Over my time at PL, I have added many ideas to what leadership means to me. Each semester has given me the opportunity to add new ideas and concepts to my definition of leadership. Now, I believe that leadership comes in so many different forms and each from is unique to specific situations that a leader may be put in. For example leadership in the military is far different than leadership for a corporate company. To me, leadership means the best possible way to inspire others to get to a desired outcome. The best possible way is different when it comes to each individual point of view.
Describing my own leadership style, some strengths I would include are patience, relatable, and open-minded. I would describe myself as a servant leader because I interact with others with the intent of improving those people. Over my time at the University of Maryland, I have made it my top priority to build a connection with anyone that may be on my team for a group project or some other assignment. Although I am not outspoken like the typical leader, I make sure I carry my weight to lead as an example.
Alex Kiyota
PLCY201
Andrew Carnegie
During the late 1800’s, Andrew Carnegie emerged as one of the most successful and wealthiest businessmen in the world. Carnegie’s life was highlighted by two main aspects; business and philanthropy. While gaining a substantial amount of self-made wealth in the steel industry, Andrew Carnegie was able demonstrate his leadership abilities. These qualities carried over into the next phase of his life, where he became a well-known philanthropist and donated his money in ways communities will be forever grateful for. Andrew Carnegie’s leadership style was both effective and ineffective through demonstrating several aspects of leadership, power, and negotiation tactics. He applied these styles effectively through becoming a self-made businessman, entering into the steel industry, and giving back to the community. However, Carnegie also demonstrated ineffective leadership styles during the Homestead strike of 1982 and the process of selling his company.
Andrew Carnegie demonstrated servant leadership and soft power while climbing from the bottom of the social chain. Due to his family’s poor economic status as immigrants in the United States, Carnegie had to get a job at the age of 13 while earning $1.20 each week at a factory (Andrew…). When demonstrating servant leadership, “the great leader is seen as a servant first” (Greenleaf). While most view him for his wealth, many fail to see how Carnegie was able to climb to the top of the economy while starting with nothing. As a servant, Carnegie was “always searching, listening, [and] expecting” something that would allow him to climb out of poverty (Greenleaf). Following this job, Carnegie found other jobs that paid more with telegraphing and railroad companies (Andrew…). While at the railroad company, Carnegie was able to obtain his boss’s job as a railroad division superintendent (Andrew…). Through obtaining this job, Carnegie demonstrated how a person with little education and money can work hard and accumulate wealth. Although this is not where he gained the majority of his wealth, it was a step-by-step process in which Carnegie took with patience. For the duration of his time at the railroad, Andrew Carnegie used soft power to be successful. A main part of soft power is developing visions and communicating effectively (Coutu). Carnegie demonstrated both of these factors. Although he was new to the business world, Andrew Carnegie saw the importance of networking. Through communicating effectively, he found several mentors to help him climb the business ladder and make smart investments (Rabang). Slowly but surely, his soft power allowed him to begin accumulating wealth. When it came to visions and goals, Andrew Carnegie certainly understood what it meant to envision the future. The use of his soft power to envision goals is what made him such a productive businessman. He saw how the civil war fueled the start of the iron industry and how much fortune he could obtain by entering into that industry (The Effective…). Carnegie was not just focused on the present, but he was focused on the future as well. Through the effective uses of servant leadership and soft power, Andrew Carnegie was able to climb from poverty and accumulate his large amount of wealth.
