- Watch video and take notes:MAKE A DECISION
- Many leaders have had to make extreme decisions during crisis. How do you think these decisions might have changed if leaders could make them in non-crisis situations? Give an example. [1-2 Paragraphs]
- ** Consider the different decisions leaders have had to make regarding war, epidemics, impeachments and natural disasters. In an emergency, leaders may make one decisions; given more time to explore options, their decisions may differ. Does crisis improve or detract from the decisions leaders make? [3-5 sentences]
Tuesday, October 11, 2016
Post #11
Leadership Through Time:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2) I believe that these decisions would change if it were a non-crisis situation because more people would disagree. You shouldn't let anyone stop you from what you believe in, because everyone will not agree with what you have to say. In this situation, in a crisis, decisions could be made blind sighted because we have hope. In a non-crisis situation, decisions are looked down upon and are rejected, even if the source is trustworthy. The leaders believe in whatever they think is truthful, and if people don't like the plan, they don't have to worry. Unless it would damage their lives, then those people should have a say. However, a lot of decisions can be made without other opinions, because whatever these leaders believe is right, they will do.
ReplyDelete3) I think that crisis causes leaders to think quickly because they have to solve the problem that is present. I believe that crisis improves the decisions that leaders make. If there is a nuclear threat, leaders will suggest any idea to save people, even if it could mean a few lives lost in the process. Many decisions are mindlessly made, such as adding more laws, restricting people from doing certain tasks. In a non-crisis situation, people constantly make decisions, helping or not helping people everyday. A crisis seems to intensify thinking because it has to be acted on quickly, rather than postponing thinking or passing it on to someone else.
2.Every leader that has been through a crisis has had to make tough decisions.These decisions would have probably changed if they were made in a non-crisis because they wouldn't have some sort of exaggeration behind it.When there is a crisis going on,every little thing can be something big.Plus when people are is crisis' they tend to be under a lot of pressure.When people are under pressure they have to make decisions they would probably regret later.Especially some leaders crack under pressure.When they crack under pressure this means that when the time comes they might make terrible decisions because they don't know how to take care of things off the top of their head.Those type of people shouldn't be leaders because they might be in such in a hurry to give a response that they might do something that will hurt millions of millions of people.
ReplyDelete3.The crisis detracts because now the leader has time to think thing through.They actually have time to think of what could happen if they make those decisions.This would bring down the stress level in others.They wouldn't be in such a hurry to make a decision just for the fact that they are rushed to have to make a decision.When people are given time to think things through their mindset changes.This slows everything down and they start to think of all the possibilities.
2. I think that if leaders were not in a crisis and had to make a decision, their decision would be even more thought out. Meaning, in a non-crisis situation, there would be less pressure weighted upon them, and thus the leaders would have more space to expand the decision. With more time, the leaders would make a better decision or improve on their decision. Adding more pressure and less time t make a decision will deteriorate in effectiveness, benefit, and the decision made might not be the best decision.
ReplyDelete3. I think that having more time can improve on making a decision. With more time, leaders wouldn't be rushed in making a decision and will have a chance to better think about the outcomes. A rushed decision is never the best decision. Overall, time really helps to improve on decision making
2) These decisions might have changed because they probably would think of more ways to solve their problem. Instead of forgetting logical ways to resolve the conflict, leaders would recall how to handle the situation reasonably. For example, in a horror movie, someone usually tries to lead the victims into a safe place for hiding from the serial killer. From a logical point of view, the best thing to do in that situation would be to run away as fast as you possibly can, especially if the killer is not armed with guns or anything of that nature. Although, in most cases, panic is what drives you to make the first option possible, even if that option is the worst one ever.
ReplyDelete3) In my opinion, crisis detracts from the decisions leaders make because they have less time to think about the best decisions able to be made. Most likely, leaders will be in a frenzy that boosts their stress and anxiety levels. This will trigger the reaction of being able to remember logical ways to solve their current conflict.
2) If a leader is in a crisis, they'll make the necessary decisions to either solve the crisis or make the crisis better. Leaders make these decisions because there in a tough spot and they'll do big changes to get out of it. If leaders were in a non-crisis, they won't make big changes compared to the changes made if they were in an actual crisis.
