By NOON on Wed, April 18 post a 250 word blog entry on this site summarizing why you selected your clip and how it represents bad leadership. Be as specific as possible.
Thursday, April 12, 2018
Bad Leadership and the Movies Spring 2018
Per the syllabus, your assignment for this week is Bad Leadership and the Movies! The specifics of the assignment are as follows:
By NOON on Wed, April 18 post a 250 word blog entry on this site summarizing why you selected your clip and how it represents bad leadership. Be as specific as possible.
By NOON on Wed, April 18 post a 250 word blog entry on this site summarizing why you selected your clip and how it represents bad leadership. Be as specific as possible.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
Michael Spiro,
ReplyDeleteThe clip I have selected is from Toy Story 3. In this movie, Lots-o’-Huggin’ Bear is supposed to be the leader of the toys. However, he is not who he initially seems to be. Lots-o’-Huggin’ Bear makes the new toys think that he is extremely friendly and welcoming. Unfortuntately, this is not the case and he is actually a controlling, manipulating bear. Not only is he controlling and unreasonable towards Andy’s toys, but he is also manipulating and controlling over the toys who are already at the nursery home. Lots-o’-Huggin’ is in a leadership role and completely abuses his power. He does not allow his followers to have much of a voice, and he makes the new toys prisoners without much reason for doing so. Lots-o’-Huggin’ essentially acts as a dictator. As a result, I believe that Lots-o’-Huggin’ Bear is a great example of a bad leader. In addition, Lots-o’-Huggin’ Bear’s deceptive behavior make him not only a bad leader but also a bad person. Lots-o’-Huggin’ Bear has many opportunities throughout the film to improve upon his actions and act as a good leader. However, he enjoys his role of authority so much that he does not even consider how his actions impact others. The clip I selected shows Lots-o’-Huggin’ taking advantage of Buzz Lightyear and basically making him his slave. This is a great example of Bear’s bad leadership. (Go to 8:00 and 12:57)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCqtQLmJTl0
Sam Lee
ReplyDeleteI chose a clip from Inside Out, in which the emotions of Joy, Sadness, Fear, Anger, and Disgust are personified. In this clip, it is the first day at a new school for Riley and Joy, as the leader, is super enthusiastic about it. In her enthusiasm, she begins to delegate tasks for her followers, in order to insure that everything is prepared for Riley's big day. According to Joy, Sadness seems to be directly opposed to what Joy wants and what is best for Riley. Thus, using her authority as leader, she confines Sadness to a physical circle so that Sadness won't mess anything up. In doing so, she represents bad leadership as she shuts out ideas that threaten to oppose her. She sets herself and her group up to fail, because she is not willing to give voice to such ideas. Much like the groupthink that allowed the Bay of Pigs fiasco, Joy and the rest of the emotions are fostering an environment in which no opposition is tolerated. They might think that they are working well as a team and ultimately will achieve their goal of giving Riley the best experience, but *spoiler* they are wrong. By the end of the movie, they realize that the best and most memorable experiences happen under a mix of emotions, and do not necessarily have to be monolithic. If Joy had allowed Sadness to contribute to the discussion of how to best help Riley, they might not have had to go on their adventures, although then there would be no need for a movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8kaShyjS_s
DeleteAshley Frey
ReplyDeleteThe clip that I chose to represent Bad Leadership in the movies is from an episode of "The Office" called Diversity Day. In the episode, Michael imitates a controversial Chris Rock routine in which he forces the staff to partake in a racial diversity seminar, which is supposed to teach them about tolerance and diversity. Michael disapproved of the teacher's seminar and decided to teach it for himself. He assigned each staff member an index card with a different race on it and asked them to guess which race they were assigned.
Michael displayed horrible leadership in many aspects of this episode. First, he thought that he was more qualified than the professional and decided to teach the course himself. Leaders should allow others to take control, especially if they are not an expert in the specific field. A good leader would have allowed the consultant full control over the exercise because a good leader puts the goals of the team over their own personal feelings.
Michael also displayed poor leadership in purposefully trying to aggravate his staff until they were angry and offended. His bad leadership is evident even without the fact that his exercise was divisive and racist, and made many people uncomfortable. He was unable to see how his activity affected his followers and how it was counterproductive to the group's goal. A good leader is able to understand their followers. They are intuitive and respectful, and they implement positive initiatives that foster inclusivity and community.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLp8pjqwlsc
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAmelia Schmitz
ReplyDeleteIn this clip of the Devil Wears Prada, we see an entire office scrambling when they find out their boss is on her way. Right off the bat this shows how Miranda is a is a bad leader. All of her employees fear her. By leading through fear, she is ensuring that no one in her office will ever be comfortable or happy to be there. The environment is not supportive, and, as the employees’ frantic preparations show, very stressful. Leading with feat rather than respect or support makes it much for difficult for followers to grow or contribute. If a follower is always scared that the slightest mistake or unwanted contribution will get them fired, they will never learn how to improve themselves or be more than a follower. There is also the possibility that they will pick up on their leader’s negative traits and have them when they lead as well.
