Leadership in Organisations - Essay Example

Leadership in Organizations 1.0 Introduction Leadership can be defined as the process of influencing others in a social manner in which a leader can engage the support and help of others in the achievement of a common mission (Tittemore, 2003, p. 78). It is the process of bringing people together to accomplish a common goal. Leadership is also the ability of a superior to make appropriate decisions about his administration and the whole society. Zaccaro (2001, p. 34) argues that these conclusions are made to motivate the subjects to reach the societies’ objectives. Good leaders are in a position to establish suitable decisions that direct the attainment of their objectives. This is because of the existing effectual communication skills, self-confidence, and the capability of managing others (Badaracco, 2006, p. 47-55). The author continues to argue that a society cannot be alienated from good leadership (Badaracco, 2006, p. 47-55). Leadership has been linked to the shape and outcome of a society since what the leaders do is replicated to what the members of the society will do as well. 2.0. Monologues in V Act 4, Scene 1, lines 227-281 2.1. Summary of monologue From the monologue, it is evident that Henry the king is willing to send his soldiers to the battlefield. With his ability to disguise himself as a commoner, it is difficult for the common people to see and recognize him. This he does by borrowing a dirty old cloak that he uses to move around (Shakespeare 2007, p.108). He is also seen to claim to be a kinsman of Fluellen though he despises him as a captain. His leadership qualities allow him to consult the common soldiers about the war (Shakespeare 2007, p.108). Despite the fact that the soldiers were doubtful about the king’s ability to lead them to war, King Henry is quick to motivate his soldiers to go to the battlefield under his leadership. Some of the soldiers like Williams also question the justification of the war with France. Despite Henry’s leadership skills in being in constant communication with the soldiers, Williams, just like any ordinary person would, questions the king persistently and argues that if they die and leave their widows, it would be unforgivable for the king (Shakespeare 2007, p.109). However, the king responds by saying that he would be responsible for any death of his soldiers as it was their responsibility to guard the nation. Since a leader is bound to face all manners of rejection, Henry is not worried but defends himself from Williams. It is after the bitter exchanges between the king and the Williams that the soldiers leave for the battlefield (Shakespeare 2007; p.110). 2.2. Analysis of monologue Looking at Henry V act Act 4, Scene 1, lines 227-281, Henry’s hidden dialogues with his warriors reveals the close relationship between the king and ordinary man who are the soldiers. In this scene, the author presents different types of voices that talk in Henry V exposing how every soldier interacted with Henry, therefore, adding a contemporary dimension to the comprehension of the difficult emperor. Henry’s discussions with his soldiers feature the team spirit between leader and his subordinate, and this promotes a common understanding between the two groups (Shakespeare 2007, p.110). Henry knew that he was the same as the other common people. The only difference was that he was a leader, and he interacted with them in a free manner without threatening them. In the monologue, Henry described the unpleasant tasks of power, which both separate and exposed the king, where all the subjects give the impression of putting all their uncertainties, worries, and responsibility to the king’s shoulders. The comment Henry uttered about his suffering as a leader echoed the speech made by his father, and this speech revealed the worries of Henry as a leader in understanding the responsibilities of leadership (Shakespeare 2007, p.110-12). This monologue presents the idea that that Henry’s motivation for his activities as king is not because of lust of power or arrogance, but because of an overwhelming awareness of responsibility to maintain strength and order for his followers. In this play, Henry has been presented as a good leader who is intelligent, motivating, and focused to his responsibility as a leader. Henry uses all the resources as a leader to ensure that he achieves his goals and objectives as a leader. It is through the monologue that Shakespeare presents his charismatic ability to interact with is subjects in order to achieve their goals. It is through this inspiration that Henry achieves his heroic goals as an effective leader (Gurr, 2005, p. 48). 3.0. Conclusion In conclusion, good leadership requires one to be intelligent, motivating, and ready to work with the subjects, whereby they should communicate freely without one group frustrating the other or seeking for power. Therefore, good leaders work for their subjects. Additionally, it is evident that leadership is not an easy task and that leaders must be tough to their decisions despite the challenges involved just like king Henry did. The leader also says a prayer, simply for comfort of his worries and he rarely relaxes just like a concerned leader would do. A good leader should also be hopeful for tomorrow. This can arguably be indicated to be a major boost to the followers who are always not hopeful, but skeptical about everything that leaders do. This can be evidenced from King Henry who consulted God and requested him to remember them in the forthcoming battle, and that He considers all the good deeds that he had done for his people under his term as a leader. For a common mission to be achieved, the leaders ought to be steadfast in their fight for the people regardless of the costs involved. References Badaracco, J., 2006. Leadership in Literature. A Conversation with Business Ethicist Joseph L. Badaracco Jr. Harvard Business Review. 84 (3): 47-55. Gurr, A., 2005. King Henry V. New Cambridge Shakespeare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Shakespeare, W., 2007. Henry V (Shakespeare Library Classic). Minneapolis, Minnesota: Filiquarian Publishing, LLC. Tittemore, J, A., 2003. Leadership at all Levels. Canada: Boskwa Publishing. Zaccaro, S., 2001. The nature of executive leadership: A conceptual and empirical analysis of success. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Read More