General Patton's Leadership Style
Implementation A recommendation that I would apply to this leader’s leadership style is ingrained in a letter from General Patton to his son, “There are apparently two types of successful soldiers. Those who get on by being unobtrusive and those who get on by being obtrusive. I am of the latter type…rare and unpopular: but it is my method” (McKay, 2016). He is portraying here that a leader should be very well known to his followers, that the actions and response of a leader should be deliberate and with equality of any given situation. As Kouzes and Posner (2012) point out, “be personally involved and create a spirit of community…when social connections are strong and numerous, there’s more trust, reciprocity, information flow, collective action” (p. 305). In the situation of slapping the soldier I do feel that if General Patton took a more social judgement-skills approach to the soldier, and not obtrusive or as extreme obtrusive, I do feel this type of connection with his
…show more content…
Patton Jr., he is still revered to this day as a very effective brilliant, ingenious, strategic military leader; his leadership methods, favoring a transformational style of leadership, are utilized by business and military professionals alike, even though I was debating on a situational type leader or contingency style leader. For example, in contingency leadership, is based a lot on the individual’s leadership style, in a sense more directed towards fitting his style with the specific situation what may arise, and I discredited that because he was highly trained in military tactics and he was very experienced leader. This lead me to think that due to his training I personally seen him as a person that needed to transform non-military personnel into highly skilled fighting machines that could perform above and beyond their own expectations. This was the deciding factor for me to conclude that he was a pragmatic (Kennedy, 1994), transformational type
Patton Jr., he is still revered to this day as a very effective brilliant, ingenious, strategic military leader; his leadership methods, favoring a transformational style of leadership, are utilized by business and military professionals alike, even though I was debating on a situational type leader or contingency style leader. For example, in contingency leadership, is based a lot on the individual’s leadership style, in a sense more directed towards fitting his style with the specific situation what may arise, and I discredited that because he was highly trained in military tactics and he was very experienced leader. This lead me to think that due to his training I personally seen him as a person that needed to transform non-military personnel into highly skilled fighting machines that could perform above and beyond their own expectations. This was the deciding factor for me to conclude that he was a pragmatic (Kennedy, 1994), transformational type