Case Study Question 1: Relate the main characters of this case study and their roles with L-NEAT. Describe what motivates each character and who are considered stakeholders. The main characters are as follows: Jason Young, Community Leadership Program (CLP & recent Executive Director of the L-NEAT) Ella Starr CLP Director Craig King CLP Graduate and Deputy Fire Chief These are the main characters of the L-NEAT. The major function of Young was to select the best volunteers for the non-profit organization. He also knows that the company needs to have vibrant staff for organizational growth. He has the basic qualities of leaders and he knows very well about the duties of the employees under his supervision. Just because of his mesmerizing personality and perfect leadership qualities have inspired Ella and she joined the organization. But she is unaware of the mission of the organization. On the other hand Craig King is very much familiar with the mission of the organization. He also knows the importance of the organization within the community and is eager to work under the supervision of Young. Fundraisers and Community outreach are the stakeholders that actively participate in the programs held by Young for fundraising. Question 2: Compare Ella Starr and Craig King as board members and followers for L-NEAT. Distinguish the ways their actions affect the overall successes and failures of L-NEAT. Ella Starr is a young lady who has a passion to work for society. Although she does not know the exact mission of the company but is willing to do more for the organization. She is very much supportive and is impressed with the personality of Young. She is beneficial for the organization because L-NEAT needs funds on urgent basis and she has very strong connections that helped Young to collect funds. On the other hand, King is a mature person and a volunteer to work for the organization and he is very clear about the mission of the organization. He has the knowledge about fire safety and eagerly wants to make his contributions in this regard. Ella does not initiate the volunteer work herself while King remains always ready to do work for the benefit of the organization. Question 3: Consider the role of the board of directors and staff in relation to the rising tension between L-NEAT and NEAT. Analyze what is occurring within L-NEAT to promote the disequilibrium. Ross Hill an inexperienced member became the board chair of the organization. Just because of her lack of experience she had made many poor decisions. These decisions have affected the working of the organization. Ross has to hire an outsider in the absence of Young. Because now the operations of the L-NEAT spread around the country and there are certain management levels involved. Volunteers have to report other managers rather than Young. The wrong decision of hiring by the Ross and Tomas (Regional Director) arose several questions about the inability of the board members ...

1. Case Study
Question 1: Relate the main characters of this case study and
their roles with L-NEAT. Describe what motivates each
character and who are considered stakeholders.
The main characters are as follows:
Jason Young, Community Leadership Program (CLP & recent
Executive Director of the L-NEAT)
Ella Starr CLP Director
Craig King CLP Graduate and Deputy Fire Chief
These are the main characters of the L-NEAT. The major
function of Young was to select the best volunteers for the non-
profit organization. He also knows that the company needs to
have vibrant staff for organizational growth. He has the basic
qualities of leaders and he knows very well about the duties of
the employees under his supervision. Just because of his
mesmerizing personality and perfect leadership qualities have
inspired Ella and she joined the organization. But she is
unaware of the mission of the organization.
On the other hand Craig King is very much familiar with the
mission of the organization. He also knows the importance of
the organization within the community and is eager to work
under the supervision of Young. Fundraisers and Community
outreach are the stakeholders that actively participate in the
programs held by Young for fundraising.
Question 2: Compare Ella Starr and Craig King as board
members and followers for L-NEAT. Distinguish the ways their
actions affect the overall successes and failures of L-NEAT.

2. Ella Starr is a young lady who has a passion to work for society.
Although she does not know the exact mission of the company
but is willing to do more for the organization. She is very much
supportive and is impressed with the personality of Young. She
is beneficial for the organization because L-NEAT needs funds
on urgent basis and she has very strong connections that helped
Young to collect funds.
On the other hand, King is a mature person and a volunteer to
work for the organization and he is very clear about the mission
of the organization. He has the knowledge about fire safety and
eagerly wants to make his contributions in this regard. Ella does
not initiate the volunteer work herself while King remains
always ready to do work for the benefit of the organization.
Question 3: Consider the role of the board of directors and staff
in relation to the rising tension between L-NEAT and NEAT.
Analyze what is occurring within L-NEAT to promote the
disequilibrium.
Ross Hill an inexperienced member became the board chair of
the organization. Just because of her lack of experience she had
made many poor decisions. These decisions have affected the
working of the organization. Ross has to hire an outsider in the
absence of Young. Because now the operations of the L-NEAT
spread around the country and there are certain management
levels involved. Volunteers have to report other managers rather
than Young. The wrong decision of hiring by the Ross and
Tomas (Regional Director) arose several questions about the
inability of the board members. Volunteers started gossiping
about this and they did not care for their actions as well.
On the other hand, Ella felt worthless under the supervision of
Ross and Thomas. Although she was not very much aware of the
mission of the organization she remained fruitful for the
fundraising process of the company. She felt that she could