ReplyDeleteOne example of this is when I had to make the choice to give my mom half of my money so she can pay the rent. This was a very big decision to us because I had to overcome my selfishness to help my mom. In another like giving my sister money so she can buy whatever she wants is unimportant because this is just something she wants not need.
3) I think a crisis improves the decisions of a leader because they need to think about the effects of their decision and how it'll benefit others. In a time of crisis, leaders don't necessarily have the time to think for long so they really need to think about their decision. As for a non-crisis, the leaders might not put the thinking into their decision as it won't affect them too much as compared to an actual crisis. So in the end, I think a crisis helps with making good decisions.
2.I do agree in the leaders making decisions in crisis situations, it will make a big change because in a crisis they tend to have less. In a non crisis they have a normal amount so it might change something so saying they get more food but there fine in food it will supply for a little bit more. But, in a crisis any type of food is wanted as much as they can get and supplies just overall. Saying there is a Tsunami and it wipes lots of factory's were food is created. Also, farms get flooded and are now corrupt and wont help because they have been wiped out. They would want as much of supplies they can receive.
ReplyDelete4. It definitely does help in crisis situations because someone ends up standing up and then takes lead of the others. It also will help because they are in trouble and they want to survive so they will act smarter and do smarter choices. Think of a way to get saved and get to safety with other people so they can begin to recover. Or also to rebuild what they have lost because they will lose supplies and structures.
2. Leaders, such as the President, must make extreme decisions for the entire population of the United States, which is why we have an election-- we choose the person who has the best plan for the future, as well as ability to help the public in extreme decisions. Decisions like helping to save populations of cities in hurricanes, or victims of violence, or any other extreme emergency, is the responsibility of the president. Of course, these being the extreme emergencies, there is not much planning for the future ahead, only immediate response and consideration for the near future or the consequences of the decision. In a more calm and less urgent environment, the president can discuss options more in depth and consider every single issue or possibility. The shift from instant reaction to slow, intelligent consideration is extreme in difference, but both are necessary, meaning that a presidential candidate should excel in either situation.
ReplyDelete3. Crisis is an extreme, therefore extreme decisions must be made if the population is going to be helped. Whether that means an evacuation of the area, a lock down, an arrest, or anything else called for to bring safety, a leader must make the decision. By default, when a person is given more time to think and research, their end product will be better than the person who was forced to put out their most effective idea rather than their most thought out idea. A leader must be able to improvise, a skill many need in daily life. Having creativity and an ability to work quickly is needed for projects, emergencies, even just doing daily tasks, like cooking. Planning is a skill just as essential, but when emergencies come up a good leader will be able to consider everything as quickly as humanly possible and make an immediate decision in the moment that will be able to be worked off of in the future.
2) There life would be easier because they made decisions before they get bigger so they wont really have extreme decisions because they made them before hand. Many people wait till it gets big so they could make the decision but it doesn't work like that. You have to first make the small decisions you have so they wont get big. But some people don't think like that they think that if they let the small decisions go by. But later they do come back and they are extreme. So that is why i think leaders should just take care of those small decisions so then later they wont have extreme ones to make.
ReplyDelete3) it depends because some leaders may leave the decisions to the last minute. So then later they could mess up on what they say. So the leader would make a better decision if he doesn't leave the decision at the last minute.
2. Many leaders have had to make extreme decisions during crisis. How do you think these decisions might have changed if leaders could make them in non-crisis situations? Give an example. [1-2 Paragraphs] You have stop making bad decisions if you know you need to do something but you don't feel like it you have to make a decisions. If you want to get somewhere in life you have to make the right decisions if you are in a crisis you have to make a decision if you want to make it better or leave it alone and it will become worst. many people don't do what they want to do because they lack self confidence they don't believe in them self. We want people to like us but you going to lose friends and gain friends along the way.
ReplyDelete3. it does make it better because it show you and pushes you to make the right decisions. being in a crisis makes you to wants do better so you wont feel the hate and the pain that you when though. Like if you go to jail for doing bad stuff that makes you to not do any more bad stuff so you can show people you can do better and want to change your life around.
