
Another example is social proof or validation. As Enron’s stock grew and employees, companies, and investors were convinced into buying shares, thousands of others were in turn convinced that their money was best spent investing in this large energy company. Even though Enron could not even produce a balance sheet for their company, investors were convinced by other investors, banks, or other institutions that they should get themselves into Enron.
Apollo 13
"Apollo 13" Response
1. Would you define the Apollo 13 astronauts and their support ground crew as a working group or as a team (according to differentiation in text)? What specific reasons/scenes in the movie support your answer?
I believe that the Apollo 13 astronauts were a team, not simply a group. There are three examples that I believe show their status as a team. The first of these is before the mission, when the three original crew members are training in the simulator for over three hours. When one of them (Ken Mattingly) comes out of the simulator feeling uneasy – even though his simulation went nearly flawless – the whole team went back in to the simulator to work on the problem. The book says that members of a team will share accountability and will encourage standards of excellence within the team. They knew that if one of them felt uneasy, then they all needed to work to make sure that the mission would go perfectly.
The next example is that the team had a specific purpose that they were all working to attain. The three astronauts were doing all of their preparation and training for one specific group goal – to get to and walk on the moon. A team will have one specific goal they are attempting to attain. The group knew where they were trying to get to and were working together to make sure that they would get there according to plan.
The last reason that I believe they were acting as a team is that they had shared leadership roles on the ship. At one point in the film, this causes a bit of conflict. Fred Haise believes that Jack Swigert made a mistake during one of the filling/draining processes on the ship while he was in the captain’s seat. They begin to argue about who was at fault or not when Jim Lovell chimes in and says it is nobody’s fault. He says, “if I had been in the left seat when they called I would have been at fault.” This is an example that they all had an ability to lead and perform each part of the mission, depending on their ability or even proximity at the time.
2. Using concepts about emergent leadership, who functioned as leader(s) in the movie? How was that leadership communicated? How did it emerge?
There were a countless number of leaders in the film, but two in particular stand out to me immediately. The first was Gene Kranz, the leader of the control team back at Houston. Clearly Kranz was a leader from the beginning, have been appointed as a leader to the others in the room and to the astronauts. However, his role as an emergent leader really showed when the crisis begun. When the entire control was panicking and trying to scramble for ideas or answers, Kranz remained calm and collected, analyzing each situation before he would rush to a conclusion about what needed to be done. He communicated well with the others and made sure they were focusing on quality communication. He wanted to hear good creative ideas on how to get the men home safely and was quick to defuse situations as they grew out of hand. His ability to remain completely calm even though there were lives at stake was amazing, but his ability to lead the men in the room showed his spectacular emergent leadership despite crisis.
The other example of an emergent leader was Jim Lovell. Jim displayed his leadership in a lot of little ways throughout the movie. Sometimes it was a simple as him telling Ken Mattingly that leaving him off of the mission was his call and not to be mad at a NASA doctor. He took responsibility for him being left behind even though he knew that his hands were tied. Another example was his dedication to the mission from the day that he found out that he would be going on Apollo 13. The first day that he came home with the news that he would be walking on the moon, he saw his family, gave them the news, and then immediately left again to train. His dedication made him stand out as a leader. Jim also displayed a respect for leadership and other authority. There were many times in the film that Jim was seen praising supervisor or team members. This helped show that his leadership and authority shouldn’t be seen with contempt for other leaders. It is much easier to follow a respectful leader than one filled with contempt for his bosses.
3. What organizational assumptions, values, and symbols were displayed in the movie? How were assumptions and values communicated? What did the material & non-material artifacts communicate about the organization & leadership?
The organizational assumptions, values, and symbols were present in many different occasions in Apollo 13. Some of the assumptions, values and symbols were: group oriented relationships and particularism; doing everything possible to preserve the lives of the astronauts; and technology and heroes.
The assumption that it was a group oriented relationship among the crew and the controllers in the control room was reaffirmed when they had to work together to solve every problem. They did not go through a hierarchy of leaders to address problems, but addressed them on their own and through their own judgment. There was particularism among the flight crews when the original moon-walkers were given better media and social treatment than the Apollo 13 crew.