3. work with L-NEAT rather the reorganized NEAT under the
supervision of Young so she decided to move on and worked for
other organizations.
Question 4: Jason Young appears to be the L-NEAT hero.
Examine his actions. To what extent did his actions contribute
to the successes or failures of the followers and the
organization? To what extent did the actions of the followers
contribute to Young’s successes or failures?
Jason Young is the true hero of the organization. He joined the
firm when the business was trembling. There was no future for
the organization. There was lack of funds. Volunteers were
leaving the firm or many had already left the organization. In
that critical situation Young grasped the reign of the
organization.
He appointed such volunteers that could do their best and that
we're willing to perform for the betterment of the society. He
had all the qualities that a leader possesses. He selected Ella
because of her strong leads of the stakeholders that can provide
sufficient funds for the betterment of the organization. Then he
started organizing different parties and competitions that
enhanced the interest of the investors. They were ready to
invest. Just because of the investment that L-NEAT started
working on sound basis. The operational activities started to
grow because new volunteers started to enter the organization.
That is the main reason that the organization started to grow on
regional basis.
Furthermore, he hired King who had clear information and
understanding of the mission of the organization. He was eager
to perform activities for the betterment of society. He was very
passionate and wanted to give clear concepts about fire security
to society. So we can say that Young is a true leader. His efforts
brought prosperity to the L-NEAT. Just because of his efforts

4. sincere people started working with the organization that has
true skills and capabilities.
Question 5: Distinguish the different roles that mission-driven
and leader-driven followers played at L-NEAT. Examine the
actions of those followers and their effects on the outcome of
the case study.
Mission-driven followers like King have strong ties with the
organization. They do not care for the board members and
higher authorities. They have concerned with the mission of the
organization and they work for the betterment of the
organization. They do not care for any change that takes place
within the organization.
On the other hand, leader driven followers work for the leaders
and they do not work for the organization. They can leave the
organization if their leader leaves the firm like Ella. Such
people can create enormous problems for the business.
Question 6: Use the follower typology of either Kelley or
Kellerman to categorize the characters in the case study.
Jason Young (Star Follower and Active Follower)
Ella Starr (Sheep or Bystanders)
Craig King (Star Follower and Active Follower)
Rose Hill (Star Follower and Active Follower)
Robert Thomas (Star Follower and Active Follower)
Reference
“Motivation Theory and Leadership (Links to an external site.)”
Updated March 2019, Viewed on Sep 2019, https://www.money-
zine.com/career-development/leadership-skill/motivation-
theory-and-leadership/ (Links to an external site.)

5. “Pustelnik. P”, “5 Theories of Motivation a Leader should
know”, Viewed Sep 2019, https://www.future-
processing.pl/blog/5-theories-of-motivation-a-leader-should-
know/ (Links to an external site.)
LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT 2
Leadership and management are two phenomena that are mostly
mistaken to mean the same thing. Although mistaken, some
differences are evident between the two phenomenons. Unlike
leadership, management is a combination of various aspects that
includes managing or controlling resources and at the same time
leading. On the other hand, leadership does not involve
managing resources but it entails guiding a group of people