2) Leaders decisions may change when they make them in non-crisis situations. When leaders are in a crisis, they tend to make poor decision. This is because being in a crisis makes them feel more pressured into making a decision. They feel that their decision has to be made as soon as possible giving them no time to think about their choice being the right one to do. When they're not in a crisis, the further think about their decision preventing them to not make the wrong one. Other things that may affect a leaders decision is fear and thinking if people will approve their choice. this just adds more stress to leaders.
ReplyDelete3) Crisis detract leaders who make decisions. Crisis makes them to make a quick decisions which prevents them from exploring other options. There might be better options, but they can never be done if leaders make quick decisions and only go for the first option that they had.
2. I believe that when leaders are in crisis, they actually take more time to think about the decision they are about to make, as opposed to when they are in a very relaxed state, when they in turn actually have more time. I also believe that when leaders are making decisions during crisis, this is what will make or break them. This will prove if they're worthy of their title. Leader. The decision during crisis, as previously stated, is going to take more time and much more thought out as opposed to passing a simpler law. The reason that this decision is more thought out, because this decision matter so much more. The time though, is limited must be used wisely. A great example of this crisis decision making is on September eleventh, two-thousand one. George W. Bush had never experienced such a tragic event, so he really had to think through what he was going to do.
ReplyDeleteBush wasn't about to have another Counter-Pearl Harbor again. His decision wasn't to attack the entire state, but attack the single master mind and whoever stood in the way of it. He decided to go after Bid Laden. "There is no textbook on how to steady a nation rattled by a faceless enemy," the former president writes. What he means by this is that, though he had never been taught how to deal with such a strong terrorism force, such as Bin Laden, he was shook for a minute, and got right back to work with dealing with the terrorism.
3. As previously stated, I believe that when a leader is met with crisis it doesn't improve or take away from the decision's quality, but it makes the leader's thoughts more focused at the task at hand. It doesn't make the decision any better if he's relaxing at a pool, it simply gives him more time to play about his fun, as opposed to focusing on the decision having to being made. Simply stated, I believe that a situation of crisis only makes a leader focus more.
2) Leader will have to make an extreme decision. They will do it because they want to changed there lives. They would do everything to do to change their lives. They will do a lot of decision that will risk a lot of things that like or like to do. There mama would not make the decision, your dad will not make the decision, or brother or sister. The leader will have to the decision that they really want to do.
ReplyDeleteIf leader could make them in no-crisis situation. They will be more confident. They wouldn't have the lack of self-confidence. They will be more happy with their lives. They will not have to risk anything. There mom, dad, or brother or sister will not have to do it. They will have to do it because they are confident about the decision they going to do.
3) Crisis will detract the leader will make. The reason i think that is because when have an emergency they will not do the thing they will have to do. The other people will crisis them because they doesn't know that they have an emergency.
2. I think that these decisions might have changed if leaders could make them non-crisis by making the right decision. They could also make them non-crisis by taking action and doing things that might not seem like a good decision at first but end up being a good decision at the end. Leaders could change crisis to non-crisis by talking with others to find the best decision to deal with the crisis. Leaders could also change crisis to non-crisis by deal the crisis when the crisis first occurs. If you don't attend to the crisis the crisis will be an even bigger problem.
ReplyDelete3. I think that crisis improves leaders decisions because they have to make a good decision that will get rid of the crisis. The crisis also improves the leaders decision because they decide that on the right decision that will impact the crisis greatly. If leaders don't make a good decision to deal with the crisis the crisis might get worse or better depending on the type of crisis that leaders are dealing with.
2. Well, because I think that we should not get carried away by others. and one does not have to be carried away by others and one can only go ahead one come very high. and not get carried away by others. still alone and unaided because sometimes you let manipulated by others.
ReplyDelete3.Yes I think leaders can not take decisions.So Others think believe it is good. But it is better for bad and we don't do it that can improve or may in.
