1.5 Appendix: Role Modeling Leadership from WWII—The Cases of Band of Brothers and Red Tails
Band of Brothers
Band of Brothers is an HBO miniseries that tells the story of the 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment of the 101st Airborne division of the U.S. Army in World War II. Specifically, it is a dramatic reenactment of individuals in a particular company (“E” or “Easy” Company) of that Regiment. Several individuals who are featured in the miniseries display aspects of leadership, or leader-member relations, that are highlighted in this book.
Below, we list those individuals, and the concepts in this book that they especially depict.
Major Richard Winters. Major Winters is the main character of the miniseries. He demonstrates a number of aspects of effective leadership, including the following:
Relations-oriented leadership—As described in Chapter 2 “Leader Traits and Characteristics”, relations-oriented leadership is a primary dimension of behavior that is shown by effective leaders. Major Winters demonstrates such leadership on numerous occasions, such as when he comforts a private, Albert Blithe, who appears to be exhibiting battle fatigue. This is also an example of individualized consideration, as described in Chapter 11 “Inspirational and Visionary Leadership”.
Task-oriented leadership—As also described in Chapter 2 “Leader Traits and Characteristics”, task-oriented leadership is important for effective leaders. Throughout the miniseries, Major Winters shows his ability as a military tactician. He directs his men in some difficult maneuvers in such a way that achieves results, while minimizing casualties to the extent possible. He displays his task-oriented leadership in a confident and clear manner, while not seeming excessively authoritarian.
Leader-member exchange—As described in Chapter 3 “Leader-Member Exchange and Relationship-Building”, it is important for leaders to form good one-on-one relations, or leader-member exchange (LMX) with followers. In general, Major Winters did a good job of forming high-quality relationships, or high LMX, with his men. However, one particular man, Staff Sergeant Bill Guarnere, gravitated to what is referred to in Chapter 3 “Leader-Member Exchange and Relationship-Building” as Major Winter’s out-group (i.e., low-quality relationship). Guarnere’s personality and demeanor differed from Winters, in that Guarnere was more boisterous, liked to consume alcohol, and so forth. In contrast, Winters was relatively quiet or reserved and did not consume alcohol. Guarnere mistakenly assumed that Winters was a pious Quaker, who might not even be willing to fire his weapon in battles. On D-Day, Winters proved his worth as a both a leader and fighter. At the end of that momentous day, a scene showed how despite not being a consumer of alcohol, Winters was willing to have a symbolic drink with Guarnere to celebrate their Company victory. From that point on, relations between Winters and Guarnere improved.
Captain Herbert Sobel. Captain Sobel is the first commander of Easy Company during their basic training. Captain Sobel shows no evidence of relations-oriented leadership. Although he is task-oriented, unlike Winters, he does so in a demeaning and authoritarian manner. In addition, to be an effective, task-oriented leader, one must have knowledge and skill pertaining to the task. However, Captain Sobel demonstrated his lack of military tactician abilities in war games prior to actual fighting. Further, Sobel failed to recognize the value of shared leadership, as considered in Chapter 8 “Team and Shared Leadership” of this book. Specifically, during basic training, Winters was a lieutenant and 2nd in charge of Easy Company. Sobel could recognize Winters’ leadership abilities, but felt threatened by him, rather than feeling comfortable with Winters as a secondary leader in Easy Company.
Captain Ronald Speirs. Captain Speirs is featured throughout the miniseries as a sort of charismatic figure (refer to Chapter 11 “Inspirational and Visionary Leadership”) who was both feared and admired by the men in his Regiment. He was feared because of a reputation for being unpredictable; for example, executing German prisoners of war, as well as even one of his own men (for disobeying an order while being intoxicated). Behavior of this nature would generally be seen as unethical or immoral (refer to Chapter 6 “Ethical, Moral, and Responsible Leadership”). On the other hand, Captain Speirs and others might argue that he behaved in a manner that was in line with the context at the time. The importance of context for understanding effective leadership is described earlier in this chapter. In any event, he was also admired for his personal courage (go to Chapter 2 “Leader Traits and Characteristics”), and he was inspiring (go to Chapter 11 “Inspirational and Visionary Leadership”) because of his ability to quickly take the Command of Easy Company in the middle of a particular battle (for the town of Foy, Belgium).
First Lieutenant Lynn “Buck” Compton. Lieutenant Compton is portrayed as an effective combat leader who is very much beloved by his men. Indeed, he likes to hang out with privates and non-commissioned officers and form close personal relationships. However, as described in Chapter 2 “Leader Traits and Characteristics”, Lieutenant Compton has too strong of a need for affiliation. Early in the miniseries, Major Winters has a conversation with Compton, warning him that he should not get too close to his subordinates. Indeed, toward the middle of the series, Compton suffers an emotional breakdown after seeing so many of his men either die or get severely wounded. Because of that breakdown, he is relieved of his duties for the remainder of the war.
