Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on COMPARISON OF CLASSICAL, PROGRESSIVE AND RISK LEADERSHIP. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 3-page paper describes, compares and contrasts models of classical, progressive and risk leadership. Bibliography lists 1 source.
Page Count:
3 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_MTleacom.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
tasks to meet corporate goals, it is the leader or leaders that draw out talents and motivated the workforce to get the job done. As with any human condition, there
are different styles of leadership. The three styles we will discuss in this particular paper are classical, progressive and risk leadership. To better define the styles, we will
rely on the article "Building the Corporate Revolution: Real Empowerment through Risk Leadership," which was written by C. B. Crawford and Curtis Brungardt.
Classical leadership, as indicated by the term, is the oldest type of leadership. These particular leaders were developed during the early days of the Industrial Revolution, in which
workplaces had mostly unskilled labor (Crawford and Brungardt, 1999). Classical leaders were successful because they were able to get the job done at a minimal cost (Crawford and Brungardt, 1999).
The classical leader believes that stability should be the main focus of the organization -- change is considered disruptive, and leads to more errors (Crawford and Brungardt, 1999). Classical
leaders also tend to be profit-motivated, believing every day without profit is a failed day (Crawford and Brungardt, 1999). Classical leaders believe their position is right and they believe that
workers would be unproductive if left on their own (Crawford and Brungardt, 1999). As a result, classical leaders use means such as management by intimidation to get the job
done (Crawford and Brungardt, 1999). These leaders do whatever they can to obtain profitable results -- even if those activities are not in the best interest of the workforce.
Progress of leadership was developed during the mid-1970s, when it was determined that stability in organizations was not the same as success
...