Answer The Questions Below Using The Directions

Answer The Questions Below Using The Directions Articles To Complete

Read the following articles. Find them by entering the titles in a Google search.

â–ª David D. Kirkpatrick and Scott Shane, “Ex-FEMA Chief Tells of Frustration and Chaos,” New York Times, September 15, 2005

â–ª “A Military General’s Leadership Lessons” (Q&A with General Russel HonoreÌ, former commander of Joint Task Force—Katrina who oversaw the military relief efforts after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita), Gallup Management Journal, January 8, 2009

Discussion Questions

1. In the Kirkpatrick and Shane article, several leaders are mentioned including President George W. Bush, Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff, and FEMA director Michael D. Brown. Briefly evaluate each of these leaders on their overall effectiveness at managing execution and driving for results.
2. We learn from the Kirkpatrick and Shane article that FEMA director Brown was removed from his job one week after Katrina struck New Orleans. What portion of this outcome for Brown would you attribute to organizational factors versus his personal ability to manage execution and drive for results?
3. Compare your analysis of Brown with an analysis of General HonoreÌ’s overall effectiveness in terms of execution and results. Which of the two is more effective? Why? What part of the general’s performance do you attribute to organizational factors? How much of his performance do you think relates to his personal skills?
4. In the Q&A with General HonoreÌ, the interviewer describes the general as someone who knows quite a lot about bossing people and who stresses that above all, the last thing a leader should do is “boss” people! The general is quoted as saying, “A leader’s job is strategic: to set people on the right path and to do the planning and then to motivate the execution.” How do you interpret the general’s call to “motivate the execution” and his advice NOT to boss people? Are these two ideas consistent with the frameworks we have discussed in this competency?

Paper For Above instruction

The aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 exposed significant deficiencies in leadership across multiple agencies involved in disaster management, notably FEMA and the federal government. Analyzing these leaders' effectiveness in managing execution and results provides insights into the critical competencies essential for crisis management. This paper evaluates the leadership effectiveness of President George W. Bush, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, and FEMA Director Michael D. Brown as depicted in the Kirkpatrick and Shane article. It further compares Brown’s performance with that of General Russel HonoreÌ, a military leader credited with effective crisis response, to assess organizational versus personal influence on leadership outcomes. Lastly, the discussion explores General HonoreÌ’s leadership philosophy, emphasizing motivation over coercion, and analyzes its alignment with reputable leadership frameworks.

Evaluation of President George W. Bush, Michael Chertoff, and Michael D. Brown

President George W. Bush's leadership during the Katrina crisis received widespread criticism for perceived indecisiveness and delayed federal response. His effectiveness in managing execution and results appeared limited; his decision-making processes were often questioned, and the lack of clear communication hampered timely actions (Kirkpatrick & Shane, 2005). The presidential role in such crises involves setting strategic frameworks and mobilizing resources, roles that Bush struggled with during this period. The delayed federal aid, coupled with miscommunication, led to diminished public trust and a perception of ineffective leadership.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff’s role in coordinating disaster response was pivotal, yet his effectiveness was constrained by institutional fragmentation. While he attempted to streamline federal agencies’ response efforts, bureaucratic hurdles and lack of integrated command compromised timely execution (Kirkpatrick & Shane, 2005). Chertoff demonstrated strategic awareness but was limited by structural constraints within the federal agency system. His leadership was marked by efforts to coordinate efforts, but ultimately, the chaotic aftermath reflected systemic deficiencies.

Michael D. Brown, FEMA’s director during Katrina, was criticized extensively for his perceived lack of preparedness and ineffective management. His leadership failures are exemplified by inadequate crisis planning, delayed response times, and poor communication with state agencies (Kirkpatrick & Shane, 2005). Brown’s effectiveness was severely hampered by organizational failures within FEMA, including insufficient resources and unclear hierarchies, which constrained his ability to drive results. The ensuing criticism and his eventual removal highlight the importance of structural capacity and clear authority in crisis management (Kirkpatrick & Shane, 2005).