Through taking risks upon entering into the steel industry, Andrew Carnegie showed how effective his leadership was. In order to buy shares, Carnegie had to take out bank loans and his mother needed to mortgage their house (McCreary). These investments, like any others, did not guarantee Carnegie abundant returns. Carnegie’s efforts worked, however, and he began seeing returns of $5,000 annually (McCreary). According to the article How Taking Risks Evokes Leadership Success, risk and successful leadership go hand in hand. Leadership success means “finding different solutions to… issues… that are getting in the way of results” (Tull). In Carnegie’s case, his lack of money was getting in the way of his accumulation of wealth. The solution he found to get to his results was taking immense risk. He risked not only his life, but his family’s as well. His solution allowed him to overcome his issue, and he ended up making triple the amount of money he was making previously (McCreary). The article How Taking Risks Evokes Leadership Success also touches on an important feature of Andrew Carnegie’s entry into the steel industry. In order to be an effective leader, one must find “new or better ways of doing things [and] meeting needs of customers or clients” (Tull). While he was involved in the steel industry, Carnegie applied several unique solutions to improve the efficiency of production. He applied the Bessemer process as well as vertical integration, two concepts which helped satisfy the needs of his clients (McCreary). As a leader, Carnegie was able to combine two different solutions in order to exceed his clients’ expectations. This solution of Carnegie’s also defines his success as a leader because he “start[ed] with an idea or concept that need[ed] to be developed” (Tull). Beginning with the idea of taking advantage of the high demand for steel, Carnegie developed his production to out-perform rival companies and “built the largest steel empire in American history” (McCreary). Carnegie’s leadership was successful due to the amount of risk he took. He “dip[ped] [his] toes into the pool of uncertainty” and did not let the idea of failure stop him (Tull).
Andrew Carnegie’s practice of citizen and authentic leadership through philanthropic investments is what truly made him a respected leader. In his book, The Gospel of Wealth, Carnegie expressed his belief that it is disgraceful for a man to die rich (McCreary). His belief in this simple concept demonstrated how much of a citizen leader Carnegie was. As stated in The Making of a Citizen Leader, a citizen leader must “develop the abilities to gain access to information… and the skills to put such information to effective use” (Mabey). In relation to his philanthropic endeavors, Andrew Carnegie had already accomplished developing and gaining access to wealth. In order to become a complete citizen leader, he needed to put his wealth to effective use. In order to demonstrate his values from The Gospel of Wealth, Carnegie sold his company to J.P. Morgan for $480 million, which is worth billions of dollars today (McCreary). For the remainder of his life, Andrew Carnegie donated a total of $350 million to schools, colleges, libraries, and several other infrastructures that worked towards the common good. Followers “expect leaders to be… trustworthy” (Llopis). While so many public figures do not keep their promises, Andrew Carnegie stuck to his word. He did not give away money for fame; he wanted to get to an outcome bigger than himself. This relates to the concept of authentic leadership, which involves “leaders and followers com[ing] together to define their ‘real’ concerns and determine what is the ‘right’ thing to do…” (Northouse). Carnegie and his followers did not come together physically, but they both knew what the right thing to do was. They both knew that these investments towards education and the general welfare would help the nation grow. Authentic leaders are purposeful, value-centered, relational, self-disciplined, and compassionate (Northouse). Carnegie’s generous donations demonstrated all five of these traits. His investments were not only purposeful for the community as a whole, but they were purposeful for his own beliefs. This goes along the line of being value-centered, where Carnegie valued giving back to society. In regard to the other three traits, Carnegie developed stronger relationships with his followers, stayed self-disciplined by not keeping any money for himself, and showed compassion towards those who were less fortunate than himself. Andrew Carnegie’s entire career of philanthropy highlighted the impact of his citizen and authentic leadership styles.
Andrew Carnegie demonstrated ineffective leadership qualities during the Homestead strike through the use of hard power. In 1982, Carnegie’s workers at his plant in Homestead, Pennsylvania began protesting and organizing strikes for labor rights (The Strike…). During these protests, Carnegie came out publicly as “pro-labor”. However, he was the exact opposite behind the scenes. During these protests, Carnegie showcased his use of hard power, which is the “tool… of coercion” (Coutu). Andrew Carnegie instructed his general manager in Homestead, Henry C. Frick, to produce as much of the product as possible and then shut down the plant (The Strike…). With the plant being shut down, thousands of workers would lose jobs and Carnegie would wait for them to “buckle” (The Strike…). Carnegie showcased his hard power by persuading the workers to end the union and continue to work by threatening them with job loss. This action, however, was not the only use of hard power by Carnegie. During the strikes, he also supported Frick in cutting the workers’ wages (The Strike…). This loss of money for the workers was a use of persuasion to force them back to work. Workers sought out Carnegie, asking for pro-labor support. However, Andrew Carnegie became inaccessible through communication because he took a vacation, leaving the workers and union unable to reach him. Carnegie continued communication with Frick but remained silent and unreachable from the media (The Strike…). Through his use of hard power, Carnegie lowered wages of the workers and cut himself off from all communication. His actions destroyed his reputation at this time. Later on, Carnegie shared the same view of his actions as did the public. Both him and the public knew that he had taken “a foolish step” and acted contrary to his own beliefs (The Strike…). The choices made by Carnegie during the Homestead strike of 1982 in some ways overshadows his actions that made him a respected leader.
