Social Movements are only as important as the person leading them

 

 

Social Movements are only as important as the person leading them. The person(s) leading a social movement must have charisma and be able to captivate an audience. Political scientists and historians are taught to analyze body language, especially during debates and speeches.
For this assignment, you will watch Dr Martin Luther King’s I Have a Dream (Links to an external site.) speech and a speech by Alicia Garza of the Black Lives Matter movement (Links to an external site.) and answer questions listed below. Pay special attention to the following aspects in the two speeches.
• Importance of body language while delivering the speech.
• Gestures, cadence and delivery style.
Answer the following
1. Provide a summary of the two speeches.
2. Compare Dr. King’s leadership, charisma, power and passion to capture his audience to Alicia Garza’s speech. What are the similarities, if any? What are the differences, if any?
3. How does the location of the speeches support their messaging? Dr. King’s speech was held in a church and at the Lincoln Memorial, whereas today we have social networking and more avenues to relay messages. Does messaging make a difference?
4. Describe how the audience in Dr. King’s speeches relate to the Alicia Garza’s audience. Do you see a similarity or differences in the speeches and in the audience?

Sample Solution

Social movements are purposeful, organized groups striving to work toward a common goal. These groups might be attempting to create change, to resist change, or to provide a political voice to those otherwise disenfranchised. Social movements are only as important as the person leading them. The person leading a social movement must have charisma and be able to captivate an audience. In this paper, we provide a summary of two speeches: Dr. Martin Luther King`s I Have a Dream speech and a speech by Alicia Garza of the Black Lives Matter movement and compare their leadership, power and passion to capture their audience.

y of Fiedler’s Contingency Theory of Leadership, Tuckman’s Model of Group Development, Belbin’s Team Theory, and Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory in practice, and how complexities like power and influence shape how they can be applied to best suit the situation a leader faces.

Leadership Contingency based theories of leadership suggest that there is no correct or best way to lead a group, or organisation, due to the significant number of constraints on a situation (Flinsch-Rodriguez, 2019). Fiedler, in his Contingency Theory of Leadership (Fiedler, 1967), suggests that the effectiveness of a group is dependent on the leadership styles of the leader and their favourability to the situation. Much of the theory is established around the least preferred co-worker scale (LPC). The LPC aims to quantify a potential leaders approach to a task on a scale of relationship motivated to task motivated, where the leader fits on the scale allows their most favourable situation to be deduced, and thus allows the identification of suitable leaders for tasks. The favourableness of the situation depends on three characteristics: leader-member relations, the support and trust the leader as from the group; task structure, the clarity of the task to the leader; and positional power, the authority the leader has to assess a groups performance and give rewards and punishments (Fiedler, 1967). If the leaders approach matches what is required from the situation then success is predicted for the group. Fiedler’s contingency model offers a very austere categorisation of leadership, clearly defining which situations will and will not result in success for a potential leader. At the senior management level of a hierarchal structure within an organisation the theory can be applied freely, firstly due to the ease at which persons can be replaced if their LPC score does not match that required of the situation (Pettinger, 2007). Secondly, and most importantly, is to ensure that the senior management are best equipped to lead the organisation successfully. However, further down the hierarchy Fielder’s contingency theory begins to hold much less relevance, it becomes impractical from a organisational perspective due to the number of people at this level of leadership. The logistics of matching the leader with their least preferred co-worker is impos

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.