Jesus Sanchez
ReplyDeleteDigital literacy
period:2
10-12-16
2.One example is when a leader has to make a hard decision for his people and what will happen if he makes that decision. This makes that think is it a good idea or a bad idea and how it will affect me and other people. And anther thing that they will have to think what will people say about me if I were to. What would they think of you and if its a hard decision then it would be hard on that person. Most of the time the people that make your decision will just think how would if affect them self's and not other people and that is most of the people in are country if high position. This is very common because that high class person whats to stay high class he dose not want to get removed from his position because he or she what's to make more money that you and other people. That will be a person who dose it for the money and because he cares.
Also you have to think who wold make good decisions in hard times like if were the president you have to think that for the people when there is a war or you are under attack and you have to make a decision. That is just an example of what could happen and that is part of the situation now that we have the worst of people trying to become president we have to make a good decision in what will happen if we pick Hillary or Trump. leaders that will not make a good decision that will affect you and other people around you believe it or not.
3. The leaders decision will improve because e they decide what will happen to us and we have to count on them to make the right choice. He or she will have to make the right choice for millions of people in the country and in are nation. this is why we have to chose carefully who we want as president.
1. notes on video
ReplyDelete2. These decisions might have changed if leaders could make them in to non-crisis situations by the leaders trying to take the smaller decisions first. The leader could have done what they believe. They shouldn't have to listen to the negative people or the negative decisions. They do not have do what other people are telling them. Another thing the leader could have done was just believe in themselves. They could take control of their own life. The leader could make their own decisions but they should think about it.
Another way that the decisions might have changed if leaders could make them into non -crisis situations is by the leaders put all of their effort and all of their selves into it. The leader needs to try their best since they are making a decision that can change their whole life. Something else the leader could do is to stop being nervous. They need to take the challenge because everyone is faced through a challenge in some point of their life. And then they need to make the right decision or the one that they believe in. Another thing the leader could do is be confident in themselves don't be afraid of failing. Everyone fails at something but if you keep failing then you need to make a decision to change the failure.
3. I believe that crisis detracts from the decisions that leaders make. I believe this because the leader may be going through something bad since they are in a crisis so they might not be thinking straight. Then they might make the wrong decision and then they will get more sad since they might have let people down or something. So the leader should probably make the decision when they in the right state of mind.
2)It will change them by not caring about their teammates.They would not take risks for them.They would just help them solve a problem.They wouldn't act on helping you with the problem.The leader would just give tips on how you can improve at something.
ReplyDeleteAn example is that my little brother wants to borrow my soccer ball to take it to school.I say no because he is careless.When I left early to go to school,he still took my ball.I came home and he told me that he lost the ball.I'm disappointed that he lost the ball,but I don't want to make a big deal out of it because he's just a little kid.
3)Crises improves because it allows the leader to take risks for others.The leader encourages others with crises.Crises is what makes a leader responsible.It makes leaders to become a true leader.With crises it will tell you if a person is capable of being a leader.
2) Leaders decisions in a crisis would change if the decision made was in a non-crisis situation due to the fact that there wouldn't be as much pressure and would give them more time to think about the decisions being given to the leader. For example if there was a attack on the country and the leader was had to make a decision his decision would be a hurried and not planned one in which many things could go wrong. Now if there was a long time period for a an attack to happen on the country then the leader would be able to have a clear plan on what the country is going to do to counter act this attack and do efficiently. The decisions would change dramatically because if there was a crisis the decision would not thought through completely and may go wrong. While on the other hand if it was not in a crisis it would be more clearly thought through and would probably go off with less injuries and almost without a hitch.
ReplyDelete3) In my opinion crisis detracts leaders decisions do to the fact that if their in a crisis they have to make decisions fast. My reasoning behind this is that if they had say a day to make a decision that can possibly hurt thousands but will without doubt stop the enemy. Or they can have say a month and effectively take down the enemy through careful planning and not have any injuries and or casualties.
1) notes
ReplyDelete-some decisions are major decisions.
-there are a lot of small decisions we don't make.
-we decide not to decide.
- if you already failed you don't want to fail again.
- we don't want to hurt anybody .
-we want everybody to like and accept us .
- we don't believe a lot in ourselves.