That’s one of the reasons I thought this clip was such a good example. You can see how Miranda’s bed leadership traits have rubbed off onto her assistant specifically. Her assistant is angry, rather than forgiving, at Miranda’s facialist for cancelling the appointment even though it was for a medical reason. Later, as soon as Miranda walks into the office she immediately starts complaining and belittling her assistant for things she could not control. Even though Miranda’s assistant did her job well, when something went wrong Miranda was quick to blame her. Overall, Miranda is obviously a very aggressive, demanding boss who is extremely difficult to please. Working under her is obviously very stressful. She wants everything to be perfect and is quick to criticize flaws rather than help people learn from them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PjZAeiU7uM
Beth Grundy
ReplyDeleteThe clip that I chose for bad leadership in the movies is one of the introductory scenes of the movie The Proposal. In this scene, you can see the dynamics of the workplace present at this publishing office. The workers are fearful of their boss and are intimidated by her so much that they have a system in place to warn each other of her arrival. She then taunts her assistant several times, eventually calling him pathetic for getting the same coffee order as her in case he spills it. Throughout the clip it is clear to see why the office fears her so much. Speaking up has consequences and you will be reprimanded if you step out of line. As a consequence she has created a terrible relationship in that her followers fear her rather than respect her, and certainly do not like her. For instance, the people in the office call her a witch when they warn each other of her presence. This nickname shows the negative relationship between the boss and those working for her. As a result of this relationship, the boss becomes an ineffective leader. It is hard to imagine that the company is maximizing their potential with their lack of mutual respect. One can assume that this relationship is damaging the quality of output at the company, especially because the boss does not recognize the hard work of her employees. The boss proves to be intemperate, as she refuses to control her mood outbursts, and therefore is a bad leader.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9PS_W9uHCo
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteKatie Bry
The episode I have chosen to represent bad leadership is the episode “The Surplus” from The Office. The premise of the episode is that the accountant Oscar discovers a surplus in the annual budget and tells the manager of the office, Michael that he must spend the surplus in the next week to ensure they get the same amount of money next year. He tells the employees and they are torn between wanting to buy a new copier and new chairs, but ultimately Michael must make the decision. He struggles with making the decision because he doesn’t want to disappoint anyone. In the specific clip I chose Michael calls his boss and asks him to make the decision for him. On this call, David Wallace informs Michael that he can take a personal bonus if he reports the surplus. In a private interview, Michael describes how he doesn’t want to disappoint anyone but would rather take the bonus to shop at Burlington Coat Factory. Michael displays his poor leadership style by first, not being able to make a hard decision. But more importantly although he says he doesn’t want to disappoint anyone the truth is that he just wants everyone to like him. When it comes down to their actual needs and feelings he doesn’t care and would put his own self interest ahead of the office's. As he puts on this facade to the office he thinks that it works and that people like him. The truth is, they can see through his insecurities and it makes them both not like him and not respect him.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4tw2dd
Sophia DeLaney
ReplyDeleteWhen I think of Bad Leadership I immediately think of Wolf of Wall Street. The biggest problem with the leadership in this movie is the fact that it was real. Jordan Belfort actually did these things. Not only did he encourage his colleagues to engage in illegal trading, but he also allowed horrible things to take place in his office. Some of these things included, but were unfortunately not limited to: drug use, alcohol use, prostitution, harassment, and the glorification of horrible morals (such as the idea “there is no nobility in poverty”). In the specific scene I chose, “Jordan Belfort” (Leonardo DiCaprio) is giving a “motivational speech.” In this speech he does successful rally his employees up as a good leader would, but he does so with horribly corrupt values. He exclaims that clients will either “buy or die,” “there is no nobility in poverty,” and that “if anyone here thinks [he’s] superficial or materialistic, [they] can go get a job at f****** McDonalds because that’s where [they] belong.” In addition to these exclamations, he also suggests that illegal activity is a better option than being poor, but still having dignity -- “I want you to deal with your problems by becoming rich.” Ultimately, figuring out how Leonardo DiCaprio’s character is an incredibly bad leader is self explanatory. However, what is really concerning is the way in which many of his followers were inspired by him and were driven to be like him. This clip not only shows how a bad leader is bad, but also how bad followership has horribly negative effects.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQleT6BtCbE
Ariel Troy
ReplyDeleteI chose a scene from the Help where Skeeter’s mother, Charlotte, fires their nanny/housekeeper, Constantine. The Daughters of America had just appointed Charlotte as State Regent and the president and members were all at her house for the ceremony. During the middle of lunch, Constantine’s daughter, Rachael, knocks on the door. Charlotte does not let her in and tells her to go around the back and wait in the kitchen. Rachael does not listen and walks in to say hi to her mother who she has not seen for awhile. The president of the Daughters of America got angry and pressured Charlotte to say something. Charlotte yells at Rachael to leave her house and tells Constantine to leave as well.
Charlotte shows bad leadership in this scene in that she treats Constantine and her daughter horribly because she feels pressured by a leader she feels she must obey. Charlotte changes her behavior in front of the ladies in the Daughters of America and does not act like herself. While Charlotte was being a good follower according to the president, she was being a bad and immoral leader. She did not stand up to the bad behavior the president was encouraging and instead followed in her ways of treating others poorly. Charlotte claims she has no choice even though she did have the choice to act in the right way, not yell at Rachael, and not fire Constantine who we know she loves. Charlotte did not want to fire Constantine but she felt she had to to fit in with this new group of women.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCQIa3inJ-A
Adam Glotzer
ReplyDeleteThe clip I chose for the Bad Leadership and the Movies assignment is not from a movie, but from a tv show called “The Office.” When we were assigned the task of finding a clip that demonstrates bad leadership, I immediately thought of the worst boss in television history, Michael Scott. Throughout the series, it becomes clear that Michael is unfit for the position of regional manager. In this clip, Michael attempts to hold an inspirational ageism seminar for his older employees. However, Michael portrays horrible leadership, blackmailing one of his coworkers, and then ending his seminar short once he got bored. Michael’s supervisor was present for this meeting, and pulled Michael outside to inform him that there is more important work to be done. Upon hearing this, Michael threatens to call the CEO of the company to tell him that his coworker was going to throw the founder of the company on his “ancient butt.” After returning to the meeting, Michael quickly becomes irritated at the story-telling skills of the old man, getting visibly angry after about 25 seconds. He belittles the older man through slight comments and sarcastic compliments and then proceeds to push the elderly man out of the room, closing the door on him mid-sentence. This scene perfectly represent Michael Scott, who defines a bad leader. A good leader does not blackmail coworkers, tell one of his followers to “shut up,” and especially be rude to the guest that they invited to the office.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j328SwxxQzk
Trevor Mckee
ReplyDeleteThe clip I have chosen to demonstrate bad leadership is from the movie Sing. The leader in this situation is Buster Moon when he is confronted by the bears demanding money. The reason I believe Buster is a poor leader in this situation and throughout the entire movie is because he lied to his performers, claiming to have thousands of dollars to give away as the grand prize. Instead, he put together a few scraggly dollars and hoped to earn the money from his new show.