The values to leave no man behind or unprotected was apparent when every person in the control room was doing everything in their power to get those astronauts home. They stayed up all night long and racked each other’s brains for over a week in order to do what they knew was right as an organization.
The organizational symbols in Apollo 13 were most notably NASA’s status and power in technology and the heroes that astronauts were to the entire world. NASA was the world standard for the technology that it took to get to the moon and the United States and all Americans were proud to say so. Also, to the American people – and to a lesser extent, to the entire world – NASA astronauts were heroes. Until a few years previously, nobody had ever even attempted to walk on the moon, and these astronauts were doing it more and more routinely. The entire world looked up to the American space agency and its astronauts in particular.
4. Which of the three types of organizational learning were demonstrated in the movie? How did communication play a role in this learning?
The most obvious of the three types of organizational learning was experimentation. As soon as problems on the ship began to go wrong, the experimentation to fix began. They needed to find out which solutions were going to fix the problems that they had, not only completely, but quickly and effectively. The scientists in Houston were experimenting to put a square filter into a circular filter capsule when it became clear that they needed to control the carbon monoxide levels in the ship. The scientists had to show an ability to have quality communication to produce a fast and effective device to save the men. Another example was when the astronauts had to fly the ship back on course without their guidance computer to help them. They had to experiment with the controls to find out exactly how there were designed to work. During this time, the men also had to communicate effectively and calmly to each other to be sure that they were performing maneuvers that would be beneficial to each other’s efforts to correctly steer the ship. Their communication was extremely important in making sure that the experimentation was being done correctly.
1. Would you define the Apollo 13 astronauts and their support ground crew as a working group or as a team (according to differentiation in text)? What specific reasons/scenes in the movie support your answer?
I believe that the Apollo 13 astronauts were a team, not simply a group. There are three examples that I believe show their status as a team. The first of these is before the mission, when the three original crew members are training in the simulator for over three hours. When one of them (Ken Mattingly) comes out of the simulator feeling uneasy – even though his simulation went nearly flawless – the whole team went back in to the simulator to work on the problem. The book says that members of a team will share accountability and will encourage standards of excellence within the team. They knew that if one of them felt uneasy, then they all needed to work to make sure that the mission would go perfectly.
The next example is that the team had a specific purpose that they were all working to attain. The three astronauts were doing all of their preparation and training for one specific group goal – to get to and walk on the moon. A team will have one specific goal they are attempting to attain. The group knew where they were trying to get to and were working together to make sure that they would get there according to plan.
The last reason that I believe they were acting as a team is that they had shared leadership roles on the ship. At one point in the film, this causes a bit of conflict. Fred Haise believes that Jack Swigert made a mistake during one of the filling/draining processes on the ship while he was in the captain’s seat. They begin to argue about who was at fault or not when Jim Lovell chimes in and says it is nobody’s fault. He says, “if I had been in the left seat when they called I would have been at fault.” This is an example that they all had an ability to lead and perform each part of the mission, depending on their ability or even proximity at the time.
2. Using concepts about emergent leadership, who functioned as leader(s) in the movie? How was that leadership communicated? How did it emerge?
There were a countless number of leaders in the film, but two in particular stand out to me immediately. The first was Gene Kranz, the leader of the control team back at Houston. Clearly Kranz was a leader from the beginning, have been appointed as a leader to the others in the room and to the astronauts. However, his role as an emergent leader really showed when the crisis begun. When the entire control was panicking and trying to scramble for ideas or answers, Kranz remained calm and collected, analyzing each situation before he would rush to a conclusion about what needed to be done. He communicated well with the others and made sure they were focusing on quality communication. He wanted to hear good creative ideas on how to get the men home safely and was quick to defuse situations as they grew out of hand. His ability to remain completely calm even though there were lives at stake was amazing, but his ability to lead the men in the room showed his spectacular emergent leadership despite crisis.
