The article talks about how the Japanese have downplayed the severity of the problem at their reactors, and how the leaders have reacted to this situation raises some points related to class. I feel that this relates to the leader member exchange in that the Japanese and specifically the leader of Japan-Naoto Kan have not been as honest with the rest of the world as the perhaps should have. The rest of the world is like a out group compared to the Japanese and they have not received all the benefits of someone on the in-group, such as someone working for the Japanese government knows a lot more probably then what the Japanese have let out to the west. And if they would have been more up front with the rest of the world in the beginning, and say they need help with their reactors and cannot get them under control, then perhaps the response from the rest of the world would be a lot greater and some of the problems that we may be facing in the future could have been avoided with a better leader member exchange.
Some questions?
1. Does how a leader emotions appear in a crisis affect the country?
2. Is there a reason to keep other nations as an out group? And if so what circumstances?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1367684/Japan-earthquake-tsunami-Fukushima-nulear-plant-radiation-leak-kill-people.html
Posted by- Greg Pawlowski
No comments:
Post a Comment