2) If a leader is crisis , they would choose to ether to solve it. A crisis is a problem you have it can be something that is small or big. A leader makes decisions because if you find a way to fix it it won't be a bigger problem or not a problem any more.
3) I think the decision leaders make for crisis would improve because a leader would check with there group to see if there good with it. because if a leader don't check with it's group it would be bad. they would not like that a leader made a decision behind there back.
1)- If a leader makes a decision in a crisis situation , they'd feel more pressure than making a decision in a non-crisis situation. A crisis is a time of intense difficulty , trouble , or danger. So the leader would feel way more intense in a crisis situation than a non -crisis situation. Their head might not be as clear as if they were making a decision in non-crisis situation. Like my aunt , who is a leader to the family , when my other aunt passed away , the day she passed , was a crisis moment for my aunt. So she made a decision to keep all the kids at home and the older ones left to the hospital. I didn't feel like it was the right decision to keep the kids at home because of the kids were my other aunt's grand kids. I think her head wasn't clear at the moment , so she reacted with instinct to tell us to stay home.
ReplyDelete2)- In my opinion , the crisis moment will detract from the decisions the leaders make. I thin k this because at times being in a crisis can often bother you in a way. So the leader can be feeling some type of way , and his or her judgement might not be as clear. They can sometimes get distracted by the crisis and not think right.
2.)I think the decisions could have been changed into a more thoughtful or calmer decision. Most leaders are pushed into a state were they have to make a risky decision because they were stuck in a crisis. sometimes they are close to the brink of giving up until hey realize that what they have started should not ended this way or that it is something they have to do for themselves. For example Cesar Chavez was harassed by police, when he told the workers to boycott the owners they were scared that they wont have money for their families and support so they worked. Some families stopped working but they were being assaulted by the police so many people were to afraid to act with Cesar. He had to make risky moves that he decided to not eat just so people can see that he doing it to show people how badly he wants the change to be done.
ReplyDelete3) In some cases leaders were able to act poor fully during a crisis since they didn't have enough time to think about the choices they could make. I others the crisis pushed them into a corner in which they used their trump card and that decision made a better attribute to the change they want in their lives. For example the problems with racism and how Mexicans and African Americans were unable to go to certain places because of their race or religion. The only side that was being hateful ad abusive was the whites when they first took over lands and forced people into the lowest they can be when Mexicans and Africans would have made friends with the whites until they made treaties, in which hey eventually broke the trust of others. Even today gangs were made just because the whites would not accept the Africans or Hispanics ad so the assaulted them or treated them badly so children and adults wanted protection ad so gangs were made so others could be save from the whites.
1- Video Notes
ReplyDelete2- These decisions might have changed if the leaders can make them in non- crisis situations by trying to make your best effort in education. You have to make a decision because it will make a difference. In a non- crisis situation you still have to make a decision because you have to be encouraged to do what is best for you. If the leaders could make their decision, they could make it easy for them on what they decide to choose. If you do not decide on something it is still a decision. The leaders have control over their decisions when there is an emergency that is going on. The decisions might make the leaders can have them in non- crisis situations because the leaders can decide on something.
Decisions are important because it will make you think and decide about what you should do. The leaders can make a decision when there is a non- crisis situation if it is something that is not in an emergency. When there is an emergency situation you must make a safe and smart decision. Your decision affects the way you perform on something.The leaders take control over their actions.
3- I think that the crisis will improve the decisions that the leader makes by saying yes that they can do it. The leaders must have determination because they have to figure out what they need to do. If the leaders want a difference, they have to make a decision during an emergency. Even though decisions make you waste your energy, you still have to be confident on what you chose. Decisions are important to when there is an emergency like helping someone that is in danger.
2.)I think the decisions could have been changed into a more thoughtful or calmer decision. Most leaders are pushed into a state were they have to make a risky decision because they were stuck in a crisis. sometimes they are close to the brink of giving up until hey realize that what they have started should not ended this way or that it is something they have to do for themselves. For example Cesar Chavez was harassed by police, when he told the workers to boycott the owners they were scared that they wont have money for their families and support so they worked. Some families stopped working but they were being assaulted by the police so many people were to afraid to act with Cesar. He had to make risky moves that he decided to not eat just so people can see that he doing it to show people how badly he wants the change to be done.
