Business Leadership Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Business Leadership - Essay Example DuBrin (2008) explained that a charismatic leader lead and influence others using personal charm, inspiration and emotion. This defines Herb Kelleher who was energetic, action oriented, visionary and inspiring. A number of leaders have emerged in the business realm to inspire and motivate employees in their organization to work hard and produce enviable results (Takougang 2004). True leaders are hard to come by because they are in short supply (Finkelstein et al 2007). Some of the outstanding leaders include; Jeff Bezoz, chief executive officer Amazon.co; Richard Branson, chief executive officer Virgin Group; Steven Jobs, chief executive officer Apple Computer; William Gates, who is chairman of Microsoft; and Herb Kelleher, chairman of Southwest Airlines among many others (Mockler 2002). The above leaders appeal to the hearts of their employees. Herb Kelleher is an outstanding leader who through years has demonstrated great abilities running Southwest Airlines. The success of Southwe st Airlines is largely attributed to exemplary leadership of Herb Kelleher. To understand who Herb Kelleher is, it is important to state part of his autobiography. Herb Kelleher Herb Kelleher who is a last born in the family of four, a husband to Joan Negley and father of four children was born on 12 March, 1931 to Harry Kelleher and Ruth Moore. He went to Haddon Heights High School and further proceeded to Wesleyan University for Bachelors of Arts degree in English literature and New York University for a Law degree. While he was a little boy, he spent six summers working at Campbell’s Soap factory where his father was a general manager. Kelleher worked as a warehouse foreman, soap chef and analyst. He became an associate of Lum, Biunno and Tompkins between 1959 and 1961. Between 1961 and 1969, Herb Kelleher was a partner at Nowlin, Macfarlane and Barrett. He became a senior partner of Oppenheimer, Rosenberg, Kelleher and Wheatley between 1971 and 1982. In addition, he worke d as a legal counsel for Southwest Airlines Company from 1966 to 1982. In the years that followed from 1982 to 2001, Herb Kelleher was appointed chairman, chief executive officer and president of Southwest Airlines Company. In 2001, he stepped down as chief executive officer and president of Southwest Airlines Company but retained his chairmanship. In 2007, Herb Kelleher steeped down as a chairman. He further resigned from board of directors of the company in 2008. However, he was to be an employee of the company for five years from 2008. This is because though he was advancing in age, his services were needed. Herb Kelleher was appointed chairman of Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas in 2010 for 2011-2013. Herb Kelleher is a distinguished leader who has been awarded for his exemplary leadership performance by chief executive, Texas monthly and Fortune. In addition, Franklin Institute awarded him Bower Award for Business Leadership in 2003 (Reference for Business). Herb Kelleher managem ent style Herb Kelleher leadership skills and style was acquired when he worked at soaps factory where he learned the value of hard work. Furthermore, his work ethics was shaped by his mother who developed a special bond with him. For example, he sat with his mother in the kitchen until wee hours of the morning discussing business, politics and ethics. His mother (Irish woman) instilled him with the importance of treating people with respect. His mother also taught him to be egalitarian and judge people on merit rather than

Con law 4 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Con law 4 - Essay Example The states cannot institute such a punishment because of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and most states are against such punishments. There have been two main aspects of consideration by the courts in defining such punishments; these are the amount of punishment and the method of punishment. The courts rely on the evolving standards of decency when considering the method of punishment. On the other hand, in considering the method of punishment the courts use the proportionality rule (Prison Conditions and the Deliberate Indifference Standards the Eighth Amendment, 2011). Over the years, there has been an extension of the Eighth Amendment to cover the conditions of the inmates’ confinement. However, the onus pressed the petitioner to prove that the officials were ‘deliberately indifferent’. Louisiana ex rel. Francis v Resweber 329 U.S 459 (1947) this case held that the petitioner had to show a reasonable intent on the part of the officer admini stering the punishment. Gregg v. Georgia 428 U.S 153 (1976) established the ‘unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain’ standard. The consideration is whether the unnecessary pain inflicted was to serve as punishment and its proportionality to the crime committed. ‘Obduracy and wantonness’ was a key requirement in this standard. The Rhodes v. Chapman case caused the further development of the Gregg standard in 1981, which expanded the scope of the Eighth Amendment to include prison conditions. In Rhodes v. Chapman (452 U.S. 337, 1981) it held that prisoners being housed in double cells is not in contravention of the Eighth Amendment. The Courts were of the opinion that the Constitution does provide for the provision of comfortable prisons; and deprivation of life’s necessities are in violation of the Constitution. However, to double-cell an inmate with a chain smoker is unconstitutional, as was held in Helling v. McKinney (509 U.S. 25, 1993). The Cou rts held that a Nevada inmate, double celled with a chain smoker, had a right to seek a court action. This is because the situation exposed him to some health hazards that he could incur as a passive smoker. However, the courts subsequently offered a more lenient standard for the prisoners; this standard is familiar as the deliberate indifference standard (Eighth Amendment and Deliberate Indifference Standard for Prisoners, 2013). Deliberate Indifference Standard Estelle v. gamble 429, U.S 97 (1976), was the first case in which the courts discussed this standard. Generally, deliberate indifference seems to people as the blatant but conscious disregard of a person’s consequences in relation to his actions or omissions. Negligence on the part of the officials is not a requirement. The court uses it in determining whether an officer has in one way or the other contravened the civil rights of an inmate. The first attempt by the courts to define this standard was made in Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994). The test has three parts: the first requirement is a substantial or excessive risk of injury to the inmate. This requirement is heavily dependent on the facts of the case presented in court. An example of such a case is Willis v. Baldwin, 70 F.3d 1074 (9th Cir. 1995), where the courts ruled that an exposure to asbestos in a prison constituted a substantial risk of harm. The second requirement is actual knowledge of the risk by the official. Obviousness of the