The study of literature continues to take a diversified context in today’s society. In considering the trajectory upon which research on subjects such as philosophy or sociology continues to refer literary works for justification of several social instances, it is enough to acknowledge the place of literature in modern sociological research. Leadership studies, as an example of philosophical and sociological studies, embarks on the importance of integrating literary concepts as well as perspectives on the audiences’ understanding of literary presentations to present situations. The memorandum conceptualizes Shakespearean ideologies of leadership through an analysis of King Henry V play; the plot offers a literary perspective on useful leadership qualities in the time of a crisis presented by King Henry V as presented by Shakespeare in his play.
Specific Questions Presented/Main Points
The conceptual questions that inform that analytic discussions center on the arguments as to whether King Henry was an active leader of the English; additionally, how efficient was the leadership approach/model applied by King Henry V as deliberated upon by the leadership insights of Goleman.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Analysis of Question 1: King Henry’s Leadership Style
Shakespeare in the plot of “King Henry V” play introduces his audience to the life of a young and naïve King keen on attaining admiration of his subjects at a time when his neighboring kingdoms were pursuing a conquest on its territories. King Henry acclaimed in many military circles as a visionary military commander who, in a time of seeming defeat, managed to hold his disadvantaged troops and managed a victory over a vicious French army. Shakespeare’s plot of the play outlines the disadvantaged King Henry in the face of mighty French forces. However, through his leadership qualities, the English emerged victoriously. The victory against France remains credited to King Henry’s adequate military vision and leadership in his application of an authoritative leadership model that proved useful in this scenario. King Henry was capable of rallying his troops towards an idea of togetherness. As a monarch, he actively participated in strategizing the battle, taking part in it, and mobilizing his forces from within the battle quotas.
Authoritative leadership, according to Goleman (2000), anchors on two principles that include strategy and commitment to the course. King Henry effectively employs the principles in curving a victory for the dilapidated English troops. As a strategic leader, he uses many military tactics to outmaneuver the French forces. In ensuring commitment among his soldiers, Henry employed effective speech and communication in encouraging togetherness among his troops. The famous “band of brothers” statement remains highly regarded in military circles today.
Analysis of Question 2: How King Henry Effectively Communicated
Thriving civilizations and societies built on the visions and ideas of leaders who could convince people to believe in their thought. The cornerstone of leadership lies in excellent communication skills. Good communicators are attentive; they listen before they can communicate empathy among their audiences. Goleman (2017), describes great leaders as those who express a higher level of emotional intelligence. Emotionally intelligent leaders have the ability to maximize not only their potential but that of their followers. Great leaders exhibit traits of self-awareness, self-regulation, social skills, motivational, and empathy. King Henry, as portrayed in the works of Shakespeare out, rightly showed a higher emotional intelligence that enabled him to effectively communicate and motivate his followers. As the King, Henry kept close to his troops and drove them through speeches, he knew their fears and challenged them to be part of his ideas, while objectively steering their strategy against France from the battlefield.
Conclusion
Authoritative leadership might have its flaws, but it encompasses some of the greatest success stories in times of crisis. King Henry, despite his shortcomings as a young leader, was able to unite his English compatriots during a time when England faced a resurgent and more powerful France. It was through his uncompromising and authoritative approach that he managed to combine the critical institutions of England, including the Church, the Parliament, and the elite, to rally against a course that would later restore the pride of England in Europe for centuries.
References
Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard business review , 78(2), 4-17.
Goleman, D. (2017). What makes a leader? Harvard business review , 76(6), 93-102.
