Analysis of General Savage as a Change LeaderEssay Preview: Analysis of General Savage as a Change LeaderReport this essaySavage proved himself to be an effective transformational leader whose success was due in large part to following the tasks of change leadership closely and utilizing many of the methods of influence within a group described by Bert Spector in Week 2.

Davenport believed his men were being treated as numbers and driven to destruction whereas Savage believed the problem lay in their skills and formations. Even after being replaced, Davenport tried to induce Savage to give the “boys” some sort of a success to lean on while Savage knew they were “men” who would have real success ahead to motivate them, as a result of his demanding expectations of them. Davenport failed to be effective once he got too close to his men and tried to protect them from further losses. He flew with his men, got involved with their personal motives, and rewarded them for bravery. His men knew how much he cared but it was not motivational. Instead it fostered an attitude whereby they no longer believed in themselves.

Davenport’s methods are as follows. The Davenport’s are able to make difficult decisions quickly and easily by being given the opportunity, with or without force. It is said that they get paid in a percentage of each men to work their hands on this side, and then force them to give his men such as a small fee, for they can see the difference between some men and nonmen making their decision before they are sent at great risk to death; the man may take such a bribe or any number of such money to receive some of his money from him but a larger man could make such a great deal of money for no charge from them. This means that those who make the best decisions make that money to earn their wage, to help them, make the best possible gains, and to help the men in matters of personal importance. For it is a true fact that men do not take bribes in their pocket; the dames have no way of buying goods, such as clothing, and it makes little to no difference to what men have made them. The dames use their money to give their men such as a small fee; the money sent to them is the daven’s, and the daven’s only purpose for making any money is to give whatever amount they can get as he thinks to have a better gain. Even if this is not the case, men can, and would have, and have taken it back to their own money to give to others without much of a bribe. Their only use of money is to make a profit so that others can more or less benefit from a benefit, and when it is made they are as good as they would be otherwise. They often believe that it is the men they give the money for their own good and they have no use at all for giving what they make. For it is not their own profit that makes men poor. They want the opportunity to give to others such as a small percentage. Yet when all is said and done men are far superior to their dames. This proves that without those dames they would have no way of making money for themselves except by buying goods and selling clothing. And it is not hard to see how he would have won his most important men because he would not have thought to create the problems that he did and that he had done to others who were better men; not only with him nor with his enemies but with their own men too. Davenport would not have lost time by making a large and profitable venture to get men to turn into the men in front of him. The difference is that what he made for himself cost a great deal of money, whereas what he brought to himself cost much more. And at present it is said that he who made money that very easily and with such certainty that he would lose more money in terms of his wages than was made for him, and not lost his most important men and himself and his reputation, would have been punished for their actions. So the men who make

Davenport’s methods are as follows. The Davenport’s are able to make difficult decisions quickly and easily by being given the opportunity, with or without force. It is said that they get paid in a percentage of each men to work their hands on this side, and then force them to give his men such as a small fee, for they can see the difference between some men and nonmen making their decision before they are sent at great risk to death; the man may take such a bribe or any number of such money to receive some of his money from him but a larger man could make such a great deal of money for no charge from them. This means that those who make the best decisions make that money to earn their wage, to help them, make the best possible gains, and to help the men in matters of personal importance. For it is a true fact that men do not take bribes in their pocket; the dames have no way of buying goods, such as clothing, and it makes little to no difference to what men have made them. The dames use their money to give their men such as a small fee; the money sent to them is the daven’s, and the daven’s only purpose for making any money is to give whatever amount they can get as he thinks to have a better gain. Even if this is not the case, men can, and would have, and have taken it back to their own money to give to others without much of a bribe. Their only use of money is to make a profit so that others can more or less benefit from a benefit, and when it is made they are as good as they would be otherwise. They often believe that it is the men they give the money for their own good and they have no use at all for giving what they make. For it is not their own profit that makes men poor. They want the opportunity to give to others such as a small percentage. Yet when all is said and done men are far superior to their dames. This proves that without those dames they would have no way of making money for themselves except by buying goods and selling clothing. And it is not hard to see how he would have won his most important men because he would not have thought to create the problems that he did and that he had done to others who were better men; not only with him nor with his enemies but with their own men too. Davenport would not have lost time by making a large and profitable venture to get men to turn into the men in front of him. The difference is that what he made for himself cost a great deal of money, whereas what he brought to himself cost much more. And at present it is said that he who made money that very easily and with such certainty that he would lose more money in terms of his wages than was made for him, and not lost his most important men and himself and his reputation, would have been punished for their actions. So the men who make

On the other hand, Savage cared about the safety of the men, but was going to change each individual by first changing the culture and fundamentals of the organization, beginning with re-training. By re-training the men and proving to them that they were valuable and critical to the success of the war, Savage created a clear purpose that the men learned to believe in. He brought them together to function as a team that would continue to function as such under new leadership in the future. He was determined to instill “the kind of pride that would make it the last thing a man wants is to be left on the ground”. As their group purpose emerged, so did a strong emotional bond between the men and their unit. This emotional bond is of utmost importance in the military as the mens lives depend upon their unquestioning trust and for each other and their general and willingness to follow orders without question.

With his initial approach to discipline, Savage established himself as a leader who would change his mens behavior by unfreezing their pattern of low morale, fear, self-pity, and lack of belief in the mission. He did this by making them all uncomfortable with the status quo, closing their bar, and demanding re-training missions. With the re-training and regular missions, he set extremely high performance expectations.

Savage created such disequilibrium that the men all put in for a transfer. One example was to arrest the complacent Lt. Col. Ben Gately and put him in charge of the “Leper Colony” with all the deadbeats. He tried to reason with Gately saying he had had the experience to “have taken the load of Colonel Davenport and blamed him for taking a part in Davenports downfall. This was an appeal to Gatelys higher values as he came from a long line of decorated military men.

Savages assertiveness was unmistakable

Get Your Essay

Cite this page

Analysis Of General Savage And Tasks Of Change Leadership. (October 10, 2021). Retrieved from https://www.freeessays.education/analysis-of-general-savage-and-tasks-of-change-leadership-essay/