We have talked in class about ethical leadership, and I think Buster violates one core principle: honesty. I believe it is essential for leaders to be upfront with their constituents about the realities of their organization. As we saw with the Enron case, thousands of people were left without jobs, and billions of dollars were lost. It is unfair to lead your followers to their doom by relying on false hope. The safety and well-being of others should not rely on chance, so it is imperative for leaders to be honest.
When the performers realize Buster has lied to them, they confront him immediately. Instead of acknowledging his faults, Buster mumbles, “wait a second. I can explain!” Even when it becomes apparent that there is no escape route for Buster, he does everything he can to avoid responsibility for his actions. Eventually, the performers forgive Buster and help him rebuild the stage so they can still perform. In real life, leaders who lie are not often given a second chance to lead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUT0WQ9cTrg
(from 00:45 to 02:05)
In The Greatest Showman, PT Barnum is a good leader most of the time because he helps his performers to find a family and has the passion and motivation that a leader needs. Unfortunately, he begins to let his success get to his head and decides to invest his time in a new performer Jenny Lind. As he throws all of his time and devotion into creating a name for her, he neglects his original performers. He becomes someone that he is not, trying to appeal to the rich and fancy crowd, rather than doing his own thing no matter what anyone thinks. He also neglects his family and the advisement of others during this time. He makes a quick decision to change without consulting his wife or asking her to work together with him on this huge project.
ReplyDeleteHad he stayed better in touch with his family and remembered his original commitments this endeavor could have been very successful. His bad leadership seems to come to a head when he is at the reception after Jenny’s show and he refuses to let his other performers come in, presumably because he is embarrassed of them. This shows bad leadership because he is going back on what he originally had promised them, a place to belong and not be left out. Also, ostracizing people or groups of people is a sure sign of a bad leader. Thankfully, but the end of the movie, he sees his wrong and comes back to his senses, making him into a good, successful leader once again.
I was unable to find the clip of the actual conversation between PT Barnum and Lettie Lutz where he tells her that she can’t come into the reception. Im guessing this is because the movie is new and very few clips of it are available online. I have attached the link to the song that she sings in response to beings shut down. Lettie actually shows good leadership in this moment, reminding the group that they are just fine the way they are and that they should embrace their own identities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRyMoHJu-i8
Kyra Hamerling-Potts
ReplyDeleteI chose a scene from Inception to represent bad leadership where Saito, played by Ken Watanabe, is shot. Cobb’s (Leonardo DiCaprio) character serves as the leader in this scene, being the one who leads his team into deep levels of someone’s unconscious in order to plant an idea in that person’s head. Not only does Cobb demonstrate questionable leadership just by agreeing to this mission in the first place - violating someone else’s subconscious in order to undo his past wrongs - but he more specifically fails as a leader when Saito is delivered to him wounded and dying. Although normally dying in a dream, or a layer of subconscious, would “wake” the person up, in this case, Saito dying would put him in limbo, an even deeper layer of subconsciousness that would be difficult to escape from. Cobb is demonstrating bad leadership by acting and speaking rashly and aggressively when his mission does not go according to plan. Instead of staying as level headed as possible, Cobb blames his fellow teammates for getting them into a seemingly unsolvable situation. Good leaders do not resort to anger when there is a setback, rather, they think rationally and with an attitude that elicits a productive response from their teammates/followers. Cobb does not seem to accept any responsibility for the outcome. Even when others around him attempt to reason with him, he remains in a heated state. Leaders should be able to better reflect on the roles and responsibilities of themselves and their followers, as well as be able to handle constructive criticism from their followers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXhaspOgDDY&t=6s
Laura Glanz
ReplyDeleteI selected the clip from “A Few Good Men” in which Colonel Jessep is found guilty during his testimony for ordering a Code Red that led to Private Santiago’s murder. This scene represents bad leadership as Colonel Jessep, a military leader who possesses an immense about of responsibility, exhibits corruption in his practice. He breaks the very rules that he teaches others to follow. Given the high-stakes of a colonel’s performance, his followers must assume that his actions are replicable and just. After all, an effective leader leads by example. Therefore, the hypocrisy, lack of transparency, deceit and distrust all represent bad leadership. By performing unethical actions that could potentially influence others to do the same, it is possible that one leader can set off a chain reaction of corruption.
Another portrayal of bad leadership by Colonel Jessep is that throughout the court case, he continues to lie about his actions. While it is not easy to admit guiltiness of such a large crime, it is not an effective tool, as a leader, to lie. Given his falsehood in this specific story, the audience wonders whether he has lied in the past. If so, how many times? To what extreme? How could his series of lies have potentially disrupted the duties of his men?
