As sophocles observes in antigone Essay

4. Awareness (Greenleaf, 2002) Able servant-leaders are usu hardlyy sharply kindle and reasonably disturbed from integrated holistic perspectives, yet with inner serenity (Greenleaf, 2002). Habit 1 (of 7 or of 8), Being Pro get alon devote or the construct of Inside-Out, that any significant type of change in the would-be-leader must(prenominal) first come from within himself (Covey, 1900). 5. Persuasion (Greenleaf, 2002) Servant-leaders rely primarily on persuasion and on convincing even by way of group- expression consensus, rather than through coercion or force based on the traditional authoritarian model (Greenleaf, 2002). charm Gardner insists that Leadership is the process of persuasion or example by which an individual (or leadership team) induces a group to pursue objectives held by the leader or divided up by the leader and his or her followers (Gardner, 1990). Yukl emphatic wholey stressed, in that influence is the essence of leadership (Yukl, 2001). 6. Conceptualization (Greenleaf, 2002) Servant-leaders perform a delicate balance amidst thinking out a problem and facing beyond day-to-day-focused-realities approach (Greenleaf, 2002).Habit 2 (of 7 or of 8), Beginning with the End in Mind, that the would-be-leader develops his own principled-center mission statement in life sentence with long-term goals (Covey, 1900). 7. Foresight (Greenleaf, 2002) Intuitive servant-leaders understand the lessons from the past, the realities of the present, and the likely consequence of a decision for the future (Greenleaf, 2002). Characteristic 1, They are Continually Learning, that the would-be-leaders perception is more than enough honed by his self-initiated desire to know it all (Covey, 1992) and kindred to Characteristic 6, They See Life As An bet on (Covey, 1992).Alfred North Whitehead strongly suggested, in that Every leader, to be effective, must simultaneously adhere to the symbols of change and revision and the symbols of tradition and stability (Warr en Bennis, 1995). 8. Stewardship (Greenleaf, 2002) Servant-leaders merely act as stewards or hold men and resources in trust for the good of all or for society, emphasizing openness and persuasion (Greenleaf, 2002), likewise very similar to Stewardship Delegation (Covey, 1900).Habit 3 (of 7 or of 8), Put First Things First, that the would-be-leaders effectiveness lies in making sure he balances his Production (P) with his building Production Capacity PC (Covey, 1900). Also, hence, according to Coveys classification, Stewardship is under Habit 3 (Covey, 1900). 9. Commitment to the Growth of People (Greenleaf, 2002) Servant-leaders are seriously amenable and deeply committed to the growth and nurturing of each individual worker within the institution (Greenleaf, 2002).Characteristic 2, They Are Service-Oriented, that the would-be-leader/ servant-leader regards his work as a vocation or a way of life and not as a career (Covey, 1992). Characteristic 4, They Believe In Other People, th at the would-be-leader is very hopeful for the beneficial potency capacity of everyone around him (Covey, 1992) though not quite far is Habit 8, It is about Finding Your Voice and Helping Others to Find Theirs (Covey, 2006). 10. Building Community (Greenleaf, 2002)Servant-leaders selflessly give themselves for building true communities among themselves who work within given institutions (Greenleaf, 2002). Characteristic 3, They Radiate Positive Energy, that the would-be-leader despite the drudgery of strengthening his institution, you could still find him cheerful, pleasant, joyous his attitude optimistic, positive, upbeat and his spirit enthusiastic, hopeful, believing. Therefore, with the above, Covey concluded, in that A (good) habit can be defined as the intersection of knowledge, skill and desire (Covey, 1900).Thus, with all of the above information, Sergeant Kidds dictum of soldiers learning to be good leaders from good leaders (Army, 1999) could now apply even to civilian employees or even ordinary civilians as more and more people are convinced through more and more pieces of literature pointing towards that thinning gray subject between military and civilian leaderships. Political leadership is what John W. Gardner in his On Leadership, espoused in that Men and women of the greatest integrity, character, and courage should turn to public life as a natural duty and a natural outlet for their talents (Gardner, 1990).While under championship leadership falls all the works of Covey, Bennis, Goldsmith, and Yukl however, noted are those other works by Frances Hesselbein and Retired US Army General Eric Shinsekis BE*KNOW*DO, Leadership the Army Way (Frances Hesselbein, 2004) and Jason Santamaria, Vincent Martino, and Eric Clemons The Marine army corps Way Using Maneuver Warfare to Lead a Winning Organization (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003) because they believe that the business world could benefit from their shared experiences of the military.While the ci vilian sector regularly and easily pirates top executives from one private company to another or among themselves, the military sector cannot do that but because the military must so promote within its own ranks is why military leadership development is that paramount according to Hesselbein and Shinseki (Frances