Dr. Bezio’s article was so interesting because it really showed the importance of the sociohistorical context and evaluating leadership. After reading the background of what Shakespeare’s England looked like in terms of politics, my eyes were completely opened up. I have not studied Shakespeare in depth, besides the few plays I read in high school, but I think that it is so intriguing how the Romans and the Greeks represent the English and the Scottish. This rivalry and the information about how the people of England thought that the Scottish people would corrupt the English. This can really be seen in the play Pericles with the way that the Union project and James connects to the looking for marriage in the play. I think that it is so interesting how what was occurring in the 1600’s with the people of England not wanting to unify relates so much to Brexit today and how the people of England want to break apart and be separate again. This really shows the long history of the traditional English identity that has never really been broken.

I think that the reading “Questioning leadership: an integrative model” by Michael Harvey relates to Dr. Bezio’s article because it discusses the importance of a group in regard to leadership. The seven questions that Harvey focuses on mostly identify with what the makeup of the group is and how the leader can best answer the questions and needs of the group. This reading emphasized the importance of communication between the leader and the group of followers because it is super important for the group to know what is going on, where they are going, etc. If there is poor communication, then the group is harder to be united and that is one of the most important things in leadership. It is very important for the group to like their leader and one of the key ways for a leader to gain the trust and likeness of their group is to be open and communicate with them.