All in all, this clip from “A Few Good Men” exhibits how although people may have powerful positions perhaps obtained through diligence or dedication, they may not necessarily express good leadership. Power often invites corruption.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_frM44bBMfA
The clip I chose is from Kung Fu Panda and the relevant part is at the very end. On Po’s first night after being named the Dragon Warrior, Tigress coldly tells him that he needs to leave. This negative attitude persists throughout much of the movie and has negative effects on the team. Tigress is the unofficial leader of the Furious Five and, while the other four befriend Po, Tigress stubbornly does not. When she finds out that Tai Lung escaped prison, Tigress sets out to face him herself, and of course, the other four follow her lead. This incident almost leads to the death of the Furious Five. Tigress displays bad leadership in the movie by being so negative and not “on board”, and her actions influence the people who look up to her.
ReplyDeleteIn this clip from the beginning of the movie, you can see the contrast between Tigress’s attitude and that of Crane. They are both upset, or “disappointed” as Crane says, but Crane is nevertheless polite and kind, much more welcoming than Tigress. If Crane were more in the leader role, perhaps the Furious Five would have opened up to Oogway and Po more quickly and would not have foolishly gone to fight Tai Lung.
I think that it’s important for people in a leadership role to be welcoming to newcomers and to be optimistic. This is not only good for them, but not displaying these traits can have a negative impact on the whole group.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QhtknV99C4
The clip I chose was from the movie Mean Girls, in which the character Gretchen reveals her dissatisfaction with Regina, the tyrannical leader of their clique the Plastics. In the clip, Gretchen compares herself to Brutus and Regina to Caesar, wondering why “Caesar” (Regina) feels so entitled to bossing everyone around. She also explains to her friend Cady about the hurtful way that Regina treats her and how it makes her feel. I selected this clip because I think it is interesting to look at the effect that bad leadership has on followers, and how they view their leader. When given the assignment, I immediately thought of Regina as an example of a bad leader, but when deciding on a clip I ultimately chose one that portrayed this from a followership perspective. This clip clearly shows how Regina is a remarkably bad leader of her “friends”. She doesn’t allow her followers to be creative or start their own trends, such as when she yells at Gretchen for trying to “make fetch happen.” She also belittles her followers and acts as though it is her right to lead as opposed to her privilege to be in this position. The effect on Gretchen is that she constantly feels very hurt and disrespected, and like she can’t be herself. For example, she is not allowed to wear hoop earrings because Regina has claimed ownership over them. Regina forces her followers to keep secrets for her, which stresses Gretchen out a lot and makes her very uncomfortable.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ovOboVwB7g
I chose a clip from Horrible Bosses. I was difficult choosing one clip from this movie because it is a comedy about three employees who are conspiring to kill their “horrible bosses” (aka bad leaders). The movie is filled with clips of bad leadership. The specific clip I chose displays a lot of the qualities of bad leaders we mentioned in class. For instance, Dave Harken, a CEO, announces that there will be a promotion within the company and hints that Nick, one of the main characters, will be getting it. Yet, he promotes himself to the position. In the clip, Nick stands up to Dave about the situation. First of all, Dave shows bad leadership when he acts selfish about the job and misleads his employees. Second, he makes fun of his employees and insults them. A good leader should be considerate about his employees’ feelings. Dave also rationalizes his actions by saying he wasn’t lying, he was “motivating.” He disrespects his employees by making them work too much and by disregarding the fact that his “followers” are people. He threatens his employees by saying if they leave work early they’ll be fired, even for family emergencies. Throughout the movie, the bosses showcase nearly all the qualities of a bad leader- even more including sexual harrassment- so much to the point that their employees want to murder them. In such a short amount of time, Dave Harkey manages to set a great example of a bad leader.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pooyGS3atjg
Alex Cohen
ReplyDeleteThe clip I chose for this assignment is from the film The Devil Wears Prada. In the film, Miranda Priestly is the antagonist: she is the boss, and is uncertainly not accommodating. In the clip I have chosen, the staff frantically prepares for Miranda's arrival at work. We see the workers quickly change how they look and act before her impending arrival. This stuck out to me as a sign of bad leadership because all followers should be comfortable with themselves around the leader, and the leader should encourage followers to embrace individuality. There should also be transparency in the relationship, but the staff fears Miranda too much to be honest with her. When she finally arrives at the office, she immediately points out the negatives when speaking to her assistant. She is completely pessimistic and puts down others for no reason.
Miranda sets the example of a bad leader as she fails to connect with her clients. In our class, we have discussed the importance of outreach and communication. These are lessons that have deeply resonated with me when I ponder leadership. In The Devil Wears Prada, Miranda does the opposite. In a company, I hope that my bosses would make me feel better or provide constructive criticism. In the clip, Miranda makes her employees feel worse about themselves.
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PjZAeiU7uM
Jessica Yu
ReplyDeleteClip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX6S4qOCYcU
The example I chose is about the secretary Belwether from Zootopia. Belwether (a prey) hides under the guise of a faithful secretary, who is kind to everyone she meets. However, it is later revealed that she was creating a scheme to overthrow the current power (a predator). Throughout the movie, predators are thought to be turning "vicious." This behavior is used to justify the dethroning of predators from positions of power. However, it is later revealed that these predators were actually being targeted by Belwether. Thus, Belwether used her constituents for her own gain. Rather than listening to the needs of her constituents, Belwether used her position as a way to carry out her own agenda and ideology. Thus, Belwether pitted her community against each other to fulfill her own personal desires. She mixed her personal desires with the city's work and there was not a clear distinction between the city's identity and her's.