ReplyDelete3) In some cases leaders were able to act poor fully during a crisis since they didn't have enough time to think about the choices they could make. I others the crisis pushed them into a corner in which they used their trump card and that decision made a better attribute to the change they want in their lives. For example the problems with racism and how Mexicans and African Americans were unable to go to certain places because of their race or religion. The only side that was being hateful ad abusive was the whites when they first took over lands and forced people into the lowest they can be when Mexicans and Africans would have made friends with the whites until they made treaties, in which hey eventually broke the trust of others. Even today gangs were made just because the whites would not accept the Africans or Hispanics ad so the assaulted them or treated them badly so children and adults wanted protection ad so gangs were made so others could be save from the whites.
2)they wouldn't be as stressful it would be less complicated for them it would be way easier for them and less challenging it would make life easy for them and there will be small consequences there will be life changing choices there are a lot of small choices that we wont make that tax our minds and drain our energy its gonna be very challenging make your own decisions get control of your life.
ReplyDelete3)they have to be careful with the choices they make in an emergency like in a natural disaster or a zombie apocalypse :p because there can be choices that may your death death or someone getting hurt there will be very difficult choices there will be some people who wont like you.the crisis can pressure them to make wrong choices and do something very bad
2) I think decisions would destroy how they would look at the decision maker because not everyone will approve of you decisions, there will be haters ,people who won't accept you for who you are and what you choose to do for example I wanted to be a lawyer when I got older and a lot of people told me that I wouldn't be ready to be a lawyer because While I'm spending my time on that I could be doing something that wouldn't take as much time to process . So I had a back up job If that didn't work .A cosmetologist was my other decision and as soon as I told everyone about it they thought it was a good idea because it would fit me . Even If my family don't want me to be a lawyer I'm going to try what's impossible to them and show them that I did it or at least attempted to try because it doesn't hurt to try and even if I don't get it I will still work on it and go to school to become a cosmetologist . Decisions are hard when it comes to making them because you don't know about how much someone will get hurt by it.
ReplyDelete3) The leaders decision may be improved because most likely when decisions are made people might be angry about it for the moment . Once it becomes a getting used to it people wouldn't really have a problem with it unless someone does something to harm our society it would be like a war trying to get our people back happy. But they would have to make the right choice something that wouldn't cause them to get hurt .But you never know because it may be a good decision to some people and a bad one to others so it can go either way.
1.I think if leaders can make decisions in non crisis decisions it wouldn't make any sort of difference because it wouldn't be major decisions like if terrorists plan to bomb the city, that would count as a world wide problem but if its something like a robbery, sure both things or pretty bad but the thing is that you have to look at the worse situation and solve that one as an adult.
ReplyDelete2.I feel like depending the crisis at hand it does change the leaders decision because there might be a world wide problem they feel strongly about and do somethings serious about it and other world problems they may not know what to do about or they do not know how to feel about the situation and treat it as the robbery and not do anything.
2. The decisions that might have changed leaders could make them in non-crisis situation is because every leader has been through crisis and has managed to to get through it. If they made decisions in a non-crisis situations, they've probably would have done much more to make the good decisions. They would've had more time to make the decisions happen than be waisting there time in making the wrong decision . Because they're to busy making the wrong decision happen they wont focus on making the right decision. If i was in a non-crisis situation i would,d probably had more time and a better mindset on making the right decision.
ReplyDelete3. In my opinion crisis does detract from the decision leaders make because they're to busy thinking of what people think about them instead of making the right decision they should be ,making. Crisis creates an lot of anxiety and nervousness because we don't take care of it. Instead they decide not to decide , which is a decision deciding not to decide and to act. There are things that happen to them along the way but they should get through it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete2. I think these decisions might have changed if leaders could make them in non-crisis situations by working through thew mental block of acting of doing things that they we ought to do. The fear of failure is preventing us from acting. For example, if you`re trying to improve something and you keep thinking that you`re going to fail, then you have to get that out of your head and instead keep in mind that you can achieve. If wanting someone`s approval keeps us from working hard, then we have to know that that their opinion do not count in our lives and we sometimes do not need others to help us out because all we need is ourselves to improve and make something out of it. Also, if our past is making situations harder, then we have to let it past because it already passed and no we have to be working on our future.
