This assignmet iclude 2 part
Length: 2.500 words ± , excluding reference list and appendix (12-point Times New Roman font, line-spacing 1.5 for the body of the report, but single line-spacing for References and Appendix)
- Eye in the Sky (Gavin Hood 2016) – 102 minutes
- Sully (Clint Eastwood 2016) – 96 minutes
- Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom (Justin Chadwick, 2013) – 146 minutes
- 12 years a Slave ( Steve McQueen (Links to an external site.) 2013) – 134 minutes
- Captain Phillips (Scott Rudin (Links to an external site.), Dana Brunetti (Links to an external site.) & Michael De Luca (Links to an external site.), 2013) – 134 minutes
- Lincoln (Steven Spielberg (Links to an external site.), 2012) – 150 minutes
- Money ball (Bennett Miller, 2011) – 133 minutes
- The Iron Lady (Phyllida Lloyd, 2011) – 104 minutes
- Secretariat (Randall Wallace, 2010) – 123 minutes
- Invictus (Clint East Wood, 2009) – 134 minutes
- The Aviator (Michael Mann (Links to an external site.), Sandy Climan (Links to an external site.), Graham King (Links to an external site.) & Charles Evans Jr. (Links to an external site.), 2004) –170 minutes
- Wall Street (Oliver Stone, 1987) – 126 minutes
Your task is to analyse and evaluate the effectiveness of leadership portrayed in the film, using the “framework for understanding leadership” given in the textbook (DuBrin, 2015, Chapter. 1, p. 21, attached).
PREPARING THE REPORT. Please note that you will need to draw upon additional readings on leadership. You are expected to identify specific issues from the film, in order to comment on the effectiveness of the leadership demonstrated in it. You will need to cite research literature and provide a reference list.
The filmmakers may have taken liberties with historical facts, but, for the purpose of this report, it is not an important issue. It is not expected that you will do further research into the person or circumstances involved in the film as this assignment is not about history—but it is a critical analysis of leadership effectiveness as depicted in the film.
FORMAT. The assignment is to be presented in a report format. A guide such as the one by Summers and Smith (2014) can assist you in preparing a report. You should include: (a) assignment cover sheet (b) title page (c) executive summary (d) table of contents (e) introduction (f) several sections presenting your analysis and discussion (g) conclusion (h) references and (i) appendix.
REFERENCES. The in-text citations and the reference list should be presented in a standard referencing style (Swinburne Harvard style).
RESEARCH. Consulting and utilising the research literature is an essential element of this assignment. You are required to explore the relevant literature concerning the aspects of leadership you plan to address in your report. You should use the literature in a thoughtful manner to evaluate the effectiveness of leadership in the film. It is expected that you will cite a minimum of 12 refereed journal articles related to leadership from the above journals.
FOCUS ON LEADERSHIP EFFECTIVENESS. In this report, you are expected to discuss issues which affect leadership effectiveness. It is not a biographical report, a film critique, or a historical report. While you may find it useful to do some reading about the people and situations featured in the film, the report should focus mainly on leadership effectiveness. Avoid extensive biographical details, discussion on the historical events, or aspects of film making.
APPENDIX. The report needs to have an Appendix at the end, which provides evidence of your observations. It should be presented in a table format with three columns: (1) Element of DuBrin’s Framework, (2) Characteristics Observed, and (3) Corresponding Scene (just describe the scene where you have observed the characteristic, e.g., Scene depicting the Administrative Board hearing). Improve the readability of the appendix by selecting table properties intelligently (e.g., use Auto Fit to Contents, define the header row to repeat across pages, do not allow rows to break across pages, etc.). Use single line-spacing for the entire Appendix.
Your task is to write a total of 5 x 200-word weekly in-depth reflections from each of the weeks focusing on at least one major lesson learnt for your own leadership development. These should be focused, personal, practical, candid, specific, and in-depth reflections about what you have learned about yourself. These lessons might relate the discussion in lectures, class and/or tutorial, and/or what you learnt through the assigned readings, at your workplace, or generally in the community. You also need to identify areas for improvement to enhance leadership effectiveness and how you would go about achieving them.
The first 5 weeks of reflections (weeks 1-5) are due at the end of Week 5.
The second 5 weeks of reflections (weeks 6-10) are due at the end of Week 10.
Please note that this is a reflective exercise, as such do not merely re-tell what happened in class or what you read in the reading. Rather, they are reflections of how a specific idea/lesson relates to your personal and specific leadership development in terms of strengths, weaknesses, potentials, barriers, etc. A few questions to help you think about the weekly entry are as follows:
- -Am I seeing myself as a leader now or as an emerging leader?
- – How can I develop leadership skills from these weekly sessions/classes?
- – How does the learning challenge the way I see myself, my work, or the real world?
- – Why is it relevant to my career or future plan?
- – How am I going to apply the idea/lesson in my own context? Are there some foreseeable challenges?
- – What is the action plan?