While making efforts to sell his company, Carnegie showcased another unsuccessful leadership style through overconfident negotiation. Andrew Carnegie sold his entire company to J.P. Morgan in 1901 (PON). The transaction was quite simple; Carnegie asked for $480 million and Morgan accepted (PON). Later, it was revealed that J.P. Morgan would have taken the offer had it been even more expensive (PON). In this scene, Andrew Carnegie showed overconfidence in the transaction, which led to a loss of profit. As a result of his success in his early life, Carnegie “put too much trust in his abilities and intuition regarding the company’s value” (PON). In most cases, negotiators are often overconfident in their estimates, although these estimates are based off speculation (PON). In the context of Andrew Carnegie, he was overconfident in his asking price, and missed out on a huge fortune as a result. He demonstrated the concept of over-precision, which is “excessive confidence in the accuracy of one’s own judgement” (PON). Carnegie’s ineffective use of overconfident negotiation resulted in a missed opportunity of even more wealth. The wealth he did receive was used in his philanthropic endeavors, therefore the money he missed out on was money that could have gone towards the common good but did not.
Throughout his life, Andrew Carnegie made choices that would define both the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of his leadership style. The actions that demonstrated effective leadership were made while he became a self-made businessman, entered into the steel industry, and practiced philanthropy for the common good. Through these actions, he practiced servant leadership and soft power, risk-taking leadership, as well as citizen and authentic leadership. Although Carnegie was a very effective leader, he also made choices that reflected an ineffective leadership style. These choices were made during the Homestead strike of 1982 and efforts to sell his company. Through these choices, Andrew Carnegie used hard power and overconfident negotiation, which resulted in a tarnished reputation and a loss of fortune. Andrew Carnegie demonstrated both what and what not to do as a leader. Through the analysis of his leadership, people have followed in his footsteps and learned from his actions.
Works Cited
“Andrew Carnegie.” Biography.com, A&E Networks Television, 24 June 2019,
https://www.biography.com/business-figure/andrew-carnegie.
Greenleaf, Robert K. “Servant Leadership.”, Article 4, Leader’s Companion, pp. 18-23
History.com Editors. “Andrew Carnegie.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 9 Nov. 2009,
https://www.history.com/topics/19th-century/andrew-carnegie.
"The Effective Leader: Andrew Carnegie." New York Essays, 26 Apr 2017,
https://newyorkessays.com/essay-the-effective-leader-andrew-carnegie/. Accessed 3 Dec. 2019.
Coutu, Diane. “Smart Power.” Harvard Business Review, 1 Aug. 2014,
https://hbr.org/2008/11/smart-power.
Rabang, Imelda. “Andrew Carnegie Leaves Behind a Legacy in His Gospel of Wealth.” Bold
Business, Bold Business, 23 Aug. 2019, https://www.boldbusiness.com/human-achievement/andrew-carnegie-bold-leader/.
McCreary, Matthew. “How Andrew Carnegie Went From $1.20 a Week to $309 Billion ... Then
Gave It All Away.” Entrepreneur, 14 Aug. 2018, https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/317827.
Tull, Megan. “How Taking Risks Evokes Leadership Success.” HuffPost, HuffPost, 7 Dec. 2017,
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/how-taking-risks-evokes-l_b_10843744.
Mabey, Cheryl. “The Making of a Citizen Leader”, Article 42, Leader’s Companion, pp. 310
-317
Llopis, Glenn. “7 Words Define What Employees Expect From Leadership.” Forbes, Forbes
Magazine, 27 Jan. 2015, https://www.forbes.com/sites/glennllopis/2014/09/15/7-words-define-what-employees-expect-from-leadership/#508cbf3354e9.
Northouse, Peter. “Ch.10 Authentic Leadership”, Leadership Theory and Practice, pp. 221-239
“The Strike at Homestead Mill.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service,
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/carnegie-strike-homestead-mill/.
PON Staff. “Are You an Overconfident Negotiator?” PON, 5 Dec. 2012,
https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/business-negotiations/are-you-an-overconfident-negotiator/.