Belwether's failure to keep her constituents' needs in the forefront of her mind led her to follow her own ideology and forget that the goal of her position is to unite the city. While there may have been some concerns about predators, the way in which Belwether sought to fix the problem (killing all predators and usurping power) did not take into mind that the citizens' opinions may be changed. Thus, she sought a "punishing" justice system, rather than a "restorative" justice system that would allow both parties to benefit. This method of restorative justice also recognizes the humanity and value of each citizen (recognizing that citizens may make mistakes, but they may change). The quick decision to kill the predators also shows that Belwether allowed her emotions and biases to drive her decisions rather than rationale. The solution she sought only addressed a symptom of the problem (of prey being picked on). Killing all the predators did not guarantee that prey may not create another hierarchy within themselves that would create a sense of power over another group of prey. Instead of her solution, Belwether should have sought a solution that fixed the root of the problem (an environment where prey are viewed as invaluable) through policy changes and discussion.
Julia Dannenbaum
ReplyDeleteThe Lion King was one of my favorite movies growing up, I must have watched it at least twice a year with my siblings, but since I was so young, I never really processed the role that Scar had in the movie. I knew he was “the bad guy,” but I didn’t fully realize how terrible he actually was. Scar is incredibly power hungry and is so obsessed with becoming king that he puts into action the murder of Mufasa, who is the current king and his brother, and gets rid of Simba, the heir to the throne and also his nephew. As he successfully carries out his plan and becomes the king its clear right away that he is only concerned with the power he has, and doesn’t care about the responsibilities that come with being a leader. Because of his inclusion of the hyenas in the lions’ land to expand his reign of power, there is no more food left for the lions to eat. In this clip, he is being told that his actions have led to this lack of food and that the lions wouldn’t be able to survive there any longer. He refuses to listen to truth of what his actions have caused, and refuses to do anything about it. To add to it, he hits the lioness who is trying to be a good follower and give him the hard truth of their situation. Scar is so consumed in the power that he has that he completely neglects all responsibility, which makes him a bad leader.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXdlJlzn0dk
William Lu
ReplyDeleteThe clip I picked is from Glengarry Glen Ross. In this scene, Alec Baldwin (in his only appearance) plays a successful salesman who is invited by the owners of a real estate firm to speak to their struggling salesmen. Baldwin’s character’s idea of motivation is to unleash a profanity-filled stream of abuse and threats at the three salesmen. He repeatedly degrades them for their job performance and meekness, all the while boasting about his own success and status. He also announces that at the end of the week, the two best-performing salesmen will retain their jobs while the third salesman will be fired. He also unveils the valuable Glengarry sales leads, only to hand them to office manager John Williamson, claiming that they would be wasted on these three salesmen.
Several elements of this scene exemplify bad leadership. Obviously, the insults don’t help the salesmen’s confidence or motivate any devotion to the firm. The high-stakes performance competition could serve as motivation for improving performance, but only out of fear for failure. It definitely does annihilate any group unity or teamwork the three (technically Al Pacino’s also a salesman but he’s not in this scene for some reason) might have had, pitting them against each other and dividing the office. Leaving the salesmen with their current “weak” leads while keeping the strong Glengarry leads from them, and judging their performance with only the poor leads, represents unreasonable expectations from the firm’s owners and a poor way to judge the sales ability of these three/four. Finally, the presence of Baldwin’s character itself represents poor leadership from the sales firm’s owners; while Baldwin’s character delivers a message and a mandate from the firm’s owners, the owners themselves don’t care enough to show up and make this announcement in person, they don’t care enough to supply this office with good leads, and they don’t care enough to put the office and its salesmen in a position to succeed as a group and as individual people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVM1V1ntFks
Katie Plotkin
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2f2Kqt_KcE
When thinking about examples of bad leadership in movies, I immediately think of “The Devil Wears Prada,” and I feel that this scene most accurately depicts the leadership style (and flaws) of the boss in this company, Miranda. In this scene, Andy, a struggling journalist, comes to Miranda to find a job; Andy is applying to work at Miranda’s fashion magazine, and Miranda makes it very clear that she believes that Andy is an unfit candidate. Andy talks about her qualifications and reasons she believes she would be a good assistant; she is also honest to Miranda about her intentions for the job and inexperience in this segment.
Throughout the interaction, Miranda fails to make eye contact with Andy at most points, instead asking her questions she seems to already know the answer to (such as whether or not she reads the magazine) and insulting her style. She interrupts her, refusing to listen to her reasoning and comments and cutting her off when she is discussing her successes in journalism; Miranda also allows someone to walk in a interrupt the interview and insult Andy all at the same time.
I believe this scene represents bad leadership in many ways. Not only does Miranda, the person in the leadership position, refuse to listen to Andy and hear her out, but she also avoids eye contact for the majority of the conversation; this is a sign of disrespect and disregard for what she has to say. In any situation, I believe it is crucial to be a good listener and keep in mind the interests and comments of others to remain levelheaded and successful as a good leader.
