| Course | LDR-3240 Leaders in History |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Module 2 application paper: leaders in history |
| Length | About 527 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Thomas Edison State University |
| Program | Bachelor of Science in Organizational Leadership |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for LDR 3240 Module 2
When Goals Align and When They Drift: Frances Perkins, Henry Ford and the Followers They Led
Student Name
Bachelor of Science in Organizational Leadership, Thomas Edison State University
LDR-3240: Leaders in History
Mentor Name
Month Day, Year
When Goals Align and When They Drift: Frances Perkins, Henry Ford and the Followers They Led
Introduction
Wills (1995) argues that leaders do not simply impose goals; they find goals that followers already hold, or can be brought to hold, and mobilize them. That idea helps explain why some leaders' influence lasts while others' fades even after early success. This paper compares a reform leader, Frances Perkins, and a business leader, Henry Ford.
Frances Perkins
On March 25, 1911, Perkins watched workers jump from the burning Triangle Shirtwaist factory in New York, where 146 people died. Downey (2009) describes how the fire shaped her career: she became an investigator for the state factory commission, then New York's industrial commissioner and, in 1933, Secretary of Labor under Franklin Roosevelt, the first woman in a presidential cabinet. She helped shape the Social Security Act of 1935 and the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. Perkins rarely had formal power over the people whose support she needed. She built coalitions among reformers, union leaders, legislators and the president by tying her goals to theirs: safer factories, unemployment insurance and old-age pensions that each group wanted for its own reasons.
Henry Ford
In January 1914 Ford announced a wage of five dollars a day for many workers, roughly double the prevailing rate. Raff and Summers (1987) found evidence that the higher wage reduced turnover and absenteeism and raised productivity, consistent with the idea of efficiency wages; Ford's workers shared his goal of a stable, productive plant because it now paid them well. But Ford's later leadership drifted from what customers and employees wanted. He kept producing the Model T until 1927, long after buyers had turned to rivals offering more variety, and his hostility to unions led to violence against organizers in the 1930s.
Comparing the Two
Both leaders achieved large changes by aligning followers' goals with their own. The difference lies in what happened next. Perkins kept listening to the groups she depended on and adjusted her proposals to win their support, which let her influence last through twelve years in the cabinet. Ford came to treat his own judgment as the goal, ignoring changes in what customers and workers wanted. In Wills's terms, his followers' goals drifted away from his, and his leadership narrowed into command.
Lessons for Today
At my paratransit service, the lesson is that early success can breed the assumption that the leader knows best. When we introduced a new scheduling system, drivers supported it because it cut their unpaid waiting time. Two years later, they complain that it packs too many rides into each shift. Like Ford, management could insist the system worked; like Perkins, we could listen and adjust it so it again serves the drivers' goals as well as ours. A practical first step would be to meet with a group of drivers, review a week of their schedules together and agree on a limit to rides per shift before any change is announced.
Conclusion
Perkins and Ford both led by aligning goals. Perkins kept them aligned by listening; Ford let them drift. Leadership that lasts depends on noticing when followers' goals change.
References
Downey, K. (2009). The woman behind the New Deal: The life of Frances Perkins, FDR's secretary of labor and his moral conscience. Nan A. Talese/Doubleday.
Raff, D. M. G., & Summers, L. H. (1987). Did Henry Ford pay efficiency wages? Journal of Labor Economics, 5(4), S57-S86. https://doi.org/10.1086/298165
Wills, G. (1995). Certain trumpets: The nature of leadership. Simon & Schuster.
What the LDR 3240 Module 2 instructions ask for
The second application paper continues the study of leaders in history, often asking you to compare leaders from different fields such as reform, business, politics or the arts. Expect to analyze how each leader mobilized followers, what each achieved and where each fell short, and to apply the lessons to a present-day setting. Choose leaders whose records include both success and difficulty, since that tension produces the strongest analysis. Use biographies and research rather than popular summaries, and keep the comparison focused on one or two concepts from the readings. Your mentor may let you choose the leaders; pick two whose followers' goals changed over time.
How this LDR 3240 Module 2 example is built
The paper opens with Wills's idea that leaders find goals followers share. A section on Perkins traces how the Triangle fire led to a career of coalition building. A section on Ford uses an economic study of the five-dollar day to show alignment, then describes how his leadership drifted. A comparison section explains the difference through the course concept. A lessons section applies it to a scheduling system at the writer's workplace, and the conclusion states the finding in three sentences. The paper keeps the two biographies short, about a paragraph each, so the comparison and the lessons receive most of the space. The present-day example is concrete enough to act on.
Where the marks sit in the LDR 3240 Module 2 rubric
Mentors grade this paper on accurate understanding of the readings, effective comparison, application of course concepts and clear, cited writing. Papers that analyze both success and failure, rather than praising or condemning a leader, show balanced judgment. Using research, such as an economic study, to support a claim about a leader's effect demonstrates synthesis beyond biography. Lessons applied to a specific present-day situation complete the assignment and show the purpose of studying history. Mentors also look for accurate dates and figures, since a comparison built on errors loses credibility. Explaining why one leader's influence lasted and another's narrowed, using a course concept, earns the most credit. Lessons tied to a named workplace decision earn the most.
LDR 3240 Module 2 help from the desk
Students lose points by choosing leaders who are only admirable or only villains, by describing achievements without explaining how followers were mobilized or by applying lessons vaguely. Others get dates or facts wrong. Show how each leader gained and kept followers. Explain what changed when a leader's influence grew or declined. Check facts against a reliable biography. Apply the lesson to a specific decision in your own setting. Keep your judgment balanced: describe what each leader did well before explaining where each fell short. Name your sources for dates and figures in the text, not only in the references. A free first sample on your own LDR-3240 Module 2 paper is available on request.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Thomas Edison State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More LDR 3240 and Bachelor of Science in Organizational Leadership sample papers
- LDR 3240 Module 1: Application Paper: Tubman and Shackleton as Leaders of Followers
- LDR 3240 Module 3: Application Paper: Machiavelli, Burns and a Leader's Moral Choices
- LDR 3240 Module 4: Application Paper: Legitimate Authority and the Followers Who Grant It
- LDR 3240 Module 5: Final Paper: Challenging the Status Quo as a Leader Who Learns From the Past
- LDR 4190 Module 3: Financial Analysis: Reading the Food Bank's Form 990
- LDR 3050 Module 9: Reflection Paper: Two Selectors, One Aisle and My Conflict Style
- PSY 3600 Module 5: Written Assignment: Environment, Effectiveness and Culture at a Moving Company
- MAN 3760 Module 3: Application Paper: Power and Influence in a Push for New Loading Procedures
LDR 3240 Module 2 questions, answered
Where can I find a free LDR 3240 Module 2 sample paper?
Frances Perkins and Henry Ford, compared on how they kept or lost their followers' goals, form the application paper above.
Who was Frances Perkins?
The U.S. Secretary of Labor from 1933 to 1945, the first woman in a presidential cabinet, who helped create Social Security and federal wage and hour law.
What was Ford's five-dollar day?
A 1914 wage of five dollars a day for many workers, roughly double the prevailing rate, which reduced turnover and raised productivity.
Why compare leaders across fields?
Contrasting contexts show which features of leadership hold across settings and which depend on the field.
What does goal alignment mean in leadership?
Leaders and followers pursuing a goal both share, which Wills treats as essential to leadership.