I chose to include my paper analyzing the leadership of Andrew Carnegie because he has always been an inspiration to me. Although he lived a highly criticized life in the business world, he showed what kind of knowledge as a leader he possessed and made up for his mistakes by giving unimaginable amounts of money in his philanthropic endeavors.
Alex Kiyota
The United States of America is known to be one of the greatest countries for immigration. While this is a great reputation, the country has also faced an astounding problem of illegal immigration, specifically from Southern and Latin America (Spakovsky). Both sides of the political spectrum have been arguing for several years about how to deal with this recurring issue. In 2012, President Barack Obama implemented the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, also known as DACA (Spakovsky). This program allowed illegal immigrants to be able to live and work in the country without legal citizenship (Spakovsky). Congress should not implement a new program similar to DACA. Instead, the United States should focus on enforcing border patrol and improving immigration enforcement. Congress should not implement a new program similar to DACA because it costs United States citizens billions of dollars in taxes, encourages even more illegal immigration, and denies legal immigrants opportunities.
For a program such is DACA to be implemented, it requires that United States citizens pay taxes that go towards this program. It requires citizens who reside in the country legally to pay for an illegal immigrant’s ability to live, work, and gain an education in the United States. For the next 10 years, illegal immigrants benefitting from programs such as DACA would cost taxpayers approximately $26 billion, while these illegal aliens would contribute just under $1 billion (Linge). A program such as DACA that costs taxpayers to lose so much money on a questionable program should be eliminated. DACA recipients are also eligible for benefits such as Medicaid, food stamps, and education funding, all of which comes out from United States citizens’ paychecks (Linge). All of these welfare programs that Americans pay taxes for are meant to be given to poor citizens, not illegal immigrants. So many of these “dreamers” do not pay income taxes, increasing the burden on taxpayers (Spakovsky). As long as these illegal immigrants keep from being convicted, they can keep evading income taxes. At the same time, legal citizens work and pay for these poor and undeserved benefits to be given to people that do not deserve them (Spakovsky). Instead of paying for benefits going towards illegal immigrants, taxes should be put towards ending illegal immigration and ultimately ending useless taxes paid by legal citizens. If a program such as DACA is implemented again, legal citizens and taxpayers will continue to bear the burden of illegal immigration, and the problem will never be fixed.
A new program such as DACA will do nothing but encourage the continuous problem of illegal immigration. Just like DACA and other programs before it, a new program helping illegal immigrants would not fix the problem at hand (Inserra). An example of this is the Immigration and Reform Act (IRCA) of 1986. This act promised a one-time acceptance of illegal immigrants and the rejection of any after that (Inserra). With about 12 million illegal immigrants and an increasing number of illegal immigrants today, this promise was never fulfilled and will never be fulfilled unless amnesty is taken away from these people (Inserra). Amnesty “establish[es] a dangerous precedent which could well encourage additional illegal immigration” (Inserra). With the United States allowing amnesty once, people from other countries are likely to assume it will happen again, which is exactly what happened (Inserra). DACA was the next act passed that gave illegal immigrants amnesty. The IRCA was supposed to be the only time that allowed this, but illegal immigration was not fixed and DACA was passed to give amnesty yet again. The program and its recipients contributed greatly to “unaccompanied minors and families at the U.S. border” (Inserra). Upon seeing recipients of this program gain the benefits of being a citizen, other illegal immigrants assumed they could legally “enter and stay in the U.S.” (Inserra). If another program similar to DACA is implemented, the United States will see even more of an increase in illegal immigration. History rewrites itself, and it already has with the IRCA and DACA. Rather than continuing to give illegal aliens amnesty, the United States has to fix the problem of illegal immigration by enforcing stricter laws, or the issue will never be fixed.
