Although sound moral judgment is an important characteristic of an effective leader, it is not as important as a leader’s ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers.
In the present convoluted world, more often than not, leaders rely on the social acceptance of their peers than on their correcting their moral compasses. Efficiancy of a leader relies on his actions in office which have to be backed up by honest, morally appropriate judgements.
The overall output of a leader's actions, if based upon the acceptibility among colleagues, can lead to disastrous outcomes. The social circle of a person comprises of people who have had similar experiences in their lives which ends up schewing the overall effectiveness of judgements. The reality on the ground is often starkly different from what happens at the top tier management. Hence, it could be detrimental to the organisation in the longer run.
In addition to this, having a morally upright stance implies that the leader has taken a holisitic approach in solving organisational problems and has done ample research to arrive at his current decision. This method may not been line with the requirements of his peers but the leader would have seen the pros and cons of the problem and then arrived at the decision. By this technique, he has considered the decisions of his colleagues, garnering their respect.
However, the moral character of an individual is questionable and subjective. Some months ago, YesBank, one of India's top private banks filed for bankruptcy. Earlier the organisation had two leaders at the top of the pyramid. The other person was keeping a check on the judgements of the other owner and protecting the company from committing any blunders. But after the demise of the latter, the avaracious intentions of the first person took the company downhill. Clearly by maintaining the respect and acceptance of his peer, the company was heading in the right direction. So, it is neccesary to avoid parochial approach when arriving at company decisions. The leader needs to be open to suggestions and criticisms which in turn determines his efficiency.
Hence, the ideal leadership listens to his coworkers to arrive at the correct decision which is morally sound and has been backed up and respected by his colleagues.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-03-30 | rahatumar9072 | 50 | view |
| 2024-03-30 | rahatumar9072 | 50 | view |
| 2023-10-30 | qwertyy | 54 | view |
| 2023-09-24 | Adelaida | 50 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | Mayuresh08 | 50 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 155, Rule ID: COMPRISES_OF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'comprises' or 'consists of'?
Suggestion: comprises; consists of
...outcomes. The social circle of a person comprises of people who have had similar experiences...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 287, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...he overall effectiveness of judgements. The reality on the ground is often starkly ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, may, so, then, as to, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.5258426966 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.4196629213 32% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 33.0505617978 61% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1792.0 2235.4752809 80% => OK
No of words: 349.0 442.535393258 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13467048711 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32221490584 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90155892213 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 215.323595506 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.555873925501 0.4932671777 113% => OK
syllable_count: 551.7 704.065955056 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.0182298703 60.3974514979 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.5555555556 118.986275619 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3888888889 23.4991977007 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.61111111111 5.21951772744 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.217371106813 0.243740707755 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0639540096719 0.0831039109588 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0525146078246 0.0758088955206 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118073425596 0.150359130593 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0366268632928 0.0667264976115 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.1392134831 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.06 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 100.480337079 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.