Has your leadership ever been tested and what do you set your foundation on? If the country became divided and you had to choose a side, could you? What would you base your decision off of? This is the decision that Robert E. Lee faced when the Civil War kicked off. Robert E. Lee was a visionary leader and ethical leader during the Civil War. First, as a visionary leader, Robert E. Lee set his leadership foundation on self-discipline and used Transformational Leadership Behavior “Individualized Consideration” to lead and motivate his troops into battle even when they were outnumbered. Furthermore, as an ethical leader, Robert E. Lee’s loyalty to his homeland allowed him to overcome an “ethical dilemma” using “critical thinking” to avoid an “ethical trap.” Finally, Robert E. Lee’s actions allowed me to reflect on improvements to my visionary and ethical leadership traits in my new assignment and deployed environments. Robert E. Lee knew he had to be “self-aware” and utilize his men to their full potential before he could march them onto the battlefield where the odds were against them.
The foundation of Robert E. Lee’s leadership was built on self-discipline. Robert E. Lee believed that “If one intends to lead by example and inspire respect, one has to fulfill the ideal of someone whose vision and performance are coherent, organized, and effective” (Crocker, 1999, p. 17). Robert E. Lee stated, “I cannot consent to place in the control of others one
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
Mission command belongs to the Army’s list of seven war fighting functions. While the other six of the Army’s war fighting functions specifically align to the application of combat power, mission command applies to leadership and its application. Mission command redefines the old construct of C2, command and control, by morphing the ideology into two distinct thoughts, the art of command and the science of control. Although mission command is a relatively new concept, it’s principles and application transcend time. This paper examines General Robert E. Lee’s application of the mission command principles at the Battle of Gettysburg.
The Civil War brought about many things, such as revolution, justice, and tragedy, but it also birthed two truly great minds of their time. These individuals were Abraham Lincoln and Nathan Bedford Forrest. One led the North as president of the United States, while the other was a Lieutenant General of the Confederate Army. While both were brilliant and truly outstanding amongst their peers, one man truly outshined the other in regards to a stronger and more efficient leadership. While Lincoln faced more success in a national sense, Nathan Bedford Forrest clearly possessed more respected authority and was a stronger overall leader than Abraham Lincoln. Forrest’s methods may have been unorthodox and downright immoral, but at the end of the day he was feared by the Union and revered by the South. This is the true mark of a great leader. They should be respected by their followers and hated by their enemies. While the South ultimately lost the Civil War, the legacy of Forrest as a remarkable leader lived on, as he was immortalized in history and respected amongst his community.
I start this project on Lincoln’s leadership very reluctantly. I am a history buff and have always viewed his leadership through the eyes of jaded historians. They have portrayed him as a dictator, incompetent, and a buffoon at some points. After reading the Donald T. Phillips book Lincoln on Leadership, my mindset was totally changed. This book broke down four key areas that produced an effective leader in Lincoln. These areas are character, people, endeavor, and communication. I will be sharing a principal from each key area that I found important and then conclude with an overall thought.
Robert E. Lee was a man of family, culture and tradition. Lee was a man who believed in the old English ways in chivalry. The Southern states fought for the same ideals that Lee stood for. Lee believed that this way of life made men to be of a higher class. He was convinced that these old values can build a better nation. Catton express the Confederacy loyalty to these values by saying: “For four years, the southern states had fought a separate war to up held the ideals for which Lee; as if he himself was the Confederacy… the best thing that the way of life for which the Confederacy stood could have ever had to offer” (410).
My leadership philosophy revolves entirely around the Army Values. In every action I take as a leader, I assess whether or not it lines up with the Army Values and the potential impacts. I have had a variety of leadership assignments during my career, all requiring a different leadership approach, spanning from team leader through platoon sergeant. My conflict resolution skills have greatly evolved through my twelve years in the Army, from rudimentary conversations to in depth problem solving. My professional development has had a profound effect on my leadership abilities, from NCOPD’s to mentorship from senior non-commissioned officers (NCO’s).
“A true man of honor feels humbled himself when he cannot help humbling others.” This quote was made in 1871 by one of the greatest generals and probably men in American History; Robert Edward Lee. Robert Edward Lee was a general in the American Civil War. He led his men and stood with them in each and every they were in and got many of them out safely.