With illegal immigrants coming into the country every day, the opportunities of liberty and freedom come at an even greater cost for legal immigrants. DACA applicants were only required to pay a fee for a work permit and fingerprints (Vaughan, DACA). These applicants were not required to pay for the application for the actual program, and this left legal immigrants with increased costs in legally applying for a desired status (Vaughan, DACA). The estimated cost of this for legal immigrants is $316.5 million (Vaughan, DACA). There is no question that it is unfair for legal immigrants applying for citizenship to have to pay for DACA recipients to apply for illegal residency in the United States. The cost of an initial DACA application is $446 and a renewal is $216 (Vaughan, DACA). With these applicants not paying and leaving legal immigrants to have to pay a subsidy for the application, it only makes it harder to legally immigrate into the country. Apart from actual costs for legal immigration, DACA and any other program like it deprioritizes people seeking legal immigration (Vaughan, Policy). Family-based applications, refugees and their relatives, victims of human trafficking, crime victims, and all other legal immigrants were moved behind DACA recipients (Vaughan, Policy). The priorities behind any program such as DACA keeps people who are truly in need of help and a new start from coming to the United States (Vaughan, Policy). Removing any program like DACA is needed in order to protect those who seek to legally immigrate into the United States. Enforcing strict border enforcement and keeping illegal aliens from entering would result in more and more people legally coming into the country every year.
Many advocates for DACA and amnesty for illegal immigrants argue that the program requires these people have no criminal backgrounds to keep them from being a danger to society (Spakovsky). Numbers show that DACA was not very thorough in ensuring applicants did not have criminal records (Spakovsky). In August 2017, there were 2,139 recipients that were affiliated with gangs and crime (Spakovsky). That number seems relatively low, but just six months prior to that finding 1,500 recipients were found to be affiliated with gangs (Spakovsky). Recipients are required to be convicted in order to be excluded from DACA (Spakovsky). This means that if someone was never actually convicted of a crime, they would still be allowed the benefits from DACA. These dangerous people who are apart of gangs, drugs, and violence are allowed into this country because they were never caught. They get Medicaid, food stamps, and other benefits when they do not deserve them (Spakovsky). If a new program like DACA was implemented, this same exact problem would occur. It is expensive and time-consuming for a country to thoroughly check 690,000 applicants for extensive criminal records to prove that they are not a danger to society. A program similar to DACA would allow “dreamers committing a wide range of…crimes” to be allowed into this country, being a threat to all other citizens living within the borders (Spakovsky).
The United States Congress should not implement a new program similar to DACA. The problems that came with DACA would not go away, no matter what program would be implemented. DACA increased taxes on United States citizens. It encouraged even more illegal immigration by giving amnesty to these illegal aliens. These poor refugees and legal immigrants from other countries were required to pay more for applications and were required to wait even longer to try and immigrate into the country legally. DACA and any other program like it causes too many problems and does not contribute to general well-being of the American society.
Works Cited
Spakovsky, Hans von. “Why Congress Should Not Legalize DACA: The Myths Surrounding the
Program.” The Heritage Foundation, 4 Dec. 2017, https://www.heritage.org/immigration/report/why-congress-should-not-legalize-daca-the-myths-surrounding-the-program.
Vaughan, Jessica M. “DACA Applications Cost Legal Immigrants $316.5 Million Since
2015.” CIS.org, 8 Oct. 2018, https://cis.org/Vaughan/DACA-Applications-Cost-Legal-Immigrants-3165-Million-2015.
Linge, Mary Kay. “Keeping 'Dreamers' Would Cost Taxpayers $26B over next Decade:
CBO.” New York Post, New York Post, 17 Dec. 2017, https://nypost.com/2017/12/16/keeping-dreamers-would-cost-taxpayers-26b-over-next-decade-cbo/.
Inserra, David. “Dreaming of Amnesty: Legalization Will Spur More Illegal Immigration.” The
Heritage Foundation, 30 Oct. 2017, https://www.heritage.org/immigration/report/dreaming-amnesty-legalization-will-spur-more-illegal-immigration.
Vaughan, Jessica M. “Policy Changes and Processing Delays at USCIS.” CIS.org, 16 July 2019,
https://cis.org/Testimony/Policy-Changes-and-Processing-Delays-USCIS.
This paper was extremely important to me because it allowed me to organize my thoughts about an extremely controversial issue. At the University of Maryland, I know that my way of thinking is different than most of my peers. However, this does not mean I am not allowed to share my viewpoints and make my argument known. This paper helped me to understand that as a leader, not everyone is going to agree with my way of thinking.
Alex Kiyota
CPPL200
Midterm Paper
A good leader is defined by both his or her actions and words. The leadership of President Ronald Reagan exemplifies an extremely effective type of leadership. After studying his presidency, Reagan’s main examples of leadership directly relate to my idea of a good leader and can be divided into three different categories. Ronald Reagan had a clear vision for the United States, exemplified complete courage, and presented himself with immense optimism.
