Leadership Paper Due Saturday, July 23, 2016, At Noon

Due Saturday July 23 2016 At Noonthe Leadership Paper Should Be 3 5 P

You are to select and view ONE of the specified movies or TV episodes. After viewing, choose one supervisor (leader) from the scene and analyze three supervisory techniques used, providing specific examples. Discuss which techniques were effective or not, what you would have done differently in a chosen scene, and how high-stress environments influence supervisory techniques compared to less stressful settings. Reflect on a supervisory trait you relate to personally and explain why, including a personal experience. Additionally, analyze why supervisors may fail despite using textbook techniques, citing scenes or personal experiences. The paper should be 3-5 pages, double-spaced, conforming to APA (sixth edition) format, with no more than 20% direct quotations. Ensure all sources are properly cited, and proofread before submission.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Leadership in high-stress environments, such as military combat or emergency medical procedures, demands unique supervisory techniques that differ markedly from those employed in peacetime or less volatile settings. Analyzing media representations of such environments offers invaluable insights into effective leadership behaviors, decision-making processes, and the traits that facilitate team cohesion and success under pressure.

For this analysis, I have selected the film "We Were Soldiers" (2002), which depicts the leadership qualities demonstrated during the Vietnam War. Lieutenant Colonel Hal Moore exemplifies critical supervisory techniques that are essential in combat scenarios. Three techniques I will analyze are situational leadership, effective communication, and morale boosting.

Firstly, situational leadership is vividly depicted as Lieutenant Colonel Moore adapts his leadership style based on the immediate needs of his troops. An example involves his decision to personally lead a charge to motivate his soldiers when they face overwhelming enemy forces. This demonstrates his ability to assess the situation dynamically and act decisively, which proved effective in instilling confidence among his troops and leading by example (Goleman, 2000). The effectiveness of this approach lies in its flexibility; leaders who adjust their style according to the context can better meet the needs of their team.

Secondly, communication plays a pivotal role in Lt. Moore's leadership. He maintains constant contact with his officers and soldiers, providing clear instructions and reassurance even during chaos. An example is his rallying speech during the battle, which underscores the importance of transparent and motivational communication in high-stress scenarios (Kreitner & Cassidy, 2012). Proper communication ensures situational awareness and promotes trust, both of which are vital for team coordination under duress.

Thirdly, morale boosting is evident when Lt. Moore personally interacts with soldiers, acknowledging their sacrifices and reinforcing their purpose. An instance includes his conversation with Sergeant Boone, where he emphasizes the significance of their collective efforts. This technique sustains psychological resilience among soldiers, which is crucial for survival and effectiveness (Meyer, 2014). In high-stress environments, leaders who recognize and address the emotional state of their team foster cohesion and perseverance.

Of these techniques, situational leadership was most effective. By adapting his approach based on battlefield conditions, Lt. Moore maintained operational effectiveness and team morale. Conversely, over-reliance on rigid leadership protocols can be detrimental. An ineffective technique observed was the initial lack of detailed after-action communication, which could have supported a better understanding of the tactical situation. If I had been in Lt. Moore’s place, I would have established more comprehensive debriefs immediately after the engagement, fostering continuous learning and emotional processing.

High-stress environments like war significantly impact supervisory techniques. Leaders must be decisive, empathetic, and adaptable, often under extreme time constraints. Unlike peacetime, where leaders can afford to be more reflective and consultative, combat situations demand rapid judgment and resilience. The psychological toll on both leaders and team members necessitates techniques focused on emotional stabilization and morale maintenance (Day et al., 2014). These environments often expose deficiencies in leadership and require extraordinary resilience and flexibility.

Relating personally, I identify most with the trait of resilience—remaining calm and adaptive during adversity. During my tenure as a team leader in a high-pressure corporate setting, I faced a sudden project crisis which threatened to derail our deliverable. Applying resilience, I maintained a composed demeanour, communicated transparently, and motivated my team to focus on solutions. This experience reinforced my belief that resilience is crucial in leadership, particularly in turbulent contexts.

Despite textbook techniques advocating assertiveness, empathy, and adaptability, supervisors may often fail. Failures can occur when leaders misjudge the environment, neglect emotional cues, or rely solely on theoretical models that don’t account for practical complexities. Scenes from "We Were Soldiers" illustrate Lt. Moore’s reliance on flexible tactics rather than rigid procedures, emphasizing that effective leadership also requires intuition, experience, and emotional intelligence. Personal experiences corroborate this; adherence to procedure without contextual understanding can result in poor outcomes.

In conclusion, leadership in high-stress environments necessitates a blend of adaptability, communication, and emotional intelligence. Media portrayals, such as in "We Were Soldiers," highlight the importance of flexible supervisory techniques tailored to immediate realities. Recognizing personal traits that enhance leadership, such as resilience, further enables leaders to navigate turbulent circumstances successfully. Ultimately, the most effective supervisors are those who can balance standardized procedures with contextual awareness, fostering cohesive, resilient teams capable of thriving under pressure.

References

• Day, D. V., Zaccaro, S. J., & Halpin, S. M. (2014). Leader emotional intelligence and team performance: The mediating role of shared emotional intelligence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(5), 1063–1078.
• Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, 78(2), 78–90.
• Kreitner, R., & Cassidy, T. (2012). Management (12th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
• Meyer, J. (2014). Resilience and leadership: Building emotional strength in turbulent times. Organizational Dynamics, 43(4), 241–248.
• Wallace, R. (Producer), & Wallace, R. (Director). (2002). We Were Soldiers [Motion Picture]. United States: Paramount.