I picked a clip from Coco that exposes the truth behind Ernesto de la Cruz’s success as one of the most famous guitar players of his time. As a brief summary, the main character, Miguel, dreams of being a musician, just like his idol, Ernesto de la Cruz. Miguel accidentally ends up in the Land of the Dead and eventually meets the deceased Ernesto, where he learns the truth behind his rise to fame, which involves the murder of his songwriter and best friend, Hector. This demonstrates bad leadership because Ernesto took unethical actions to ensure his own success and lied to his loyal fans while he was alive and dead. His motto, “You need to do whatever it takes to seize your moment,” to preserve his reputation further demonstrates his ruthless nature. Ernesto’s desire for fame was so overpowering, that it turned him into a lying, cruel, and uncompassionate person, which is especially unfortunate since many people looked up to him as a role model. Furthermore, Ernesto went so far as to twist Hector’s death and portray himself as a hero by trying to save him, when in reality, he was the one who poisoned Hector. Ernesto was able to cover up the lies for decades; however, once the truth was exposed, his reputation in the Land of the Dead was ruined forever.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKSam8VtlYU
The example I chose for an instance of bad leadership in film comes from the movie “Whiplash.” The students are at the very prestigious Shaffer Conservatory and are playing in the school’s top jazz band, which is conducted by Terrence Fletcher. Terrence Fletcher displays several characteristics of bad leadership in this clip.
ReplyDeleteFletcher displays bad leadership when he makes fun of a student’s sexual orientation after the student makes a mistake. As the bandleader, Fletcher should aim to make his classroom a safe and welcoming place for students of all races, ethnicities, gender identities, sexual orientations, and religions. By singling out an individual for his sexual orientation, Fletcher not only demonstrates intolerance, but also implicitly encourages the other students to do the same, as it is the leader’s job to set an example for the followers. Since a band’s ability to play well depends on its cohesion, it is necessary for members of the band to get along with each other and feel accepted and included. Thus, Fletcher essentially undercuts his own goal by showing a lack of acceptance.
Later in the clip, Fletcher completely mishandles a situation in which one of the students is playing out of key. Fletcher asks the student playing out of key to identify himself, but, since Fletcher in this scene and other scenes has already proven himself to be physically and verbally abusive, the student playing out of key naturally does not own up to his mistake. When Fletcher finally finds the student, instead of trying to help the student play better, Fletcher screams at the student and kicks the student out of the band. Had Fletcher offered useful advice, the student would have likely been able to quickly get in tune and the rest of the band would have been able to go on. However, instead, Fletcher kicks the student out and scares the other students, thereby encouraging them not to speak up if they are playing out of tune in the future. Furthermore, Fletcher goes out of his way to insult the student on a deeply personal level, bullying the student for his weight, which is completely unrelated to the student’s trombone-playing ability. Fletcher proves to the band members that he is a cruel and terrifying person and as a result, his followers, the students in the band, probably dislike him. And, if there’s one thing we’ve learned this semester, it is that good followership is essential to good leadership.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9VViSscQvA
To this day, Animal Farm is one of my favorite stories. Despite my enjoyment of anthropomorphism in books, the story itself is quite telling of how the power of leadership influences others. The section of the movie adaptation I focused on (https://youtu.be/1Ibe-BgqwNg?t=1996) starts at 33:16.
ReplyDeleteTo give a short background, the farm has been taken over by animals who were unhappy with the way their human farmer was running it. Snowball, a pig, led the rebellion. As he was shot many times and still led the animals to push away the humans from the farm, he is quite brave and clearly a fighter in the eyes of the animals. His plans for the farm take into account the common interests of the animals. He creates a set of rules for everyone to follow to ensure safety and equality, and his ultimate goal is to, as he explains in his speech, create a happy environment for the animals. Napoleon, however, has other ideas.
On the surface, Napoleon is the "bad" leader in this clip. It's clear that he removed Snowball from power in a rather aggressive way, and judging from his speech, doesn't necessarily care about the interests of the animals. Even though he vows to "protect" them, clearly he's trying to take control over every aspect of the farm. In a way, Napoleon is also a bad follower. Instead of communicating with Snowball, if we don't count the few words they exchange before he calls the dogs in, Napoleon seems to have been planning some sort of uprising behind Snowball's back.
After Napoleon takes rule, if we are to watch or read further, we see how the farm changes. Spies are present, working conditions are unfavorable, and animals that cannot work, like Boxer who burnt himself out after giving his life to Napoleon's windmill project, will be shipped off for money. Are we to blame only Napoleon for this? Was Snowball a flawless leader? From his speech, it seems as though Snowball is speaking about a plan he himself conceived without necessarily consulting with the other animals. The plan certainly sounds considerate of living conditions, but without communication, how well can the animals know what Snowball was really planning? While Napoleon's accusations of Snowball's treason are obviously to cover up his own tracks, maybe he wasn't that far from the truth.
I chose this scene from the Emperor's New Groove as I think that it depicts bad leadership in the most clear cut way possible. The movie intentionally does this to set up a journey that will ultimately lead to a change of heart for the once terrible emperor, Kuzco. In the beginning of the movie, Kuzco is a tyrannical emperor who never lifts a finger to get whatever he wants. His way of life is completely centered around himself, whilst completely lacking any regard for anyone else in his empire. In this scene, Kuzco summons Pacha, a humble village shepherd, to his palace. Pacha, obligingly does so, not knowing why he was summoned. When Pacha arrives to the palace to speak with Kuzco, Kuzco merely asks him a question about his village. Pacha proudly answer, noting that his family had lived there for 6 generations. When Kuzco tells him he can leave after the question, Pacha is confused and asks why Kuzco would need to know such trivial information. It is at this point that Kuzco discloses that he only needed an insider opinion on where he should build his fancy swimming resort for the summer. Pacha, horrified by this news, asks Kuzco where he and his family would live, but Kuzco shows no concern at all for him or his family, merely forcing him out of the palace.
