Motivated to perform well and struggle hard and lead

motivated to perform well and struggle hard and lead the project towards success. The leader
evaluates all risks and ensures the project is being completed within specified deadline and time
limit.
Feloni (2016) explained the charismatic and charming personality of John Legere. Legere
is highly motivated and thus he also use his motivational approach to boost the employees’
energy and convince them to work hard for the company’s objectives. He also announces great
rewards for the team to keep them motivated and develop good relationship with them. Feloni
(2016) further explained that John Legere is a visionary leader and has persuasive characteristics
to convince the employees and develop better relationship with them. He set up solid objectives
for the workers and guide them how to perform well. Not only this, but also Legere stands with
the team members in times of difficulties and guide them how to come out of the situation and
lead the team towards success.
On the other hand, Lucas (2019) discussed the leadership style of Bernard Hees, who
lacks in his motivational appraoch. Hees never focus on motivating his people; instead he
remains more authoritative and pass his orders to let the employees know what they are going to
do. This leaves negative impact on the employees’ energy and thsu they fail to perform well or to
attain the project objective efficiently. Also, his decision making skills are weak due to which

team remains confused and get involved in several workplace conflicts [ CITATION ALu19 \l
1033 ].
Conclusively, both leaders have different motivational approach towards their team and
therefore they attain the project objectives in different ways. Legere is more motivational and so
he leads the team to success efficiently[ CITATION Fel16 \l 1033 ], whereas Hees is more
authoritative and so he fails to direct his team the right way towards success [ CITATION ALu19
\l 1033 ].
Contingency Leadership
Contingency leadership explains the effectiveness of the leaders to perform well in
different situation. Fiedler (2017) explained the contingency of leaders to evaluate how it helps
them to work hard in tough times. A good leader is the one who take effective decisions on time
and lead efficiently during the disaster, whereas ineffective leader can never take the right
decision in particular situation and remains more focused to impose power over the workers in
all situations.
Long (2016) highlighted the contingency nature of the John Legere, who knew how to
deal with different situations efficiently. He always analyzed the risks and uncertainties and then
took decision accordingly. Legere never used his power to force employees; rather he used his
brain to resolve the matters efficiently and lead the team towards the right target.
On the other hand, Lucas (2019) explained that Bernard Hees was more concerned to
impose his power over the workers. He never tried to analyze different situations; instead he
thought power is the key to success. Therefore, Hees always forced his workers to do whatever is

ordered but this generated a frustrated workplace environmenta nd thus lead to ineffective