The other example of an emergent leader was Jim Lovell. Jim displayed his leadership in a lot of little ways throughout the movie. Sometimes it was a simple as him telling Ken Mattingly that leaving him off of the mission was his call and not to be mad at a NASA doctor. He took responsibility for him being left behind even though he knew that his hands were tied. Another example was his dedication to the mission from the day that he found out that he would be going on Apollo 13. The first day that he came home with the news that he would be walking on the moon, he saw his family, gave them the news, and then immediately left again to train. His dedication made him stand out as a leader. Jim also displayed a respect for leadership and other authority. There were many times in the film that Jim was seen praising supervisor or team members. This helped show that his leadership and authority shouldn’t be seen with contempt for other leaders. It is much easier to follow a respectful leader than one filled with contempt for his bosses.
3. What organizational assumptions, values, and symbols were displayed in the movie? How were assumptions and values communicated? What did the material & non-material artifacts communicate about the organization & leadership?
The organizational assumptions, values, and symbols were present in many different occasions in Apollo 13. Some of the assumptions, values and symbols were: group oriented relationships and particularism; doing everything possible to preserve the lives of the astronauts; and technology and heroes.
The assumption that it was a group oriented relationship among the crew and the controllers in the control room was reaffirmed when they had to work together to solve every problem. They did not go through a hierarchy of leaders to address problems, but addressed them on their own and through their own judgment. There was particularism among the flight crews when the original moon-walkers were given better media and social treatment than the Apollo 13 crew.
The values to leave no man behind or unprotected was apparent when every person in the control room was doing everything in their power to get those astronauts home. They stayed up all night long and racked each other’s brains for over a week in order to do what they knew was right as an organization.
The organizational symbols in Apollo 13 were most notably NASA’s status and power in technology and the heroes that astronauts were to the entire world. NASA was the world standard for the technology that it took to get to the moon and the United States and all Americans were proud to say so. Also, to the American people – and to a lesser extent, to the entire world – NASA astronauts were heroes. Until a few years previously, nobody had ever even attempted to walk on the moon, and these astronauts were doing it more and more routinely. The entire world looked up to the American space agency and its astronauts in particular.
4. Which of the three types of organizational learning were demonstrated in the movie? How did communication play a role in this learning?
The most obvious of the three types of organizational learning was experimentation. As soon as problems on the ship began to go wrong, the experimentation to fix began. They needed to find out which solutions were going to fix the problems that they had, not only completely, but quickly and effectively. The scientists in Houston were experimenting to put a square filter into a circular filter capsule when it became clear that they needed to control the carbon monoxide levels in the ship. The scientists had to show an ability to have quality communication to produce a fast and effective device to save the men. Another example was when the astronauts had to fly the ship back on course without their guidance computer to help them. They had to experiment with the controls to find out exactly how there were designed to work. During this time, the men also had to communicate effectively and calmly to each other to be sure that they were performing maneuvers that would be beneficial to each other’s efforts to correctly steer the ship. Their communication was extremely important in making sure that the experimentation was being done correctly.
Chapter 11 - Extra Credit Movie Reflection:
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
"The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" Response
Chapter 11 of our textbook was about Ethical Leadership and Followership. These are very important parts of leadership and how leaders can be effective; these are also very commonly seen topics in many movies. The movie I observed these in was The Lord of the Rings: The Return of The King (LOTR). Behind the engaging and interesting plot, there are many examples of leadership and followership and how they are used ethically.
The most obvious example of this in the film is servant followership. A servant-follower is someone who wants to remain in a follower role rather than to take a role of leadership. Obviously, the best example of this in LOTR is Samwise Gamgee. Sam is a follower of many things, but most of all he is a loyal servant-follower to the main character, Frodo Baggins. He is always doing everything he must to make sure that the journey that he and Frodo are on is safe. He is acting as a protector of Frodo, because it is in the best interest of the overall group – The Fellowship of the Ring – and to the leader himself – Frodo. He is always open to new ideas, but is acting and communicating in the same manner and interest of his leaders.
