The Boundary Conditions For A Case Study

This paper reviews and analyzes three main issues with the first one being leadership. Other sub-issues involve lack of vision, coercive leadership style, using taxpayer’s money for personal benefit and irresponsible top management. The organizational structure, mixed communication, and no clear indication to who to report to is the second. The third

A case study is an intensive type of research that involves a process in which detailed information is collected

A case study is “a method of analysis and a specific research design for examining a problem” (University of Southern California, 2010). It can be used to analyze a person, place, event, or other subjects in order to help discover mitigating issues, misconceptions, failures, trends, or recommendations (USC, 2010). Case studies will be used to gain a better understanding of situations and topics to help others make better policies, procedures, and decisions (USC, 2010).

A case study is a puzzle that has to be solved. The first thing to remember about writing a case study is that the case should have a problem for the readers to solve. The case should have enough information in it that readers can understand what the problem is and, after thinking about it and analyzing the information; the readers should be able to come up with a proposed solution. Writing an interesting case study is a bit like writing a detective story. You want to keep your readers very interested in the situation.

resignation of his advisors, his Attorney General, and others who had worked on the CREEP

The United States since its adoption of the Constitution in 1787 has accumulated total amount forty-five presidents over two-hundred and thirty years. These forty-five presidents as history and the United States continues, will be the subject of analysts throughout history, who will try to rank them from the best to the worst. The book written by James Taranto and Leonard Leo, ‘Presidential Leadership: Rating the Best and the Worst in the White House’ is one of these analytical books shoving the presidents into a ranking by using a survey of professors of history, law and political science to rate them. This book by Leo and Taranto focus on a handful of prime objectives for the readers to overserve while reading the book. The first is to

When the World War II finally ended, the United States was the most powerful country the history has ever witnessed. Politically, economically, and militarily, the United States possessed an unmatched power. The Soviet Union soon built a comparable nuclear force but was far behind economically. The enormous power the United States possessed forced it to assume the responsibility of leading the Western world in the struggle against Communism around the world. To understand and properly evaluate the leadership of Presidents Dwight Eisenhower and John Fitzgerald Kennedy, it is necessary to keep in mind this historical development, as it provides a context for understanding specific leadership styles and policies these presidents adopted. Both international affairs and domestic concerns influenced the actions and leadership styles of Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy. George Moss's Vietnam: an American Ordeal makes it clear that Eisenhower was a strong and decisive leader but domestic politics continuously inhibited his liberty to act. Kennedy, in contrast, seems to have been a weak decision-maker, despite the fact that international affairs and domestic concerns continuously pressured him to make prompt and crucial decisions.

With the end of World War Two and the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt, the United States emerged on the global stage as one of the planet's great economic and military powers. It is safe to say that with America's change in status, and in conjunction with profound industrial and technological change, that presidential leadership would necessarily have to transform yet again to meet a new era; nowhere could two different styles of leadership to meet the age be seen than in the Cold War administrations of Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy. Both men would exhibit a unique style of leadership suited to the personality of each, and each style could be considered to characterize the administration of each president, but nevertheless, both men would also use very similar leadership styles when necessary in order to attain certain policy goals.

Governing the U.S. is a hard endeavor, and thus the founding fathers aw fit to establish the constitution in such a way that divides the powers of governing into three branches. Of these three branches it can be argued that either congressional power or executive power is appropriate for governing the nation, however it is my opinion that the executive branch is the best choice of leadership. The central thesis for this paper is, do to the “separate intuitions, and sharing powers” portion of the constitution, the president is best suited to leadership do to his abilities to negotiate and in turn implement good strategies. The structure of congress and the president is largely different, where congress is governed by multiple individuals

Throughout history, presidents have or have not wielded the powers and tools available to them to further their goals. Examining presidential power and success is to understand presidential leadership. These top-tier individuals elected to the presidency uses the resources and personal characteristics to lead them to success and greatness, in some cases, some more than others. I have provided a case study between Presidents Van Buren and Roosevelt to show how the internal and external factors lead one president to be one of the greatest and most successful presidents in U.S history, while the other is regarded as one of the more unsuccessful and worst presidents. Presidential success is distinguished between internal and external factors. We should care about presidential success and greatness because it significantly impacts the state of nation. I argue that both internal and external factors are most important in determining presidential success.

Under President Donald J. Trump’s presidency, he has been primarily clear that under his leadership operations means “business” for the United States of America, however, in this New York Times article called “Donald Trump Is the Worst Boss in Washington” by Britt Peterson, further explains the perspective on “why” he is the absolute worst boss in Washington. Since he took over the Oval Office, President Trump has decided to fire or allow to resign of three essential White House staff members, such as national security adviser, Michael Flynn, who handled the Russian Investigation, Michael Dubke to resign as White House Communications Director, and most infamously, fire F.B.I. Director, James Comey, who led the FBI's investigation into Russian

Therefore rational for the use of case formulation is that it improves practice by linking theory, research and

The bureaucratic era has been the traditional form of organization for more than a century, in simple terms described as hybridity, standardized operations and none flexibility inside the organization. The change to the post-bureaucratic is shown through personal influence, high trust relationships and the importance of the individuality of everyone (McKenna, Garcia-Lorenzo & Bridgeman, 2010). According to Kernaghan (2000) the characteristic of the bureaucratic era is “position power” and of the post bureaucratic “participate leadership”.

Moreover, several of the courses I have taken have falsely led me to believe that leading in the private and public sector is fundamentally identical. However, those courses did not effectively convey to the student that the private and public sector are unique entities that have different motivations, objectives, and are commanded by individual forces.

On a macro level, public administration and business management are similar in their overall functions. “At the broadest level, some organizational theorists contend that administration is administration whatever its setting, and that the problems of organizing people, leading them and supplying them with resources to do their jobs are always the same (Kettl, 2012, p. 38).” In his paper, “Public and Private Management: Are They Fundamentally Alike in All Unimportant Respects?,” Graham T. Allison explains that in comparing public and administration and business management, “it is possible to identify a set of general management functions (Allison, 2012, p. 4).” Regardless of their end goal, each administration must form strategies by setting goals, priorities and creating procedures. Public and private organizations must manage internal components by organizing staff, defining job responsibilities, hiring and managing personnel and creating budgets. Furthermore, they must manage external constituencies such as other agencies, the press and public (Allison, 2012, p. 5). His observations stem from Wallace Sayre’s famous words, “public and private management are fundamentally alike in all unimportant respects (DiIlulio, 1993).”