Michael Abrashof was a prominent captain in the USS. He became in charge of USS Benfold and had the vision to improve his ship. This led him to know productivity of Navy as a business and created a firm crew, which came up with the Slogan, “It’s your ship.” Before he took over as commander of the ship, there were struggles in the Navy business and he needed to improve his ship. He knew he had to improve his leadership skills first before he could improve the situation in the ship (Abrashof 67).
This aspect of leadership made him recognized in the Persian Gulf. He reduced small duties, which would tie the crew. The action made him popular with his crew. He would discuss with his crew about their performance often. Abrashoff always instilled good manners to his crew by advising them to focus on their goals (Abrashof 89).At some instance, he lay a test b tending the SAT far off the Iraq coastline this made him gain extraordinary points among the US Navy by changing the course of the ship.
Additionally, Abrashoff gives his idea by saying, the investors may tend to gather their resources together and install latest technology. However,always the people who work determine the productivity. He argues that, use of the latest technology just acts as a medium of ensuring maximum results. It is not a determiner to maximize output in any production, even though it gives the motivation for better results.
The staffs who work with these modern tools deserve personal growth too. He argues that most people, who are facilitators of this modern technology, concentrate on their own growth. Leaders should work to see these people achieve their best results, despite the owners’ benefits. Most leaders fail to achieve this from their crew (Abrashof 78).Research showed that majority of people who left their jobs would leave and did not want relationship with their bosses. This exhibits a characteristic that most leaders fail to get the best out of their employees.
The main problem that most leaders have is that of personal needs allied to the leader, the surrounding environment at the place of work as well as the ability of the employees. It is prudent for all leaders to note that, only leaders can help the whole team maximize full productivity.The author explains that it is better to be respected as a leader than being liked, but most leaders look in the opposite direction. In the modern days, most leaders aim at being liked and end up losing employees due to this aspect. Leaders look out to entice their subjects so that they could with zeal and enthusiasm and this just brings results for the investors.
Abrashof continues to argue and suggests that most people who quit jobs in the Navy do so because of they are not treated with respect (Abrashof 90). He states that the low pay is not a major reason but hindrance from people airing their views and opinions was the major cause that caused many people to quit their jobs.
Since he was the leader in his ship, he states that he trusted his crew and always listened to them. They made decisions together. This made it easy for him to know the problem. Through his actions, it was easy to fix problems. More so, together with his crew, he would find better ways of dealing with any problem that arose (Abrashof 87). When people came up with a solution collectively, it would solve a problem in the end. This was the major secret towards his success in the Navy.
As the leader of the group, it was a wise idea to teach his subjects how to discern and make good decisions on their own. Leaders influence people’s lives and culture. The way they express their opinions in positivism or negativity spreads to the people whom they lead. The way leaders behave directly influences the way the subjects will react. If the leader behaves well, then the subjects too are expected to behave well and the vice versa.
The actions of the leader would directly influence the subjects and the consequences had the same effect too. The author of “This is My Ship” explains that leaders should have good morals. They should listen to their subjects even if the ideas of the subjects do not add up. Accordingly, one should listen to higher authorities even if you do not share the same thoughts as with those in higher ranks. It is better to enforce the policies instructed by those in higher hierarchies. It is correct too to observe respect for higher authorities (Abrashof 118). The author explains that he would discuss with his crew measures given by his bosses. They would then come up with a common decision, which he would share with his bosses. This earned him respect and made his subjects gain confidence.
In the modern day world, leadership entails working and achieving goals and objectives. The leaders enforce the strategies put in place and strive to achieve maximum results for the benefit of both the higher authorities and the subjects. The main context of leadership is to help achieve the goals and objectives put in place.
The postmodern view of leadership involves a test of reality. People set objectives, which are to be achieved by everyone. People try to be realistic and truthful and share their views. These views are then weighed and help to come up with a concrete decision. In the modern world, decisions come from higher authorities and do not seek opinions from people in the lower levels of decision-making. It is worth mentioning that the decisions made are rather dictatorial since they do not give a chance for review in the lower ranks even if they may seem inappropriate (Abrashof 80). The modern word tends to assume reality and take ideas, as people may understand them.
