Analysis of an Issue

Welcome to Dilip Oak's Academy's Discussion Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Click here to register!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Analysis of an Issue
Topic Started: Feb 26 2008, 02:56 PM (218 Views)
sudipshah	Feb 26 2008, 02:56 PM Post #1
Novice Posts: 3 Group: Members Member #472 Joined: November 17, 2006	A first attempt to write an analysis of an issue. Please comment: "A leader who is respected is more powerful than one who is feared." Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with this opinion. Support your position with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations,or reading. Complete your essay in 30 minutes. Once, to maintain the informal working atmosphere in office, an employee's superior reprimanded him for addressing him as 'Sir'. The employee replied, "I call you 'Sir' not because I fear you but because I respect you." A leader of men, greatly respected among his flock, will be more influential and successful than one who has become a leader out of sheer fear in his subordinates' minds. The respected leader will command more devotion, inspire higher amounts of motivation and ultimately be more powerful than a feared one. A leader who is respected by his subordinates may be respected for his ability to take decisions, for his vast amount of knowledge and experience in a given field or simply for the kind of person that he is. This respect will always lead to respect for the decisions that he makes, be it decisions for allocation of work in a small team, or those taken to guide a nation towards new frontiers. On the other hand, the same decisions taken by a feared leader, even though effective, will not evoke the same kind of respect. This, in turn, will lead to those decisions not being whole-heartedly accepted by his subordinates. They might follow those decisions out of fear, but they won't be happy doing it. This brings into light another interesting factor that affects the psyche of a workforce - motivation. A respect for the leader and his decisions will always result in higher levels of motivation in his immediate subordinates, which could percolate down the hierarchy to motivate the complete workforce as a whole. For example, in the corporate world, many times you see a certain team willingly putting in long nights and extra weekends. More often than not, it is the leader of the team who commands great respect from them that makes them willingly work for him. They believe that if he is asking them to work the extra hours, it is only after thoughtful consideration and the realization that this might be the last resort. On the other hand, the leader with the iron grip will have more number of his team members suddenly falling sick when the time to put in extra hours comes up. As a result, the respected person will get more work done than the feared one. Even though there have been instances of feared leaders being successfully at the helm over a long period of time, the probability of those leaders being toppled from their positions has always been high. Not only is this true in the corporate world, where employees escalate matters to their leader's superior, it is also the case with leaders of nations. For example, a dictator usually comes to power by sheer force and rules the country by instilling the fear of his power in the public, while a leader in a democracy generally comes to power because he has earned the people's respect through their votes. The dictator may rule the country for a long period of time, but he is always plagued with the fears of assassination, public revolts or armed coups against him. As a result he becomes even more ruthless, tightening his grip on his power while the democratic leader rules with a free hand without worrying about such factors. What better example than the emphatic support received by Winston Churchill, the prime minister of England, in his fight against the fearsome dictatorship of Adolf Hitler? We can conclude that though a leader may be marginally successful with the help of fear, it is only with respect that he becomes truly effective. It is with respect that he garners the love of his subordinates and their willingness to work for him, thus making him inherently a more powerful and a more worthy leader than the feared one.
	"Diagonally Parked in a Parallel Universe!"


Atul Londhe	Mar 7 2008, 05:59 PM Post #2
Moderator Posts: 229 Group: Moderators Member #3 Joined: April 20, 2006	Sudip, Congratulations on a very well-formulated reply. The language is fluent and largely error free. The organization and development is good and there is a clear focus. The first three paragraphs in particular flow very well. This essay would therefore earn a score of around 5. There is, however, some scope for improvement. First, on the vocabulary and expression front, be careful about using words like "always" (in the second paragraph for instance you say, "This respect will always lead to respect for the decisions that he makes") especially since this is a context where you are required to think analytically. Also your use of the word "marginally" in the last paragraph ("We can conclude that though a leader may be marginally successful with the help of fear") contradicts the implications of the reference to the "the fearsome dictatorship of Adolf Hitler" in the previous paragraph. More importantly, the large part of your essay seems confined to the corporate world - which is why the discussion of dictatorships in the last paragraph does not get enough room. It would have been good to either stick to the corporate world - and make it clear in the beginning of your essay that you were going to do so - or to introduce other contexts and examples for your discussion. Related to this is the fact that your essay doesn't really examine what is meant by 'power' - what does it mean in different contexts? However 'power' is at the heart of this topic. The scope of this topic would be "Which kind of leader wields more power or is more powerful?" Consider Dawood Ibrahim, Veerappan or Phulan Devi - were (or are) these leaders powerful because they were respected or because they were feared? How about leaders among the Naxalites, Al Quaeda (or other terrorist organizations), or in the army. How about police officers (think about the encounter specialists), principals and teachers at school (there might be a bit of both respect and fear in these cases)? How about the old-fashioned zameendar? An understanding of these complexities would have enriched your essay. Even if you did not deal with them directly, your essay should at least have indicated that such complexities exist. But, everything considered, congratulations on a very good job. You definitely have the potential to score 5.5 or even 6.
	"Success is not final. Failure is not fatal. What matters is how we carry on." - Winston Churchill


sudipshah	Jun 3 2008, 11:10 AM Post #3
Novice Posts: 3 Group: Members Member #472 Joined: November 17, 2006	Hello Sir, I thank you for your guidance and feedback. Though I couldn't attend all the future classes due to work commitments, I did follow up on your comments above and altered my essay writing techniques. You would be really happy to know that I recently gave my GMAT and I got a 6.0 on the AWA section! (I got 730 in the others). It would not have been possible without your insightful comments! A sincere thanks once more. Warm Regards, Sudip.
	"Diagonally Parked in a Parallel Universe!"


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · GMAT Analytical Writing · Next Topic »