A Peaceful Evacuation

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to explain what leadership style Lieutenant Colonel Yaron exhibited as the commander of battalion for the evacuation operations. This paper will give three examples of his leadership action and behaviors. This paper will also analyze the leadership style that Lieutenant Colonel Daniel exhibited and give three examples of his leadership action and behaviors. It will discuss the pros and cons of each example given. This paper will then compare and contrast the two Lieutenants and it will take a look at the interrelationship using Jung theory and the four personality traits.

Lieutenant Colonel Yaron

There are many types of leadership styles one can only imagine what type of leader one would need to be in order to handle the difficult task at hand that Lieutenant Colonel Yaron had to encounter. Yaron displayed two types of leaders: directive and participative. During his trial on striving to gain a grasp on what he should do to make this project successful he had many face-to face meetings, telephone calls, and email communications with some top officers in the air force. He was very hands on when it came to approaching commanders of units so he could find suitable soldiers for his task. He even stated himself that he “finally felt direct openness and communication between the senior commander and his subordinates” (Laufer, 2012). Yaron needed that feeling that everyone was on the same page and he didn’t want to move forward with a plan until he knew that everyone one was. This was all a ploy to make sure that the morale level was at one and it worked just nicely. What makes Yarn a participative leader is him putting himself in the same situation that one of his soldiers may be in. for example the visited a home that one of his soldiers would be coming into soon to remove the people within. That experience made him see how settlers were emotionally and how to tell his soldiers how to address the settlers. It was that firsthand experience that made his mission a peaceful mission.

The pros of being a directive leader in Yaron case is that he had open communication several departments so everyone was on the same page. This helped keep the lines of communication seamless so there should be no reason
to wonder what Yaron wanted and how he wanted to do it. The cons in having this time of leadership in Yaron’s case is that there were many people that didn’t want to follow his plan at first. This could have caused people to rally up against him spread false word about him eventually driving him out of the position he was appointed to. Sometimes keeping information to oneself is half the battle won. Not everyone should know the cards that you hold in your hand. Yaron Him putting himself in the “battlefield” is great as far as experience is concerned. He was able to relate to the settlers and give that valuable information over to his battalion so they would be prepared. The best teacher is experience. The con of that could have been him being injured and now the army would have to find another leader to help the soldiers remove the settlers from Gaza. Being a leader at times means putting you self in harm’s way. Lieutenant Colonel Daniel

Lieutenant Colonel Daniel style was that of consultative and participative leadership style. This is shown by Daniels working with a team of psychologist to help refine the guidelines for the evacuation project. He went through several think tanks to see what would work best for the mission at hand. Once he was able to find the best method he then set up workshops. “In these workshops, participates were trained to evacuate children and families form their home and to cope with the possibility of evacuation under fire and violence on the part of the settlers” (Laufer, 2012). Daniel was concerned about the mental and emotional well being of both the evacuators and evacuees. The cons of being this type of leader is it helps to display an culture of trust where the members of they team know that you have their best interest in mind and will make sure that any actions that are taken will help ensure you are protected and cared for. It also helps the leader serve as a figure head of the group and gains respect from the members of the group. The con to this is that it could be looked at as a weakness. Many times leaders have to make decisions that are not popular with the masses of the group. They make decisions that are bigger than the group but reaps a better benefit for the project as a whole. If a leader was to be so focused on their member’s feelings or concerns it could cloud their judgment and show weakness in their ability to make decisions. Lieutenant Colonel Yaron verse Lieutenant Colonel Daniel

Lieutenant Colonel Yaron and Lieutenant Colonel Daniel have some leadership qualities in common such as they both care about their evacuators and evacuates. They both wanted to make sure that both parities involved understood the dynamics of what was attempting to be done and wanted both parties to be mentally and physically prepared of what may happen. Both Yaron and Daniel took advice from others around them to ensure they were making the best decision. They were not afraid to revamp and try another method in order to complete their mission. Also they both wanted a peaceful outcome of their removal of the Jews from Gaza. End the end the goal was clear to make sure both parties left unharmed and to have the least amount of confusion as possible. When looking at the differences in the leadership roles it safe to say that Yaron took this mission on as his own personal challenge, “Yaron, who perceived it as a personal challenge, immediately responded favorably and one week later was informed that the Air Force Commander had approved his appointment” (Laufer, 2012). Daniel on the other hand was just trying to help out the mission no personal attachments were needed for him.

Yaron took on many roles as he was coming up with solution for the evacuation such as being apart of the planning team, training team and chief supplier. Yaron also differed from Daniels because he actually went out to meet evacuates to see how the felt and to see the environment that the soldiers would be working in. This is what gave him the upper hand on making his mission successful. He was afraid to do of him self what he asked his soldiers to do. Today both of these types of leaders still live today so it’s safe to say that they would lead in the same fashion as they did before. One is not better that the other though one should be over a different project than the other. The Jung theory and personality traits would consider individualism, these gentlemen acted as though they were content and satisfied with their outcome and decision made to retrieve their outcome, indicating individualism or persona being used. Both had some type of spirituality and or alchemy involved when making their decision, this can be seen by the sensitivity being used doing the evacuation process.

Conclusion

In conclusion Lieutenant Colonel Yarn and Lieutenants Colonel Daniel had many personality traits in common and those that differed from each other. At the end of their evacuation both leaders used what traits they had within them to make the best possible decision that they both thought worked best for them and the members involved. This just goes to show that there is no wrong way to lead as long as everyone has the same goal to achieve.

Reference:
Laufer, A. (2012). Mastering the leadership role in project management: Practices that deliver remarkable results. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall-Pearson