Having a vision of what is needed to succeed in the future represents good leadership. It shows that the leader does not only have a single end goal in mind, but they have a plan in getting to that end goal. When Reagan took office, the economy was the worst it had been since the Great Depression (III). It was his goal to revive one of the greatest economies in the world. In addition, the United States military was at a low after the Vietnam War and the country’s foreign affairs were going downhill (III). Reagan vowed to revive the economy as well as the military, and to make the United States a powerful world leader once again (III). Not only did he have an end state in mind for the end of his presidency, but he also had a plan to get to that end state, which he communicated to the country. He applied management concepts to his presidency as he did as governor of California, planned to engage with the Soviet Union to combat communism so he could both rebuild the military and become a great world leader once again (III). His vision that he communicated to his people made him such an effective leader because he had a strategized plan to rebuild the country. He decreased unemployment rates, assisted in stopping the spread of communism, and built a military that could protect the freedoms of the United States of America.
An effective president leads by example, and Ronal Reagan did so by leading with physical and moral courage. Throughout his time as president, Reagan showed courage, and a leader that does so instills such courage into the people he or she is leading. When Ronald Reagan was shot in 1981, he continued to work hard for the American people (Edwards). His strength and courage to keep fighting was an example the American people needed, because it inspires them to fight and succeed through opposition. He also showed courage when he challenged the communist powerhouse which is the Soviet Union (Edwards). For a president to challenge such a powerful country takes courage. No matter how many times the Soviet Union challenged or opposed Reagan’s ideas, he did not change his stance (Edwards). His courage resulted in the ending of the Cold War and showed Americans that with courage and persistence, they can be successful.
Reagan’s optimism was one of his best traits that allowed him to be one of the greatest leaders the United States has ever seen. It made him a very likeable person and helped him gain respect from anyone, even if they had opposing ideas. Having such a good attitude made his voters admire him. A good leader is one who has strong support from his or her followers, and Reagan’s optimism provided such support. Not only did it help with his followers, but it also helped with pushing himself forward to find success (Jason). His optimism tied in with his vision. He took office during dark times in the United States but stayed hopeful for a better future. This hopefulness motivated him to bring the country out of darkness to become the greatest country in the world (Jason). Although his presidency was full of mistakes and difficulties, his positive leadership style made him one of America’s greatest presidents.
I identify Reagan’s traits of having a vision, being courageous, and staying optimistic as the most important features of a good leader. Ronald Reagan was a great example of what a good and effective leader should be. All leaders experience setbacks, as seen by Reagan’s presidency, but it is a leader’s key traits and actions that define how effective they are.
Works Cited
III, Edwin Meese. “A President of Great Vision and Leadership.” The Heritage Foundation,
www.heritage.org/conservatism/commentary/president-great-vision-and-leadership.
Edwards, Lee. “The Classical Virtues of Ronald Reagan.” The Heritage Foundation,
www.heritage.org/report/the-classical-virtues-ronald-reagan.
Jason. “In Dark Times, Reagan Ran on Optimism.” NBCNews.com, NBCUniversal News Group,
13 Oct. 2008, www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna27117516.
Having the chance to write about a leader I have always looked up to, Ronald Reagan, and relating his leadership styles to my own leadership philosophy was a great opportunity in analyzing what I believe a leader is. Reagan's traits of having a vision, showing courage, and staying optimistic are perfect examples of what a leader should be. Personally, there was no other leader I could have picked that would have defined my leadership philosophy so well.
An experience that stands out to me for using leadership qualities I have obtained would be at work. This past summer, I had the opportunity of working at Dick's Sporting Goods as an Operations Associate. Originally, I had only taken this job for money and because the job title fit my major. However, after working for just a month, I developed a love for my coworkers as well as the company itself. I came to work everyday prepared to get my tasks done as well as help other coworkers along the way. My biggest achievement at this job was leading by example. All the coworkers who started after me were inspired to copy my work ethic. Staying positive was a huge part of my position as well. Waking up at three in the morning to unload trucks is not fun for anyone, but being able to stay positive made the mood of the workplace so much more enjoyable.