An Influential Leader

An Army Leader is able and willing to act decisively, within the intent and purpose of his superior leaders, and in the best interest of the organization. Army leaders recognize that organizations built on mutual trust and confidence, successfully accomplish peacetime and wartime missions.” (2006, P. Viii). Balance molds a leader and in turn, an effective leader is a proactive person who works a whole lot smarter. President George Bush (1997) states, “Leadership to me means duty, honor, and country; It means character and it means listening from time to time.” (Adrain, p. 35).

Leaders are look upon as role models as they guide us with their motivating, influence to accomplish tasks. There are a lot of leadership styles; when leading, it is based on the situation. When I was in the military, I encountered with many different styles of leadership. A leadership that I considered meaningful is a Transformational Leader. The transformational Leader in the military with their inspiring charisma of motivating, influence creates a visualized path that produces energetic characteristics that inhere to new changes, developments, and possibilities.; by demonstrating authority, the Transformational Leader in the military utilizes their power to inspire and motivate people into trusting and following their example; this as

Leadership can be viewed in many different ways and possess many different qualities. There are courageous leaders, respectful leaders, terrible leaders, and seemingly insignificant leaders but leaders nonetheless. But what is it that differentiates between a strong leader and a weak leader, or a powerful leader and an insignificant one? Is it the qualities in the leader or the decisions they make in key situations that define good leadership qualities? Some would define a good leader by their ability to do the right thing even if it is not the easiest choice. Others might define a good leader as one that possesses great integrity and leads by example. The military possesses many great leaders through a process of development and molding individuals to meet expected leadership qualities like honor, courage, commitment and integrity to accomplish any mission or goal. However, this process doesn’t always create the desired effect. So, let’s examine some good and bad examples of leadership qualities and break down what and how we can emulate them.

Our world is filled with many successful leaders. The gift of being a leader can be learned; however some individuals have a natural born talent to be a leader. Each leader has his or her own unique leadership style. The gift of being a leader can be learned. Certain individuals are born with a charismatic style and can easily be a leader. A successful leader is one who can inspire and motivate people towards a goal. Martin Luther King Jr. was an individual with a born gift to lead people. The following paper will discuss how Martin Luther King Jr. was able to inspire and motivate people with his effective leadership style.

There are a variety of ways to define both leader and leadership. There is not, however, a clear definition of how to become one. There is no set list of mandatory traits, either innate or learned, that a person must embody to be considered successful or proved a failure. What I feel it takes is the right mix of strengths and weaknesses in a given situation to demonstrate effectiveness. No one person has abilities without accompanying deficiencies. It’s all in the way they are balanced. The balance in the way one uses his or hers’ abilities will ultimately determine the type of leadership one has throughout time. To support these claims I will examine a well-known leader throughout the military, General James “Mad Dog” Mattis. This essay

As a professional leader, role models are an important source of inspiration and development. The ability to deliberately aim to improve as a leader is equally important. In the Army, the Leadership Requirements Model found in doctrine provides the framework necessary to make those deliberate improvements. This framework presents the opportunity to analyze our leadership role models using the Leadership Requirements Model and assess how that leader has contributed to the Army or the Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) Corps. Additionally, it is important to apply the same analysis to how that role model has influenced our own leadership. Lastly, with these considerations in mind, leaders can project into the future and determine what kind of legacy they wish to leave. The purpose of this analysis is to explore these opportunities and the relationships between doctrinal leadership, a legacy leader, and my own leadership and legacy. My father, retired Chief Warrant Officer 2 (CW2) Nelson Stydinger, had a significant influence on the profession during his own service. He also represents my most important leadership influence throughout my career and his record informs the type of legacy I would like to leave as an Army leader.

An effective leader is one who inspires many to not only accept change but to cause change themselves, furthermore, though leaders can be effective it doesn’t always mean they are responsible with their power.