Hesselbein, 2004). Santamaria, Martino, and Climons first laid down the premise that although business and war are entirely worlds apart, the same principles apply to them because they both thrive in very competitive environments.The authors gave 23 true-to-life civilian examples followed by explanations forwards proceeding to compare and contrast 23 parallel true-to-life military examples (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003). Like the non-original Servant-Leader Greenleaf with his 6th century BCE Tao Te Ching, the non-original Maneuver Warfare Santamaria has his more than 2,500 age ago genius and timelessness of Sun Tzus work The Art of War, especially in targeting critical vulne rabilities, surprise, focus, tempo (speed), and combined arms.The authors ask if they are very natural or universal laws of warfare however, because the concepts are intuitive to the greatest strategists, generals, and CEOs, the authors have endeavored to transform such intuition into a systematic problem-solving approach that the remainder of us can clearly grasp and then apply (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003).These authors interchangeably explained the 46 examples in detail the workings of the Marine Corps Way by compressing Maneuver Warfare through these not only 7, but 10 Guiding Principles which when implemented singly and shortly is very powerful, but all the more deadly when applied in subsets or as an integrated whole (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003). When these spatial relationers are examined closely, potential businesses should achieve breakthrough results (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003).1. Targeting Critical Vulnerabilities (Jason A.Santamaria, 2003) To attack and to fleetly take a dvantage of the competitors weaknesses after thoroughly studying both the allied leaders group and the competitors situation (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003). 2. Boldness (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003) When occasion arises to grab that opportunity to carry out calculated risks which can secure breakthrough results (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003). 3. Surprise (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003) Using surreptitiousness, vagueness, and sham to confuse the competitors.And for them to outrightly turn out their knowledge of the allied leaders group condition thereby prejudicing their capability to position well their assets against the allied leaders group (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003). 4. centralise (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003) Clustering unitedly the allied leaders group materiel at decisive places and times to take advantage of important favorable conditions to represent the allied leaders group needs and objectives (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003). 5. Decentralized Decision Making (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003) Designating responsible people for them to make their own judicious decisions nearest the activeness centers after they have timely and thoroughly assessed firsthand local information about the situation within the mission target area (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003). 6. Tempo (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003) Recognizing potential breaks, deciding, and executing plans more swiftly than opponents for the allied leaders group to grab the upper hand and relegate the enemy to always be on the defensive and always to be confused by the allied leaders group concerted and coordinated actions against the enemy (Jason A.Santamaria, 2003).7. Combined Arms (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003) quantify the allied leaders group attack in such a way that his groups people, vehicles, equipment with pre-planned sequencing become orchestrated as only one entity whereas, if the allied leaders group use them singly, the effect will not be as dramatic (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003). 8. Integration of Principles (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003) When measured individually, these concepts give the best results when implemented in subsets or all are treated collectively as only one whole (Jason A.Santamaria, 2003).9. reconnaissance mission Pull (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003) Reconnaissance crook is an illustration of implementing the concepts in subsets the unintended reaction is an actual time happening to a golden chance to weaken or defeat the enemy, whereby when the fortuity is afforded to the allied leader to surprise the enemy, that leader then familiarizes the greater organization towards the situation, with him assuming that leadership function in setting up and applying the attack.Reconnaissance pull covers four of maneuver warfares ten concepts decentralized decision-making, targeting critical vulnerabilities, tempo, and focus (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003). 10. Full Integration (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003) Joining simultaneously all ten concepts together as one combined entity allows the person to eff ect the greatest outcome with much reduced cost of materiel (Jason A. Santamaria, 2003).