Another example from chapter 11 in the film is courageous followership. The textbook says that courageous followers support their leaders through hard, often unglamorous work. There are multiple aspects of courageous followership which I believe are represented by many of the characters in the film. Frodo shows the courage to assume responsibility when he realizes how poorly he has treated his friend Sam. He goes to Sam and apologizes for his poor decisions and actions appropriately. Pippen shows the courage to serve when he dedicates himself to the Lord of Gondor. He knows that it is his duty to do what he has been asked and he is courageous to do these things, even when he is afraid of their outcomes. Aragorn showed the courage to challenge the King of Rohan when he refused to go to the aid of Gondor. The king had power over him but he still told him that he was wrong and made a case for him to change. Aragorn also showed the courage to leave when he knew that the King would be unable to lead them appropriately and he made his own way to retrieve more soldiers for war (in the case, an army of undead soldiers).
One more example of concepts from the chapter in the film is moral motivation. Moral motivation is the motivation to do what is right despite the advantages or conveniences you have. The best example of this in the movie is a negative example. The reigning Lord of Gondor how very low moral motivation to do what was right and to give Aragorn his rightful seat on the throne as the King of Gondor. He knew that if he gave up his position he would lose power over the land and the people. He would also lose wealth and privilege that he currently owned. His reluctance to do the right thing was a perfect example of how a good leader should avoid treating his followers, or other leaders.
The concepts of chapter 11 cover many other media and many other scenes from the film. The three I have chosen seem to be the most obvious, and I believe that ethical leadership and followership is represented well from them.
Chapter 11 of our textbook was about Ethical Leadership and Followership. These are very important parts of leadership and how leaders can be effective; these are also very commonly seen topics in many movies. The movie I observed these in was The Lord of the Rings: The Return of The King (LOTR). Behind the engaging and interesting plot, there are many examples of leadership and followership and how they are used ethically.
The most obvious example of this in the film is servant followership. A servant-follower is someone who wants to remain in a follower role rather than to take a role of leadership. Obviously, the best example of this in LOTR is Samwise Gamgee. Sam is a follower of many things, but most of all he is a loyal servant-follower to the main character, Frodo Baggins. He is always doing everything he must to make sure that the journey that he and Frodo are on is safe. He is acting as a protector of Frodo, because it is in the best interest of the overall group – The Fellowship of the Ring – and to the leader himself – Frodo. He is always open to new ideas, but is acting and communicating in the same manner and interest of his leaders.
Another example from chapter 11 in the film is courageous followership. The textbook says that courageous followers support their leaders through hard, often unglamorous work. There are multiple aspects of courageous followership which I believe are represented by many of the characters in the film. Frodo shows the courage to assume responsibility when he realizes how poorly he has treated his friend Sam. He goes to Sam and apologizes for his poor decisions and actions appropriately. Pippen shows the courage to serve when he dedicates himself to the Lord of Gondor. He knows that it is his duty to do what he has been asked and he is courageous to do these things, even when he is afraid of their outcomes. Aragorn showed the courage to challenge the King of Rohan when he refused to go to the aid of Gondor. The king had power over him but he still told him that he was wrong and made a case for him to change. Aragorn also showed the courage to leave when he knew that the King would be unable to lead them appropriately and he made his own way to retrieve more soldiers for war (in the case, an army of undead soldiers).
One more example of concepts from the chapter in the film is moral motivation. Moral motivation is the motivation to do what is right despite the advantages or conveniences you have. The best example of this in the movie is a negative example. The reigning Lord of Gondor how very low moral motivation to do what was right and to give Aragorn his rightful seat on the throne as the King of Gondor. He knew that if he gave up his position he would lose power over the land and the people. He would also lose wealth and privilege that he currently owned. His reluctance to do the right thing was a perfect example of how a good leader should avoid treating his followers, or other leaders.
The concepts of chapter 11 cover many other media and many other scenes from the film. The three I have chosen seem to be the most obvious, and I believe that ethical leadership and followership is represented well from them.