6. towards achieving the set goals and objectives. The two terms,
therefore, cannot be assumed to be same since there are
different roles for a manager and a leader (Spector, 2015).
I partially agree and disagree with the argument that "leadership
characteristics are nothing more than Great Man Theory and
have no relationship to modern leadership theory". Over the last
centuries, the characteristics of a great leader have not changed
much. The world is evolving but the characteristics of the
ancient leader are still the same as that of the modern leader.
The Great man theory outlines various characteristics of a
leader such as courage, heroism, high intelligence and
inspiration to the society. The leadership characteristics are the
same as that of Great Man theory. The Great Man theory and
leadership characteristics share the same aspects hence making
them alike. I, therefore, agree with the portion of the statement
that says "leadership characteristics are nothing more than Great
Man Theory" (Simon, 2015).
I disagree with the statement that says that the Great Man
theory and has no relationship to the modern leadership theory.
Over the years, leadership has changed but the characteristics of
a great leader remain constant. Unlike the Great Man theory,
modern theory has many different styles that are used for
leadership. The modern theory leadership styles are dependent
on the scenarios that leaders are in but they still maintain the
characteristics that are outlined by the Great Man theory. The
characteristics shared between the great man theory and the
modern theory of leadership are therefore brings in the
relationship between the two theories (Simon, 2015).
In conclusion, leadership and management are two different
phenomenons. The two phenomenons represent the top
individual within an organization but these two individuals
assume different roles within the organization. A manager will
be expected to manage the distribution of resources within the
organization for the effective running of the affairs in the
organization. Also, in the absence of a leader, the manager can
act as a leader. On the other hand, after a team has received the

7. necessary work resources, the leader will be expected to assist
in the utilization of the resources towards the achievement of
the set goals and objectives.
References
Harrison, C. (2017). Leadership Research and
Theory. Leadership Theory and Research, 15-32.
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-68672-1_2
Simon, C. A. (2015). Are two heads better than one? System
school leadership explained and critiqued. School Leadership &
Management, 35(5), 544-558.
doi:10.1080/13632434.2015.1107035
Spector, B. A. (2015). Carlyle, Freud, and the Great Man
Theory more fully considered. Leadership, 12(2), 250-260.
doi:10.1177/1742715015571392
Running head: ADAPTIVE LEADERSHIP
1

8. ADAPTIVE LEADERSHIP
4
Adaptive Leadership
According to Heifetz and Donald (2001), an adaptive leadership
is the kind of leadership where there is the mobilization of the
people in order to carry out the tough challenges for the purpose
of success. These challenges that needs to be mobilized are
divided into adaptive challenges and the technical fixes. Before
taking action to find the solution to this challenges, it is
important to diagnose the adaptive verses the technical
challenges. The diagnosis enables the adaptive leadership to
know the exact method that should be used to solve the
challenge successful. This is because, the adaptive challenges
requires the team or the individual to learn the new techniques
that will be used to solve the problem (Savage, n.d.). This
means that the individuals to be used in giving solutions are
required to alter their believes, loyalties and the values. But on
the other hand, the technical fixes only needs the knowledge of
the expert to solve the problem within a short period of time
(Savage, n.d).
In the career that I am pursuing, an example of the adaptive
challenge that I am wrestling with is the use of the blended
learning program to increase the knowledge and the skills of the
employees. It is among the many adaptive challenges as it
requires the employees to alter with their daily activities and
the strategies. But this can be made different by the use of the
following four competencies. With the diagnosis situation
competence, a deeper understanding of the situation together

9. with the different interpretations has to be done (Heifetz, &
Linsky, 2002). Understanding the blended learning program
well will enable the employment of the good techniques that
will not inconvenience the workers. This is followed by
managing self where the where the assumptions about the
strengths and the weakness are evaluated concerning the
situation. This will help in reducing the challenges by knowing
whether to maintain the program or not from the strength and
the weakness that is has. From this program, we can see that
there are a lot of the strength to reap from it hence it is of
benefit to the organization and the personal level. Next we have
intervene skillful where the program is analyzed to see if there
are chances of making progress from it (Heifetz, & Linsky,
2004). From our challenging program, we can see that it has to
be partaken because it helps in making the progress through the
gained skills and knowledge. Lastly energizing others where
they are made to be interested to attend the learning program so
that they can gain more knowledge and skills (Heifetz, &
Linsky, 2004).
References
Heifetz, A. R. & Donald L. L. (2001). "The Work of
Leadership." Harvard Business Review 79, no. 11: 131-141.
Business Source Premier, EBSCOhost.
Heifetz, R. A., & Linsky, M. (2002). "A Survival Guide for
Leaders." Harvard Business Review 80, no. 6: 65-74. Business
Source Premier, EBSCOhost.
Heifetz, R. A., & Linsky, M. (2004). "When Leadership Spells
Danger." Educational Leadership 61, no. 7: 33-37. Education
Source, EBSCOhost.
Savage, N. (n.d.). Adaptive vs. Technical - Dr. Ronald Heifetz.
Retrieved from: Adaptive vs. Technical (Links to an external
site.)

