A Comparison of Two Leaders

His cheerful per tidingsality and gentle style has made him one of the great leaders of the NFG. Although Ben Franklin lived a very commodious time ago, people still speak highly of the man and his accomplish manpowerts. English historian Lewis Simpson stated almost Franklin that he was always terse, luminous, simple, pregnant with meaning, and eminently persuasive (Stout 613). Eugene Weber describes Franklin as urbane, tactful, and dedicated (Weber 19). Franklins equitable brainpower and outgoing personality helped him to be elected and selected for many different public offices during his life.Franklin was a man of a couple of(prenominal) failings, but the ones he had caused him some serious trouble. While serving as the envoy to England, he would not listen to public opinions about America that did not give way with his views (Weber 19). This got him into trouble with the English and he left-hand(a) the country bitter towards Its citizens. Franklin overly spent many years from home and away from his family. HIS relationship with his son deteriorated until his son joined the British to fight against America and his father. Although I could not find anyone who had anything bad to grade about Tony Dungy, he, eke Franklin, spent a lot of time away from home.NFG coaches spend many long hours at the office and many days away from home. This time away caused strains in his family relationships and may have been a contributing factor in the suicide death of his son Jamie In 2005 (Morning 34). When it comes to lead styles both men continue to have a lot in common. Tony Dungs lead style is a blend of both consideration and initiating structure styles. Tony likes to work with his followers leading them in the correct direction, but he also gives them lee way to make their own decisions.When off the sketch he uses a lolling approach to harbour order and keep his players in line. Jim Caldwell, Tonys Mentor Leader. In the example Jim recalls Tony telling pla yers to be good role models while showing clips of athletes that had run against the wrong side of the law (Dungy VII-VIII). While on the field he would use various styles from telling, to selling, and even a participating style allowing players to give input on what play to run next. It is this intense relational style that caused Jim Caldwell to declare that Tony Dungy leadership DNA perfectly fit the description off Level 5 leader (Dungy X). WhileDungs leadership style was a blend, Franklin adjusted his leadership style to fit his role. While in public office Franklin displayed a directive style of leadership to get the job done. When working with the other leaders of the new America, Franklin took on an Advisory role (Lane 42). He used his wit and wisdom to guide and advise them through the new challenges that now faced them. He also used an advisory role while serving as envoy to England and France. In shoemakers last I would like to answer the question if they could have swit ched places in time. Even putting aside the long difference in time and the fact that an AfricanAmerican would not have been accepted in Franklins position, I telephone the answer is no they could not have switched. Though both men exemplify what it is to be a leader, their roles in history and on those around them were very different. Franklin is an extrovert and enjoyed the public eye while Dungy is an introvert and would find it difficult to be around that many people all the time. Franklins fame is inexorably tied to his inventions as well, something Dungy could not have duplicated. Franklin, although fond of sports and the outdoors, I dont would have been happy in Just one occupational group as a NFG coach.