Emotions are not part of the leadership objectives in the society. Leaders are put in place to help organizations achieve their goals and targets. Besides that, working relationships between leaders and their subjects do not express any relationship. People can put up with whichever environment just to satisfy their needs. They are not interested with the achievement of goals of the authorities they work for; rather they treasure the nourishment of their own desires.
In getting the best out of their employees, those in higher authorities are not in understanding the subjects. They just require attainment of goals set in place and the ability to achieve more than the set objectives. It is notable that the working environment is not a determiner in leadership. Nevertheless, leaders try to create a conducive environment to enable people work efficiently.
The main differences between the modern leadership and Michael Abrashof revolve about the type of leader that is authority and those even in higher authorities. Michael Abrashof explains that a leader should be attentive to his subjects but in the modern world, leaders just expect to attain their goals and are not interested in the affairs of their subjects. Beyond goal attainment, the rest is irrelevant and does not involve the modern leaders.
The author of the book tries to explain that leaders should listen to their subjects. He tries to bring out the point that decision-making must not always follow the hierarchy from top to bottom. He explains that there is more importance in listening to those people in the lower ranks and let them express their opinions (Abrashof 81). This instils respect and self-confidence in them. In the modern world, decisions come only from those in high hierarchies and are not concerned with the subjects.
Michael Abrashof tries to bring out the best out of his crew and helps make them feel as part of the leadership in his ship. He says this creates confidence in his crew and they can make decisions on their own. In the modern world, all decisions are expected to come from those with the powers to make decisions. The subjects just follow the commands and act accordingly.
The author explains in his book that when he is issued with decisions that do not add up from his bosses, he follows them to the latter. However, he would discuss with his crew those decisions that seemed wrong and would advise his bosses according to the best point of view. This made him earn respect from his bosses (Abrashof 86). However, in the modern leadership, it is wrong and not advisable to make corrections after orders have been issued.
In the modern leadership technique, subjects are likely to quit their jobs since they feel treated in an improper way. The relationship between subjects and their leaders is not strong and they may quit due to their leaders. The subjects may feel as though they are unwanted and their presence is unfelt but in Michael’s Abrashof, it is difficult for his crew to quit their job to relationship factor with their boss (Abrashof 109). He created an environment which made them feel wanted and were involved in the decision process his crew always felt confident and he taught them how to make decisions without consultation.
There is a whole bunch of similarities between modern day leadership and Michael Abrashof way of approaching leadership. In both, decision-making involves more than one party in order to come up with a concrete decision. More so, in both, decisions follow a hierarchy. Decisions come from higher authorities and are implemented by the subjects. However, there is correction when the decision seems incorrect
In both the modern world and Michael’s approach of leadership, there is need to listen to each other for effective communication and implementation of decisions
In both approaches, there are goals put in place to be achieved by both the leaders and the subjects. Attainment of these goals ensures productivity. Cooperation helps people attain their goals even more effectively. Additionally, both approaches of leadership address effective communication. In the modern leadership, communication is from top to bottom but in the last ship, it may be both from top to bottom or bottom to top.
The modern approach of leadership and Michael’s way of leadership aim at attaining goals put in place. Both discuss how to make productivity more effective and attain maximum results from the current use of leaders and subject.
In conclusion, Michael Abrashof came up with a unique way of how leaders should interact with their subjects. He tries to show that subjects can still get the best out of themselves besides achieving the goals for their leaders. He explains the need for effective communication abd also addresses the need for listening to subjects.In the modern leadership, goal attainment is more crucial even though it does not concentrate with the welfare of the subjects. Decision-making comes from the highly ranked leaders and is passed to the subjects. Both types of leadership aim at attaining maximum productivity. Michael Abrashof became popular with his subjects and helped attain good productivity for the Navy even when it was very difficult to make good production in the Gulf of Persia. His theories provided a framework of leadership skills and goal attainment.Both types of leadership have both merits and demerits. In the modern days, it is more profitable to earn better results than gain better social status. There is competition for the positions of both the leaders and the subjects thus all put up with the current trends.
Abrashof Michael D. It’s Your Last Ship: Management Techniques from The Best Damn Navy in the Navy. N.P: Grand Central Publishing, 2002 wed 24 Oct 2016