10. Running Head: PROJECT 4
Project
Compare the differences between adaptive challenges and
technical fix interpretations in the case study. Critique the
interventions used and the ways it changed or could have
changed the outcome in the case study.
There exist a wide difference between technical fix
and adaptive challenges. Technical fix or challenges can be
defined as problems that can be easily solved or fixed (Green,
2009). On the other hand, adaptive challenges are the dynamic
and more complex issues that cannot be easily fixed rather they
require the behaviors of the stakeholders to be interfered with.
The city of Mission in the case is aiming at improving the
transportation sector such as roads as well as fixing the
problems in the pathways for cyclists and pedestrians. To
enable them to fix these problems, there must be adequate

11. funding.
The technical fix that is available is increasing the
sales tax so that they can get the money to fund the projects.
However, this technical fix cannot be adequate to fund the
whole project. However, another adaptive fixation has to be
made. Adaptive fixation is likely to increase the number of
funds for the project. The core and most promising strategy in
the adaptive fix are increasing the property taxes. This is a
dynamic method since it helps in increasing the levels of funds
to the project. However, this method is a bit complex and is
required both the members of the public as well as the members
of the council in thinking and contributing to the strategy. At
first, these stakeholders have to be given an insight into the
benefits of the whole projects. An example of the adaptive
challenge in the case was when a meeting was called in a local
meeting hall and the members were allowed to discuss the
whole issue. They were given a chance to learn the way the city
was aiming at getting the funds and the way they would use the
funds for the benefits of the stakeholders. The meeting was
aimed at helping them get an ideal adaptation on the way the
city was pulling funds out of various sources in creating the
pool for funds for the project. This was an ideal adaptive
challenge.
Examine the challenges that arose between leadership vs
authority in the case study.
There is a great difference between leadership and
authority. A person in authority is a person who has been given
the power to discharge his/her power on others. On the other
hand, a leader is a person who has the ability not necessarily
power to lead and guide others in undertaking specific tasks. It
should be noted that one being in power does not necessarily
mean that he/she can be a good leader. In the case, the people
in the authority did not demonstrate ideal leadership qualities.
Leadership means working with all stakeholders and involving
them in the process. It requires leaders to organize public
participation forums where the members of the public can freely

12. give out their views and insights. In the case, the people in the
authority organized very minimal public participation forums.
The people's opinions were not highly put into consideration in
the process of implementing the funding process of the project.
They hardly allowed the public to freely vote for the strategy
rather they used a very wrong way of hindering the members of
the public their opinions and rights. This is a clear and direct
lack of leadership qualities among the people in the authority. A
good leader is the one who gives the people who he/she is
leading the priority and allows them to give out their views and
insights. Good leaders do not use tricky strategies to win
people's support rather; they speak the truth and freely allow
them to give their views (O’Malley, 2012). There must be an
ideal commission between the leaders and the people who are
led. They should be good engagement among the leaders and the
public. The authority would have first act as good leaders in
convincing the members of the public about the importance of
the project and then, later on, they would have exercised their
power by imposing the property tax that had been agreed by the
members of the public.
Relate ways the four competencies were used or could have
been used to change the outcome in the case study.
There are 4 core competencies which make a
good leader. These include the first competency which is the
diagnosis of the situation. The second one is the competency of
managing oneself then the facilitation of intervention and the
last one is energizing other people. In the case of the city of
Mission, the situation was properly diagnosed since it was
found that there was a great need to improve the transport
infrastructure in the city. The authority did not undertake good
self-management since they would not be able to control
themselves on proper ways of identifying their problems. The
Mission was also not able to properly facilitate the intervention.
They only introduced more taxes without proper involvement of
the public. In that view, it was not able to energize the members
of the public. If the members of the public would have been

13. properly involved, the whole project would have been more
popular.
References
Green, C. (2009). Redeveloping Mission and the ‘Driveway
Tax” controversy. Kansas Leadership Center Case Series, pg.
97.
O’Malley, E. (2012). The competencies for civic leadership.
Kansas Leadership Center. Retrieved from
https://www.emporia.edu/dotAsset/631d8f1f-ff9c-47e1-9d05-
4179779c1414.pdf