Jack is a 36-year-old leader within a major hospital. As a leader, he prides himself as a professional who supports his team and helps each of them to meet their chosen goals. From a personal standpoint, he focuses on eating healthy, exercising regularly, and playing on his church’s basketball team but for the past year, his focus on healthy living has declined because of professional responsibilities. During a follow-up visit to his physician for laboratory test results, he is told by his primary care doctor that his cholesterol is 286, HDL 30, LDL 85, and triglycerides 500. The primary care doctor explains the meaning of the test results. The primary care doctor explains that Jack will need medication to control his cholesterol and lipids, writes prescriptions, and explains that his condition is one of a chronic nature and will likely require lifelong treatment. The risks and benefits of treatment are explained while Jack sits quietly in disbelief. Jack takes the prescriptions and leaves the office convinced that this is a joke. He tears the prescriptions in pieces and throws them in the trash. Jack knows that his recent lack of focus related to his health have taken its toll, along with his family history. He vows to exercise more and eat a better diet but also wonders how he can turn his bad habits into good ones without neglecting his team. (Self-Concept Case Study, 2010) Please address the follow questions.
What actions by Jack suggest his self-esteem may be negatively impacted by his diagnosis?
What positive direction might Jack explore to help with the acceptance of his diagnosis? How can he motivate his team to get involved in the process?
Identify the potential causes in Jack disturbance of self-concept.
How can the behaviors related to self-disclosure and time play a role in helping Jack to accept and live with his diagnosis? What role does communication play in Jackâs overall acceptance? As a leader, how can Jack engage his team in this new healthy lifestyle while respecting his privacy?
Sample Solution
being a deadly blunder of judgment. Ney requested the mounted force to charge without the help of the gunnery and the British reacted by shaping infantry squares bolstered by cannons batteries. The 9,000 French rangers charged the squares multiple times and were each time spurned with overwhelming misfortunes. Amid each charge the British heavy weapons specialists took shelter in the infantry squares in this way surrendering their gun to the foe. The French anyway neglected to exploit this by not spiking the gun with nails and rendering them pointless. [5] This strategy if fruitful would have influenced the fight as cost the rangers beyond a reasonable doubt as on consequent charges and withdraws, they were influenced horrendously by grape shot from these firearms. Neyâs ineptitude in requesting these charges was noted by Napoleonâs head of Staff Marshal Soult, âhe [Ney] is trading off us as he did at Jenaâ. [6] This demonstrates it was not simply misfortune or a terrible day for Ney and that he had been reliably blameworthy of deadly mistakes, his direction and goofs unquestionably added to British triumph. From here, he would serve in a decent limit in many significant fights amid the Prussian battle of 1806/7 against Prussia and Russia, regularly being a flanking corps leader. Be that as it may, he wasnât known for being a quality authority. Napoleon himself said that Ney was âexcessively shameless, too inept to be in any way ready to succeedâ and that âhe was useful for a direction of 10,000 men, yet past that he was out of his profundity.â The ten thousand men is a harsh size for a French division as a corps could number from twenty to forty thousand men relying upon crusade prerequisites and misfortunes. Past the âimproper and doltishâ remark, the remark around ten thousand men is by all accounts best. He has been depicted as a perfect infantry division leader, frequently driving from the front with the men instead of being reasonable and driving from behind a couple of lines of infantry. Marshal Grouchy was an unequivocal factor in Napoleons demise. After the Battle of Lingy Napoleon gave Marshal Grouchy direction of 33,000 men and requested him to pursue the Prussians and to keep them from reaching the Duke of Wellington. Grumpy neglected to do this while he figured out how to pursue the Corps of General Thielmann he lost contact with the fundamental Prussian power that was walking to the aid of Wellington. His second flaw was that once he heard the guns shooting originating from Waterloo he didnât lead his men to the field. The purpose behind Grouchy not to walk to Waterloo was on the grounds that he thought it was the French guns pounding the British. Had he done as such his 33,000 men would have absolutely enabled Napoleon to have crushed Wellington before the arrival of the Prussians along these lines counterbalancing Grouchyâs prior bumble. Rather Grouchy battled against and crushed Thielmann at Wavre while the skirmish of Waterloo was in >
being a deadly blunder of judgment. Ney requested the mounted force to charge without the help of the gunnery and the British reacted by shaping infantry squares bolstered by cannons batteries. The 9,000 French rangers charged the squares multiple times and were each time spurned with overwhelming misfortunes. Amid each charge the British heavy weapons specialists took shelter in the infantry squares in this way surrendering their gun to the foe. The French anyway neglected to exploit this by not spiking the gun with nails and rendering them pointless. [5] This strategy if fruitful would have influenced the fight as cost the rangers beyond a reasonable doubt as on consequent charges and withdraws, they were influenced horrendously by grape shot from these firearms. Neyâs ineptitude in requesting these charges was noted by Napoleonâs head of Staff Marshal Soult, âhe [Ney] is trading off us as he did at Jenaâ. [6] This demonstrates it was not simply misfortune or a terrible day for Ney and that he had been reliably blameworthy of deadly mistakes, his direction and goofs unquestionably added to British triumph. From here, he would serve in a decent limit in many significant fights amid the Prussian battle of 1806/7 against Prussia and Russia, regularly being a flanking corps leader. Be that as it may, he wasnât known for being a quality authority. Napoleon himself said that Ney was âexcessively shameless, too inept to be in any way ready to succeedâ and that âhe was useful for a direction of 10,000 men, yet past that he was out of his profundity.â The ten thousand men is a harsh size for a French division as a corps could number from twenty to forty thousand men relying upon crusade prerequisites and misfortunes. Past the âimproper and doltishâ remark, the remark around ten thousand men is by all accounts best. He has been depicted as a perfect infantry division leader, frequently driving from the front with the men instead of being reasonable and driving from behind a couple of lines of infantry. Marshal Grouchy was an unequivocal factor in Napoleons demise. After the Battle of Lingy Napoleon gave Marshal Grouchy direction of 33,000 men and requested him to pursue the Prussians and to keep them from reaching the Duke of Wellington. Grumpy neglected to do this while he figured out how to pursue the Corps of General Thielmann he lost contact with the fundamental Prussian power that was walking to the aid of Wellington. His second flaw was that once he heard the guns shooting originating from Waterloo he didnât lead his men to the field. The purpose behind Grouchy not to walk to Waterloo was on the grounds that he thought it was the French guns pounding the British. Had he done as such his 33,000 men would have absolutely enabled Napoleon to have crushed Wellington before the arrival of the Prussians along these lines counterbalancing Grouchyâs prior bumble. Rather Grouchy battled against and crushed Thielmann at Wavre while the skirmish of Waterloo was in >