ReplyDeleteThis movie does wonders to show kids and anyone else who watches it the dangers of greed, self-centeredness, and rudeness and what kind of implications that they can have on your relationships around you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTV5nDfelH8
(6:15-8:16)
Brian Hall
ReplyDeleteMy clip is the iconic scene from The Sandlot where the team gangs up on Scotty when they realize he doesn’t know who the Great Bambino is. This clip not only displays bad leadership, but bad followership and how the two influence and exacerbate each other.
As soon as Scotty asks who they’re talking about, Ham – who is without a doubt a leader among the team that other players look up to – reacts negatively and alienates Scott. Ham confronts Scott and in effect creates a target for the other boys to pick on. This unhealthy group behavior could very well have been avoided if Ham had tried to promote an environment of inclusivity, but it’s shown time and time again throughout the movie that the team doesn’t get along well with outsiders.
From here, the followers take over, and it’s all downhill. Rather than calling Ham in about alienating Scott over something so harmless, they join the harassment and pour it on pretty excessively. Without even answering the question posed, the boys throw out nickname after nickname for Babe Ruth until Scott is forced to lie and say he misheard the conversation. Picking on the new kid, who they all know is a bit shy and awkward, is rude at best, but groupthink takes over in this situation and the boys collectively feed on their leader’s negativity.
Although Ham started the scenario with his poor initial reaction, the blame is shared among all of the boys for not being courageous enough to do what was right in that situation and correct a fairly toxic group attitude.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdLkYcnml4s
I chose a clip from The Office where Michael Scott fake fires his employees as a joke. Michael thinks that it will be funny to trick his employees into thinking that they have been fired, but it backfires horribly. Initially, he tries to fake fire Pam, and she becomes incredibly distressed. Rather than realizing that his fake-firing prank may have been a poor judgement call after witnessing Pam’s reaction, Michael continues to try the scheme out on another Employee. By attempting to deceive his employees as a joke, Michael is breaking their trust. He is also sending the message that he doesn’t take his relationship with his employees seriously by signalling that his own personal enjoyment is more important than their dignity. Michael also demonstrates bad leadership through this clip because he fails to learn from his mistake and continues to try the prank on others despite it going miserably wrong on the first attempt. Michael clearly wasn’t considering how his employees might be affected by his prank initially, bad leadership in its own right, but the fact that he ignores Pam’s reaction and continues on with the joke is all the more telling about Michael Scott’s misguided leadership style.
ReplyDeleteSummer McKenna
ReplyDeleteWhen I thought of bad leaders in movies, the first idea that came to mind was the stereotypical jerky office boss or snappy high-heeled woman. However, my second thought was the infamous, hot mess orphanage caretaker, Miss Agatha Hannigan in the classic 1982 film Annie. In the clip I chose, Miss Hannigan comes in to lead the orphans in cleaning their bathroom and kitchen. However, rather than leading though example, Miss Hannigan enters the room obviously intoxicated and commands the orphans to complete the task with threats, intimidation, and mocking. I think we can all agree that a stumbling entrance with aggressive whistling is not the best example of radical hospitality. Further, rather than knowing her orphans by name and story, Hannigan opts to refer to the girls as her “little pig-droppings.” Next, Miss Hannigan decides to motivate the girls with the threat of no lunch…which is delicious cold mush. Miss Hannigan’s bad leadership style and the toxic environment she creates is not productive nor safe for the orphans. Yet, Miss Hannigan still forces an artificial relationship between herself and her followers by demanding that they chime “we love you Miss Hannigan!” Another red flag I noticed is how when Miss Hannigan asked where Annie was, it did not seem to be with genuine concern, but rather with frustration and annoyance. After getting an answer, Hannigan seems to forget about Annie’s absence rather than possibly checking in on her. It is also not productive leadership when Hannigan responds to the girls through mocking them. This is perpetuates insecurity in the orphans and hinders the relationship between leader and follower. In the last seconds of the clip, Hannigan is reminded that Mr. Bundles, the laundry man, has arrived and briskly ditches the orphans to go attend to the laundry, which she is obviously unprepared to handle. Overall, this short clip highlights Miss Hannigan’s lack of personal and professional leadership skills and exemplifies a “leader” who has little to no care for her followers and quite frankly herself!
LINK: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6GSpdFfgv4&app=desktop
The movie excerpt I have chosen is from Pirates of The Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest. Jack Sparrow is an infamously known pirate who is a terrible person and bad leader. In the excerpt selected Jack is seen bargaining his crew’s life for his life and is leading his crew to what they think is treasure when he is really just trying to save himself. Jack Sparrow is a bad leader because he is incredibly selfish and does not actually care about the goals of any of the members in his group. He makes plans by taking advantage of and manipulating his members into following behind him. In this case he claims to be leading his crew to a treasure with goods to be shared with all. In actuality Jack is planning to betray his entire crew and his friends by selling their souls. What causes Jack’s demise is this movie is his disorganization and lack of support from his crew. Jack has made it completely known that he has no group interest at heart and the only thing keeping him attached to a crew is that he is the captain of a ship. When Jack is concerned about losing his ship, he chooses not to ask for help from his crewmen. Instead he leads people astray and gets lost in his destiny, ultimately leading to his defeat.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qs8lTUW9uFY
Ian Mallery
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=231TmvIPzQQ
I chose this clip because it shows a lack of organization and bad followership. In the movie Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, an insane general, Jack D. Ripper, sends out all of his planes to attack the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union then tells the president of the United States that if an attack occurs a doomsday machine will go off and destroy the entire world. Peter Sellers, who plays the president is frantically trying to get the leader of the Soviet Union to shoot down a plane and prevent a nuclear war. During his conversation he is interrupted by George C. Scotts character General “Buck” Turgidson who is in favor of starting the war. The general shows his bad followership by countering the president and attempting to instill fear in him. This is bad followership because it is not productive to the cause and is attempting to subvert the plan of the president. He pressures the president into taking his side on the issue by making him doubt himself. The president himself shows his bad leadership style through his tone of voice and his lack of a solid plan. He sounds extremely frantic throughout the whole scene while talking to the Russian leader. This is bad because it does not encourage his followers to think of him as being in control of the situation. You can tell though the diologue that the Russian leader is not taking the president as seriously because of this when he says “Dimitri keep your feet on the ground when you’re talking”. This scene is an excellent representation of how bad leadership and bad followership can be brought out in tense situations.