First Lieutenant Norman Dyke. Lieutenant Dyke was a good example of what is referred to earlier in this chapter as a laissez-faire sort of leader. For a portion of the miniseries, he was the Commander of Easy Company. But he was frequently missing when the men under his command needed his support or direction. Most importantly, he failed to make decisions, which is an important type of leader behavior. Such individuals can be considered “non-leaders”, and that is generally a bad thing for individuals in leadership positions.
Second Lieutenant Carwood Lipton. Although Second Lieutenant Lipton was an officer, he is portrayed in the miniseries as more of an informal leader (go to Chapter 8 “Team and Shared Leadership”) who essentially takes up the slack for the lack of leadership shown by First Lieutenant Dyke. Specific leadership qualities that are shown by Second Lieutenant Lipton include relations- and task-oriented leadership (refer to Chapter 2 “Leader Traits and Characteristics”).
Red Tails
Red Tails is a movie about the Tuskegee Airmen, 332nd fighter group of the U.S. Air Force in WWII. They were referred to as the “red tails” because the tails of their airplanes were painted bright red. Despite prior racism in the U.S. military, this group was formed during WWII, but faced initial resistance and lack of confidence from the military bureaucracy. Gradually, the Tuskegee Airmen gained that confidence because of their success in escorting B-17 Flying Fortress bombers to their targets, and safely back to their bases. In the years since WWII, the Tuskegee Airmen have continually received praise and recognition for their accomplishments, despite racism and prejudice in the military at the time. In addition, as a testimony to their character, Tuskegee Airmen typically harbored little ill will toward the military and others, and instead, proclaimed their enduring patriotism toward the United States in later years.
Below, we list two leaders who are featured in Red Tails, and the concepts in this book that they especially depict.
Colonel A. J. Bullard. Colonel Bullard is the commanding officer in charge of the 332nd fighter group. In the movie, he demonstrates a number of aspects of effective leadership, including the following:
Political savvy—As described in Chapter 3 “Leader-Member Exchange and Relationship-Building” of this book, it is sometimes necessary for leaders to influence individuals over whom they do not have formal authority. They may do so in order to get resources and prerogatives for their subordinates. In this movie, Colonel Bullard is depicted in his interactions with other high-level officers in the U.S. military as he struggles to get better airplanes for his fighter group and better or more involved assignments in fighting the enemy. Because of his political savvy, he is successful on both counts.
Inspirational leadership—In one scene, Colonel Bullard is giving a speech to his pilots during which he tells them about how their mission will change from engaging enemy fighters or ground targets to defending the heavy bombers. He experiences some degree of pushback from one of the pilots who is more favorable toward the older mission of engaging the enemy in aerial “dog fights.” But Colonel Bullard’s visionary depiction of their new role (refer to Chapter 11 “Inspirational and Visionary Leadership”), combined with his announcements that the fighter group will receive new airplanes, serves to inspire the pilots.
Specialized language to build organizational culture—It is clear in the movie that Colonel Bullard has attempted to build a tight-knit culture with shared values and beliefs. He does so through one of the mechanisms that is considered in Chapter 12 “Strategic Leadership and Shaping Organizational Culture” of this book, specifically the creation of specialized language. The best example is how despite the challenges that the group faces, and its changing mission, one slogan (or principle) remains the same: “we fight, we fight, we fight.”
Coaching and individualized consideration—In one scene, Colonel Bullard meets with one of his pilots, First Lieutenant Joe “Lightning” Little. Although Lieutenant Little is an excellent pilot, he sometimes does not follow orders, and he has a temper. When faced with overt discrimination from a white serviceman, Lieutenant Little gets in a fight and is temporarily imprisoned. During a follow-up coaching session (go to Chapter 7 “Seeking, Receiving, and Giving Feedback”) with Colonel Bullard, he receives feedback that is negative, but constructive. Despite providing a reprimand, Bullard nevertheless displays individualized consideration toward Little (go to Chapter 11 “Inspirational and Visionary Leadership”).
Major Emanuel Stance. Major Stance provides good back-up leadership to Colonel Bullard, which is a demonstration of what is referred to as shared leadership in Chapter 8 “Team and Shared Leadership”. As described above, Colonel Bullard is often back in the United States attempting to provide support for the 332nd fighter group. Major Stance remains in Italy, where the group is based, in order to hold down the fort, so to speak. It is clear in the movie that Major Stance is an effective, loyal follower of Colonel Bullard (refer to Chapter 4 “Followership: Managing Up and Sideways”). But at the same time, he is an effective leader in his own right. For example, at the beginning of the movie, he is shown providing an inspirational speech to the pilots (go to Chapter 11 “Inspirational and Visionary Leadership”).