Profile the contextual intelligence of two political leaders (hint: contextual intelligence is the ability to move around the matrix in Table 3.1 of the Nye text). Political leader is defined broadly (e.g. president, legislator, foreign leader, general, diplomat, mayor, governor, social movement leader, etc.).
One profile should cover an example of superior contextual intelligence. The other should cover an example of poor contextual intelligence. In other words, one profile should be about a leader achieving their goal and the other should be about a leader’s failure.
Describe how each leader changed styles from one situation to another, and be sure to note the styles each leader moved to and from. Also, explain why they were/were not successful, with reference to one or more dimensions of contextual intelligence.
Be sure to describe the hard and soft power skills each leader used in each situation and explain how these tools helped or hindered their achievement.
Be sure to note the leaders’ objectives in each situation.
Be sure to note the leaders’ followers and environmental/institutional constraints in each situation.
Finally, you must cite any news articles, books, reputable websites, or any other material you use in your descriptions and explanations. Also, cite sources for any historical facts that are not likely common knowledge (It’s sometimes difficult to know what is and what is not common knowledge–don’t get hung up on this, just try your best).
Journal entries will be between 3 ½ and 5 pages in length and will be submitted on Canvas. To ensure students do not go over or under the required length, they should write the essays in a MS Word document prior to submission. The correct formatting is double-spaced, 12-point font in Times New Roman typeface, and 1” margins in MS Word.
A reference page is required.
Each journal entry must include the following five (5) basic components:
Touches on each element of the prompt.
Utilizes one of the philosophical-logical or values-based frameworks covered in the course.
Contains a central argument that is backed up with evidence and relevant to the prompt.
Is intelligible and easy to read/comprehend.
Avoids heavy use of/reliance on logical fallacies in making argument.