Attribution of Organizational vs. Personal Factors in Brown’s Removal

FEMA Director Michael D. Brown’s removal from his position can be attributed extensively to organizational factors. The institutional collapse within FEMA—characterized by insufficient preparedness, inadequate staffing, and failure to adapt the agency’s structure for catastrophic disasters—was a primary driver of ineffective response (Kirkpatrick & Shane, 2005). These organizational issues created an environment where Brown’s personal capabilities, such as leadership skills or decision-making ability, were less influential compared to systemic flaws. Brown’s limited experience in emergency management further compounded this situation, leading to an organizational culture unable to support effective crisis response.

Comparison of Brown and General HonoreÌ’s Effectiveness

Contrasting Michael D. Brown’s leadership with General Russel HonoreÌ’s shows stark differences in effectiveness regarding execution and results. HonoreÌ’s leadership during Katrina’s aftermath exemplified strategic competence—setting clear objectives, motivating personnel, and ensuring coordinated action. His emphasis on planning and motivation rather than coercion fostered a cohesive and responsive military relief effort (Gallup Management Journal, 2009). In terms of effectiveness, HonoreÌ’s leadership resulted in tangible improvements in response efficiency and operational outcomes, establishing him as more effective than Brown.

Organizational factors significantly influenced HonoreÌ’s success. His military background provided him with a structured command environment and leadership training that facilitated effective crisis management. Conversely, his personal skills—such as communication, resilience, and strategic thinking—also played crucial roles. These qualities enabled him to motivate personnel and adapt to dynamic conditions effectively. Therefore, HonoreÌ’s success was a product of both his personal competence and a supportive organizational context designed for disciplined response.

Leadership Philosophy: Motivating vs. Bossing

In the interview, General HonoreÌ advocates for leadership that “motivates the execution” rather than “bossing people,” emphasizing strategic guidance and inspiration. This approach aligns with transformational leadership principles, which posit that motivating and empowering individuals lead to higher engagement and better results (Bass & Riggio, 2006). HonoreÌ’s stance reflects the belief that authoritarian, command-and-control tactics may inhibit open communication and initiative, especially in complex crises.

The idea of motivating staff involves inspiring trust, fostering a shared vision, and aligning personal goals with organizational objectives. Contrarily, “bossing” implies imposing orders with little regard for team input or morale. This distinction is consistent with leadership frameworks like Kouzes and Posner’s (2017) model, which emphasizes inspiring a shared vision and enabling others as keys to effective leadership. HonoreÌ’s emphasis on motivation bolsters this perspective, suggesting that leaders should focus on strategic direction and empowerment rather than mere authority.

Conclusion

The analysis reveals that leadership effectiveness in crisis scenarios hinges on both organizational preparedness and personal competency. President Bush’s leadership deficit, Chertoff’s constrained coordination, and Brown’s organizational failures illustrate that structure and systemic capacity are critical. HonoreÌ’s success underscores the importance of motivational strategies and personal qualities in leadership. His philosophy—focused on inspiring rather than controlling—aligns well with contemporary leadership theories, underscoring that effective crisis management requires not only strategic planning but also the ability to motivate teams towards common goals.

References

• Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Kirkpatrick, D. D., & Shane, S. (2005). Ex-FEMA Chief Tells of Frustration and Chaos. New York Times.
• Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2017). The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations. John Wiley & Sons.
• Gallup Management Journal. (2009). A Military General’s Leadership Lessons.
• U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2005). After Action Report on Hurricane Katrina.
• Wheatley, M. J. (2006). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
• Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.). Pearson.
• Maxwell, J. C. (2012). The 5 levels of leadership: Proven steps to maximize your potential. Center Street.
• Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Weick, K. E. (2001). Making sense of the Organization. Blackwell Publishing.