Assess The Significance Of Leadership In Warfare

2240 Words9 Pages
Assess the Significance of Leadership in Warfare between 1854 and 1991 Leadership throughout times of war has bore many fronts and has contained countless leadership tactics which have shown both continuity and change throughout. Leadership can be defined as, “A process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task.” The influence of differing leadership styles can dictate the outcome of a war; Kurt Lewin suggested that there are three different types of leadership. These include Autocratic, Participative and Laissez-Faire styles. The Autocratic style has been seen in the Second World War as Adolf Hitler took control of the German forces making terrible judgements such as sending the majority of the Panzer tank divisions into France, leaving Germany open to attack from the Russian front in the East. The Participative style is democratic and based on group decisions. This Democratic approach was best demonstrated by countries such as Britain and France during the two World Wars. The final method of Laissez-Faire is one based on giving free rein of control to those lower down. This can be shown in Stalin’s Russia during the Second World War, as troops were permitted their own free rein to make decisions and were either rewarded or executed dependent of their choices. Different situations call for different leadership styles. In an emergency when there is little time to converge on an agreement and where a designated authority has significantly more experience or expertise than the rest of the team, an autocratic leadership style may be most effective; however, in a highly motivated and aligned team with similar levels of expertise, a more democratic or laissez-faire style may be more effective. The style adopted should be the one that most effectively achieves the objectives of the group

More about Assess The Significance Of Leadership In Warfare

Open Document