Becoming a strong, influential leader is determined by an array of factors, as well as who we are as people. Our most inner being holds the key to whether or not we are destined to become successful leaders. Culture and society also play a powerful role in our leadership style. It is thought that various styles of leadership have varied effects on leadership practice and results. Regardless of our natural abilities, there will always be room for change, growth, and overall becoming a more effective leader.

In accordance with ADP 6-22 “An Army leader is anyone who by virtue of assumed role or assigned responsibility inspires and influences people to accomplish organizational goals. Army leaders motivate people both inside and outside the chain of command to pursue actions, focus thinking and shape decisions for the greater good of the organization.” The leadership style a person portrays determines their effectiveness to influence people to accomplish any mission. I have observed several different leadership styles in my career and the one I associate with is the Transformational Leadership Style. I will articulate my comparison to retired CW5 Robert L. Storey and retired CW4 Athur Frazier and why. “ADP 6-22.” data.cape.army.mil, Aug. 2012, www.bing.com/cr

In John Steinbeck's "The Leader of the People," a theme that is portrayed throughout the story is that of the contrast between dream and reality. In the story, Grandfather cannot come to grasp that his dreams of the West and moving across the plains are over and that reality has set in. Another story that contrasts dream and reality is Ambrose Pierce's "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge." In this story, Farquhar cannot tell the difference between dream and reality until the very last second, when he is hanged.

Leadership, according to the Army doctrine, represents individuals’ ability to influence people by providing purpose, direction, and motivation while operating to accomplish the mission and improving the organization (“Leadership” FM 6-22). However, the varying characteristics of individuals that the Army attracts may instill this doctrine in many different ways, leading to different representations of leadership. Some individuals choose to lead their subordinate in a stern matter, only displaying matured emotions and a “tough-loving” attitude to guide them in the right direction. Others

Sports celebrities are prevailing on Time Magazine’s list of “Most Influential People in the World."

For many people in around the world, who and where they are today can be largely attributed to significant individuals throughout history. Many of these individuals have had a positive impact on humankind and have played a crucial role in molding societies of today. Therefore, I feel that the most influential individuals in history are not the ones who have caused the most harm.

Beginning in boot camp and continuing throughout my career, I’ve seen the Coast Guard promote the leadership model to be: “You” influencing “Others” to achieve a “Goal”. With all the different ways leadership can be defined, this simplistic model which has been permanently engrained in my thinking definition still rings true for me. As such, when defining my own personal definition of leadership, I align it to this same model. More specifically, while I support the fact that leadership involves influencing others to achieve a common end I propose that is not the whole story. Leaders must not be stagnant in their vision and must lend themselves to the possibility they may have to adjust their leadership styles depending on the goal. The best leaders are the ones that understand their own personality traits as well as those traits of the people they are trying to lead.

A leader of an organization needs to be flexible with ideas and open to a diversity of solutions and viewpoints. Although leadership has abounding definitions and assorted measures for success, it is authentic by the acceptance that it is an access action that in abounding cases is situational. The success of a leader of an organization depends on his/her adeptness to accomplish an ambition through the accomplishments of those involved. It takes the charge of others in the alignment to apparatus a leader 's eyes and goals. Association and organizations accept to accept able administration in adjustment to auspiciously accomplish their objectives. Therefore, it is basic for beforehand and the all-embracing abundance of our society. We accept to aswell bethink that administration needs to be consistently developed, able and be able to finer beforehand charge aural an organization. As many world leaders strategize on how to yield their alignment to the next level. Abounding are because the active armament that will accomplish an all-around impact. It has been acclaimed that abounding active armament that accept facilitated these beefy changes in the 21st century, conspicuously the acceleration of the all-around economy, and its address on countries common (Perrin, 2010; Snyder, 2001), the access in the angle of fundamentalism (McGrath, 2002; Beckett, 1998; Green, Rozell, 2003) boundless political inequities (Gamwell, 2005; Daly, 1989; Safran, 2003), affective leaders into