Were his accomplishments worthy enough for him to be greatly respected two centuries later? Since other iconic leaders seemed to do much more than Nelson did. “Wellington won eight major battles, while Napoleon Bonaparte, self-styled emperor of France fought over two-dozen, most but not all of which were victorious. ” Angus Sonatas, A. K. (year). Horopito Nelson.
There was a very important difference between Nelson and the three leaders; Nelson was the only one that understood the importance of sea power. Nelson had a natural ability to seize naval strategy, and he changed naval tactics severely.He then became the most successful guarantor of victory in the age of fighting sail. Like any normal imperfect human being, Nelson had his mistakes. “He was vain, eccentric, pompous, and self centered. ” Angus Sonatas, A. K.
(year). Horopito Nelson. For a year, Nelson put his personal life ahead of his duty as a naval officer. He had an inappropriate affair with a married woman which almost lead to his career shattering. Many Of his predecessors have never held a position of authority at the admiralty, and eave excelled at naval administration.On the other hand, Nelson didn’t. Those who came after Nelson had to struggle with new technologies, he didn’t.
He didn’t perform any great feasts of navigation or seamanship, and he never circumnavigated the globe. Even after everything that was mentioned earlier, he still ranks above the Bakes, Hawks Calicoes, and Cunningham in the naval pantheon, and he eclipses his own superior, the Earl of SST Vincent. Nelson was a gifted leader of men, he inspired his captains, his ‘band of brothers’, to great feasts. This wasn’t exactly what made Nelson a tee genius Hough.Nelson had a special gift, a gift of having a vision of naval warfare that was revolutionary for its time. That vision rejected the strategy of accepted tactics, of limited naval strategies and the constricting safety of the line of battle. Some thought of Nelson as full of bravado, and immersed with an unshakeable belief in his own abilities though.
“Even today, Horopito nelson is the ultimate naval hero of ‘immortal memory, a leader whose generous for naval warfare is unquestioned. ” What made Nelson a great commander was that he was the first commander to understand the concept of full war.His aim wasn’t only to defeat the enemy, it was to completely eliminate him and remove his ability to rage naval warfare. The young Nelson You will understand later on why if it wasn’t for the death of Nelson’s mother, there wouldn’t have been Lord Nelson, a Tarantula or an ‘immortal memory. His mother was Catherine Nelson, the sister of Maurice Suckling, a successful naval captain. There wasn’t any talk about sending her son to sea, at first. She was married to the Reverend Edmund Nelson, the rector of Burnham Thorpe in Norfolk.
The fourth surviving child of her marriage was Nelson, Ron on 29 September 1758.
NBS8328- International Management Practitioner
NBS8328- International Management Practitioner.
Assignment 1: Critical Journal Article Review (30% of overall module grade)
Word count- 1500 words
In this assignment you are asked to write a critical review of an academic journal article that is on a topic related to International Business Management
Please read ‘Getting Critical’, by Kate Williams (the little red book from the module Pocket Study Skills collection):
Williams, K. 2009. Getting Critical. Oxford Brookers University, UK
Preparing your review:
A key question to ask yourself: What are the main strengths and weaknesses of the journal article?
• When first reading through the article, consider the author’s intentions and whether or not you think those intentions were successfully realised.
• Write notes on the article as you read through it.
• Organize your points into separate groups (e.g. points about structure, style, or argument).
• Devise a logical sequence for presenting these ideas.
• Remember that all of your ideas must support your central thesis.
As you become more familiar with the journal article, consider the following:
• What is the author’s purpose? To survey and summarize research on a topic? To present an argument that builds on past research? To refute another writer’s argument?
• Does the author define important terms?
• Is the information in the article fact or opinion? (Facts can be verified, while opinions arise from interpretations of facts.) Does the information seem well-researched or is it unsupported?
• What are the author’s central arguments or conclusions? Are they clearly stated? Are they supported by evidence and analysis?
• If the article reports on an experiment or study, does the author clearly outline the methodology and the expected result?
• Is the article lacking information or argumentation that you expected to find?
• Is the article organised logically and easy to follow?
• Does the writer’s style suit the intended audience? Is the style stilted or unnecessarily complicated?
• Is the author’s language objective or charged with emotion and bias?
• If illustrations or charts are used, are they effective in presenting information?
Marking criteria (please refer to Degree Program PGT Marking Criteria).
Overall, a marker is evaluating the following:
– Is the journal article appropriate (i.e. from a peer-reviewed journal and related to IBM/Management/Business)
– Is there evidence of a critical analysis, or is the review more descriptive?
– How informed are the evaluations in the review? Are these logical and relevant?
– Is the review coherent? Is there an overall argument or position?
– Is the structure coherent and clear
Presentation of the review:
– Put the full reference of the article at the top of the review
– An essay style structure or subheadings are ok (don’t over-use sub-headings if you are using these)
– Provide a reference list at the end of the review if you have referred to any other sources
Essay Help “>Essay Help