In war, the commander in chief makes or breaks the efficiency and effectiveness of the army. The Civil War involved 3 main commanders in chief of the Union and Confederate Army. Through letters written by these three leaders, Ulysses S. Grant, George McClellan and Robert E. Lee, it is evident that their opinions and strategies differed greatly. While Grant considered himself part of the army, Lee separated himself as a ruling commander. Grant’s humble nature and vast knowledge on war technique also made him a more efficient leader, compared to the egotistical George McClellan, another commander of the Union army. Ultimately, Grant and the union army won the war, because of Grant’s hands-on leaderships skills, while Lee lacked confidence in his troops, causing him to remove himself from his men.
Throughout history, there have been people whose names and faces have become synonymous with the time periods in which they lived. For example, Julius Caesar is synonymous with the late Roman Republic and George Washington is synonymous with the American Revolution. Just like these two men, the name Robert E. Lee has become synonymous with the American Civil War. Not only did Lee rise to become the most important and recognizable person in the Southern Confederacy, but his honor and virtuous acts during and after the war made him a hero to modern-day Americans. Even though he fought for what many consider the morally erroneous side of the war, the virtues of his character have made him a figure in American history
Robert E. Lee had many successes in leading the United States Army. What made Lee so remarkable was he carried a lot about what the United States government was doing and believed in a good relationship with the personal that are working for the government. We know that Lee held high standards. He was big on honor, and held people to high standards. He graduated West Point as a military commander. Lee was considered one of the bluest of Virginia blue bloods. Lee was a full blown southerner who would give anything he could to get a southern victory. Lee would be the general of the Confederate Army during the Civil War. Lee first will take over and will be in charge from 1861-1865. What Lee’s first task will be to take his army at Second Bull Run and lead them to a Confederate victory.
Seeking a good commander, Davis appointed Robert E. Lee to a leadership position in the army, and gave him jurisdiction over much of the military tactics (Strode 2018). This decision proved to be one of the wisest decisions he made as president and commander-in-chief, as Lee was one of the most formidable and famous generals of the
There are a number of qualities that quantify good leaderships and good leaders. According to Kouzes and Posner in their book The Leadership Challenge, all successful leaders have (5) practices in common. They “Model the Way”, “Inspire a shared vision”, “Challenge the process”, “enable others to act” and “encourage the heart”(15). Never is there a more important time to have exemplary leadership, than in a time of war. Both the American Civil War and World War II showed what was possible through good leadership. From abolishing slavery and preserving the Union, to fighting tyranny and oppression abroad, both events in American history had a profound impact on all those involved. The impact would most certainly be different if not for the leadership of Colonel Lawrence Chamberlain of the Union Army during the Civil War and General George S. Patton during World War II. Both leaders possessed the 5 practices essential for god leadership, yet both leaders to different approaches to accomplish their goals.
Dwight D. Eisenhower was born in Texas in 1890 into a family of seven sons (American Decades). He was a bright man all throughout his life and achieved many goals that would be impossible for any ordinary person. World War II gave him a chance to use his talent for organization to lead the United States to victory (American Decades). He is famously known for his courageous acts during the invasion of North Africa, D-Day, and for his great communication skills.
The book; Lincoln on Leadership, by Donald T. Phillips, is a case study into the leadership principles and practices of arguably one of the world’s greatest leaders. Abraham Lincoln was a man with principles, ethics, decisiveness and vision. He inspired greatness in those around him. It is often said of Lincoln that he was the perfect man put in the perfect position to complete the improbable task of maintaining the union that was and is, the United States of America.
Earl Kim- known as a previous superintendent /educator at several New Jersey schools, previously serving the U.S. Marine Corps and last serving as our headmaster at Kamehameha Schools - is one of my most inspirational leaders. I've known him for four years. When Mr.Kim first came to our school, a lot of people despised him because he wasn't Hawaiian. In making our school's twenty-five year plan, he incorporated a Hawaiian language proficiency test that students had to pass in order to graduate. To me, Mr.Kim saved our language; without this proficiency test, some students would graduate not knowing our Hawaiian language. Although he isn't of Hawaiian descent, he truly cares about the perpetuation of our culture. Not only is he a leader for strengthening our Hawaiian curriculum, but he is like my father figure.