ReplyDelete3. I think crisis detract leaders from the decisions leaders make because if a leader is experiencing stress,his or her mental abilities will be diverted from the task at hand. It can help improve the leaders make decisions , but they can lose time and they might not have the right ability to make it happen. To increase control over the situation, the leader can do one or more of improving task structure and make more position power.
2:These Decision's could be alittle bit less quick and put alittle more thought into them.
ReplyDeleteThey could also have in a non-crisis made a more wise and not stupid decision.If you make a decision in life like i did at one point it could really mess you up.Lucky i have a family who cares about me. They got me back on track, cause at one point in life i had to make a decision to dot do work and be cool or do my work and have no friends. I took the stupid choice and chose to be cool and not do my work. Like i said we should put more thought into the outcomes of our decsions before we make them.
3:Crisis Dont improve or de-prove the decision making of a person. We all have a thoght of what were going to Do. Its the timeing of the decision that we make thats differs the outcome.In War that would be a time were a decsion could ruin somebody or something. At the same time it Could make a person or persons very pleased. Even if its not the right choice.
2. I think some leaders have made some bad decisions. I know I'm one of them, I've made decisions that I shouldn't have made. At least I had my family and friends on my back. There not there all the time so that's why I have to make my own responsibility instead of making it theirs. I think I could have changed my decision by not hanging out with the wrong type of people, that lead you to make bad choices.
ReplyDelete3. Crisis makes leaders think quick. It can lead to making bad choices but sometimes you have to make the call of making that demand. It can cause high-stress levels for people but once it's over everything can pay off. If it's in a crisis situation you have to act quick kinda like pearl harbor they had no clue what to do until people took off on a plane and started to attack back at the Japanese.
2.) This decisions might have changed if leaders could make them in non-crisis situations because when people bring you negative vibes on your goals you start feeling like if you will never be able to accomplish it . So you start giving up quickly , but if they bring positive vibes you will start doing better and better and soon finishing your goal in life . For example many people start doing something successful in their life and others start seeing a change and try to ruin their achievements. And some people are sensitive and will listen and give up . But if people believe in you and believe that you can get anything done you will do good.
ReplyDelete3.) Crisis does and does not improve people . Some people do better even when they been crisis by many people . And some people are weak and believe on peoples crisis instead of believing on themselves . The weak people get upset of not being able to accomplish their goal and the people that just don't care what others say have a better chance of doing good in life.
2.) This decisions might have changed if leaders could make them in non-crisis situations because when people bring you negative vibes on your goals you start feeling like if you will never be able to accomplish it . So you start giving up quickly , but if they bring positive vibes you will start doing better and better and soon finishing your goal in life . For example many people start doing something successful in their life and others start seeing a change and try to ruin their achievements. And some people are sensitive and will listen and give up . But if people believe in you and believe that you can get anything done you will do good.
ReplyDelete3.) Crisis does and does not improve people . Some people do better even when they been crisis by many people . And some people are weak and believe on peoples crisis instead of believing on themselves . The weak people get upset of not being able to accomplish their goal and the people that just don't care what others say have a better chance of doing good in life.
2.) This decisions might have changed if leaders could make them in non-crisis situations because when people bring you negative vibes on your goals you start feeling like if you will never be able to accomplish it . So you start giving up quickly , but if they bring positive vibes you will start doing better and better and soon finishing your goal in life . For example many people start doing something successful in their life and others start seeing a change and try to ruin their achievements. And some people are sensitive and will listen and give up . But if people believe in you and believe that you can get anything done you will do good.
ReplyDelete3.) Crisis does and does not improve people . Some people do better even when they been crisis by many people . And some people are weak and believe on peoples crisis instead of believing on themselves . The weak people get upset of not being able to accomplish their goal and the people that just don't care what others say have a better chance of doing good in life.