It is not surprising that Cruela de Vil, as the villain in a Disney movie, exhibits Bad Leadership tendencies. In the clip I chose, Cruela is interacting with her “followers”, Jasper and Horace. She uses fear and intimidation control them, going as far as exerting physical force to get what she wants. The task she has instructed them to complete, killing a bunch of innocent puppies so that she can make a coat, is also unethical. Cruela clearly knows what she is doing is wrong as she is evading the police yet, she disregards all logic and morals to achieve her desired outcome. She interrupts Jasper and Horace when they speak, has little to no patience, and no sense of personal space. She has no empathy for Jasper and Horace or their wants and needs. Jasper and Horace’s actions show just how intimidated and over worked they are; all they want is a moment to relax and finish their show but Cruela refuses to grant them this, focused solely on her selfish desire for a dalmatian-spotted piece of clothing. It is interesting to note this repeated theme of Bad Leadership in Children’s movies. These tendencies are usually seen in villains teaching children from a young age to associate Bad Leadership with being “bad”.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtzS5pA9CZA
I chose this clip first because I find it really funny and The Office is one of my favorite shows, but also because it's such a clear example of bad leadership. Although it's comical from the outside, to have a leader single out and ostracize a member of a working team creates a really a really negative environment – and not just for Toby, the person being ostracized. The rest of the team obviously witnesses interactions like these and is aware that this alienation could happen to them as well. Because Michael is in a position of power as the boss, he's misusing that to take out his personal vendetta against Toby. Additionally, he escalates the problem by bringing Toby's private life into it. That kind of ad hominem creates an unbelievably toxic atmosphere. It also greatly reduces trust in the leader, both for his moral character and his ability to compartmentalize his role and his feelings. It's also noteworthy that Michael's bad leadership is the focus of much of the show, and a primary source of humor. In part it's funny because he's so childish, so blatantly unprofessional, but often bad leadership is more subtle. To say "he's not a part of this family" is an easier problem to identify and therefore deal with; with more power and a more subtle alienation, this style of leadership has the potential for severe consequences.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gemDBt4odwM
I chose a supercut of Ron Swanson from Parks and Recreation. He serves as the director of the department, and consistently degrades the government, his position, and his employees. He is, overall, a decent leader, and loved by his colleagues, but his quirks and attitude are comical examples of elements of bad leadership, such as lack of empathy, lack of motivation or passion for the cause, as well as a disinterest in the work. He is content to step aside and let his employees work hard, rather than build them up (at least most of the time).
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrLZgP-OR6s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjN5q9Ixen4 0:52-2:52
ReplyDeleteWalter Sobchak
I chose a clip from the Big Lebowski in which Walter Sobchak, a man who cares deeply about rules and order, will defend them with severe and violent means. Walter is a man who has a strong moral compass that he sticks to. He takes a good leadership concept—sticking true to your moral compass—to an extreme when he responds with violent outbursts to any and all situations that violate his moral compass. Throughout the movie, Walter pursues justice through violent means which juxtaposes, often comedically with the laid back and pacified nature of his best friend ‘The Dude’ Lebowski. Neither complete pacifism nor extreme physical violence are the ideal approaches for a good leader.
In the clip I chose, Walter is playing a game for his bowling league when he sees Smokey, a man on the opposing team, step over the line on one of his shots. When Smokey asks that the score be added to the sheet, Walter insists that the score be zero given the foul. When Smokey insists that the shot was fair, Walter responds with extreme means—aiming a gun at Smokey, he yells, “Am I the only one here that gives a shit about the rules?!” He forces people to align with his point of view through means of violent domination. At the end of the day, Smokey will write the score as zero over fear of physical injury, but nothing has been changed. Smokey still believes he is right. An important lesson in leadership can be learned from the two polar opposite approaches to pursuing justice. True leadership means defending rules and order by empathizing with the person who’s views differ from yours, and explaining your beliefs to them in a firm but not violent way.
Blake Bernstein
ReplyDeleteMy $5 act of kindness entailed giving it to one of my friends for a good cause. I was walking along my path to my first class of the day, contemplating what I was going to do for my act of kindness, and I saw one of my friends unexpectedly at a table outside the Danforth University Center. He was representing the Relay for Life club and was asking for donations. Of course I wanted to support my friend so I venmoed Relay for Life $5 and got to pie him in the face with foam in return. I wanted to support my friend and the fight against cancer, so I thought it would be a great idea. This took some time out of my day, but it was totally worth it because it made my day and others better. It was a mutually nice interaction between my friend and I, and made both parties happier. By doing this I promote good leadership because I’ve given money to a good cause to help support them in a time of need, and it helps this good cause grow. In the end, this was a nice, unexpected encounter with a friend and club that ended up being my act of kindness.