Chapter 6 - Extra Credit Movie Reflection:
Rules of Engagement
"Rules of Engagement" Response
Chapter six of our textbook is all about leadership and influence. Many of the topics covered in this chapter were represented in the movie Rules of Engagement. The first topic that was apparent was the influence of credibility. Credibility is the foundation for successful influence in leadership. A leader cannot lead without credibility, because his or her followers will not have the respect or the willingness to follow. Credibility is shown in multiple ways in the film. First, the credibility of Terry Childers (Samuel L. Jackson) is attacked when there is question of what happened at the embassy in Yemen. The prosecution attacked his credibility to make it appear that he was unfit to lead and he was not to be trusted at his word. In return, Terry Childers used the credibility of his friend Hayes Hodges (Tommy Lee Jones) to represent him because he was a respected military lawyer who was a great leader in the courtroom. This goes to show the importance of credibility in leadership; it can either degrade or elevate your leadership ability.
Another leadership trait evident in the movie was argumentative competence. Argumentative competence is necessary when two or more people take sides on an issue and there is conflict involved. This was very relevant to this film because a large amount of movie took place inside a courtroom where argumentative competence is very important. The prosecutor and his team used many aggressive arguing tactics in order to try to convict Childers. They included: character attacks – showing that he would kill an unarmed citizen, background attacks – showing his history of violence and leadership woes, and profanity – patronizing him and antagonizing him with profane language. Hodges represented the other side of this argument by countering these things with his own background information, character credibility, and some quick thinking.
The last thing that was obviously present in the film from chapter six in our textbook was reciprocity. Reciprocity is a natural give and take between two parties, whether individuals or organization. It is an understanding that if a favor is given, a favor must be returned. The best example of this is Hodges’s duty to represent Childers for his accused crimes. Childers had saved Hodges’s life 28 years earlier when they fought together in Vietnam. When Hodges was able to return home and have a son, he owed his own life and the life of his son to Terry Childers. He was able to return the favor by representing him in court and winning the case, “saving” the life of Terry Childers.
Obviously, these things just scratch the surface of the evidence and examples of leadership in the Rules of Engagement, but given what we have learned in class and in our readings, I believe that these examples were the best applied in the film.
Chapter six of our textbook is all about leadership and influence. Many of the topics covered in this chapter were represented in the movie Rules of Engagement. The first topic that was apparent was the influence of credibility. Credibility is the foundation for successful influence in leadership. A leader cannot lead without credibility, because his or her followers will not have the respect or the willingness to follow. Credibility is shown in multiple ways in the film. First, the credibility of Terry Childers (Samuel L. Jackson) is attacked when there is question of what happened at the embassy in Yemen. The prosecution attacked his credibility to make it appear that he was unfit to lead and he was not to be trusted at his word. In return, Terry Childers used the credibility of his friend Hayes Hodges (Tommy Lee Jones) to represent him because he was a respected military lawyer who was a great leader in the courtroom. This goes to show the importance of credibility in leadership; it can either degrade or elevate your leadership ability.
Another leadership trait evident in the movie was argumentative competence. Argumentative competence is necessary when two or more people take sides on an issue and there is conflict involved. This was very relevant to this film because a large amount of movie took place inside a courtroom where argumentative competence is very important. The prosecutor and his team used many aggressive arguing tactics in order to try to convict Childers. They included: character attacks – showing that he would kill an unarmed citizen, background attacks – showing his history of violence and leadership woes, and profanity – patronizing him and antagonizing him with profane language. Hodges represented the other side of this argument by countering these things with his own background information, character credibility, and some quick thinking.
The last thing that was obviously present in the film from chapter six in our textbook was reciprocity. Reciprocity is a natural give and take between two parties, whether individuals or organization. It is an understanding that if a favor is given, a favor must be returned. The best example of this is Hodges’s duty to represent Childers for his accused crimes. Childers had saved Hodges’s life 28 years earlier when they fought together in Vietnam. When Hodges was able to return home and have a son, he owed his own life and the life of his son to Terry Childers. He was able to return the favor by representing him in court and winning the case, “saving” the life of Terry Childers.
Obviously, these things just scratch the surface of the evidence and examples of leadership in the Rules of Engagement, but given what we have learned in class and in our readings, I believe that these examples were the best applied in the film.