Browse through the curated selection of our completed assessments to get a sense of the quality and depth of our work. Whether you need guidance, inspiration, or just want to evaluate our work, this page is your go-to resource.
Leadership is an imperative component of project management; in order for any project to be successful a strong leader needs to be appointed as the head of the project. The importance of leadership in project management can be seen in the case study, “A Peaceful Evacuation: Building a Multi-Project Battalion by Leading Upward”. The case study revolves around the leadership and strategy of Lieutenant Colonel Yaron and Lieutenant Colonel Daniel during the disengagement and evacuation of Israeli settlement in the heart of many Palestinian populations near the Gaza Strip. Each commanding officer had a different kind of leadership style which faced many difficulties and was advantageous for the process. This paper will look to compare and contrast the leadership styles of both Lieutenant Colonels Yaron and Daniel during the evacuation process. Different leadership styles during the enactment of a project, even if it is a militaristic one, impacts the progression of the project and its management in many ways.
Lieutenant Colonel Yaron has a very transformational leadership style which is prevalent throughout the majority of the case study. A transformational leadership style in highly depend on high levels of communication between management in order to meet and achieve the set goals for the project. With this kind of leadership style, leaders usually motivate their employees and enhance their project’s productivity and the employees’ productivity and efficiency through communication and high visibility. With this style of leadership, it is highly required that there is involvement of to meet the set goals or aims. Leaders, with this type of leadership style, mostly focus on the big picture within an organization and hand over smaller tasks to the team in order for the goals and aims to be accomplished. An example of just leadership style is seen when Yaron encouraged, “the battalion’s company commanders to initiate ongoing meetings with their soldiers” (Laufer et al., 2012, p.157). This show Lt. Col. Yaron’s transformational leadership style as he believed this evacuation process to be somewhat of a personal deal in which it was necessary that soldiers should interact with the higher management in order to get the feel of the project. Another two pieces of evidence suggest the method of Lt. Col. Yaron’s leadership style, this is seen when Yaron requested an immediate meeting with a Brigadier general. The Lt. Col. Yaron asserted that if the personnel did not show some sort of personal involvement or commitment in the mission that was being executed by the commanders of the dispatching unit, there will be no chance of success to come about in the mission (Laufer et al., 2012). The second piece of evidence is seen in Yaron’s expression when Brigadier General gave Lt. Col. His personal cell phone number after a meeting and permission to call him any time. Lt. Col. Yaron expression that he had finally felt some, “direct openness and communication” between the higher management and lower subordinates (Laufer et al., 2012).
Lieutenant Colonel Daniel had a different leadership style than that of Lt. Col. Yaron in the time of the evacuation process. The reason for this might be that Lt. Col. Daniel is a psychologist by profession and so his leadership style reflects that of his profession. When analyzing Lt. Col. Daniel’s leadership style it can as more as a participative leadership style, which is often viewed as a more democratic leadership style. Lt. Col. Daniel wanted to gain insight of the views and feelings of the IDF psychologists which was labeled “the day of thinking” (Laufer et al., 2012, p. 153). Lt. Col. Daniel boosted others morale since other participants were able to make contributions to the decision-making process. It caused them to feel as if their opinions had mattered in the overall mission in the evacuation process. With this style, many of the battalion members understood the need for the evacuation and were more accepting of the change that was about to come. This style is known to be effective in a long-term process but it becomes challenging to properly implement this style when decision needs to be made in a short-term process.
Both Lt. Col. Yaron and Daniel exhibited a different type of leadership style during the time of the evacuation plan and the complex military operation. It is logical to say that different kinds of situations and contexts benefit from different leadership approaches (Courtemanche, 2008). But sometimes there is not enough time for an organization to analyze various literatures to determine what would be the best suited leadership method for their organization at a specific situation. Both models of leadership exhibited by Lt. Col. Yaron and Daniel adopt an outlook that is longer term. They both focus on the development of their followers and this also brings about the reason for their difference which the reason for causing development in followers. With transformational leadership the leaders will place the good of the organization above everything and that ensures their timelessness. The participative leadership model places the good of not just the organization but the good of the involved individuals above everything. This type of leadership style has leaders exhibiting behaviors that go in the favor of the welfare of the follower. Each leader will have a different method of tackling the issues and challenges facing leaders in Israel today. Trust is a key issue found in Israel today; Lt. Col. Yaron will most likely tackle this issue by keeping in mind that good of the state, while Lt. Col. Daniel will focus more on increasing the trust of people within the state of Israel to believe in their leaders.
Carl Jung is one of the most influential people to have proposed an idea with his book Psychological Types. Lt. Col. Yaron’s personality it best described as an “A” personality type after analyzing the four personality traits. He wanted to make sure that the environment remained controlled. During the mapping of the mission, he was not very detailed orients, but was very much goal oriented and practical in his solutions (Hire Succes, 2008). Lt. Col. Daniel, on the other hand, is more of “C” personality (Hire Succes, 2008) type as he was very detailed oriented. Lt. Col. Daniel looked through research to better understand how the evacuation will affect the battalions deployed and those that will be in the evacuation circumstance. He was more interested in making the mission plan of this complex operation more accurate and logical. Both of the personality and leadership style of his Lieutenant Colonel balances each other out to make the complex military operation’s team performance more enhanced to carry out the mission. Lt. Col. Daniel was able to give a detailed report of the psychological impact of the soldiers during this operation. Lt. Col. Yaron could use this information to curb the feelings of the soldiers in order to help them comprehend the greater good of the evacuation.
Couremanche, L. (2008). Contemporary leadership challenges: A comparison of select leadership models. Retrieved from http://lc2leadership.com/wp- content/uploads/2009/09/LeadershipModels.pdf
Hire Success. (2008). Understanding the four personality types. Retrieved from http://www.hiresuccess.com/help/Understandingthe4PersonalityTypes.htm
Laufer, A.; Ziklik, Z.; & Cohenca-Zall, D. (2012). Mastering the Leadership Role in Project Management: Practices that Deliver Remarkable Results. Upper Saddle River, NJ: FT Press.
All orders at our writing service are delivered exceptionally for research purposes.
