The leadership has been an imperative component in case of project management. A strong leader is required to be appointed to make any project successful (Vann, Coleman & Simpson, 2014).
The significance of the leadership in project management is analyzed in this report. This is viewed under the light of the strategy and leadership of Lieutenant Colonel Yaron and Lieutenant Colonel Daniel.
1. Description of the leadership style of Lieutenant Colonel Yaron:
The style of leadership of Yaron was transformational. This type of style largely depends over high communication levels between the management to achieve the goals. The examples found about this style are described below.
- The first instance of the style was seen in Yaron as he encouraged the company commanders initiating the ongoing meetings with the soldiers.
- Another example could be shown as he requested an urgent meeting with the Brigadier general.
- The last instance was evidenced in his expression as the general provided him with his personal cell number.
Pros and cons:
The first example indicates the transformational leadership style of Yaron as he believed that the evacuation process has been personal deal where the soldiers must interact with higher management for getting the feel of their project (Mesu, Sanders & Riemsdijk, 2015).
In the second case he asserted that as the personnel never showed any personal commitment or involvement in the mission executed by the dispatching unit’s commanders, there would be no scope to change direction in that mission.
The expression in the last example indicated that he have at last felt having some direct communication and openness between the lower subordinates and higher management.
2. Description of the leadership style of Lieutenant Colonel Daniel:
Daniel’s style has been quiet separate from that of Yaron. The reason is he was a professional psychologist and this reflected on his leadership qualities. His style has been participative in nature. The examples of this are discussed below.
- As Daniel’s style was more participative in manner which is generally seen to be more democraticin nature.
- Moreover another instance could be shown as he boosted morale of the others as other participants have been capable of making contributions to the process of decision-making.
- Additionally as the third instance it could be said that many members of the battalions have been becoming aware about the perquisites for that evacuation.
Pros and cons:
In the first case he wanted to achieve insight of the feelings and views of IDF psychologists labeled as the “day of thinking”.
In the second example he made the members feel like as their opinions have been mattering throughout the mission in the process of evacuation (Nijstad, Berger-Selman & De Dreu, 2014).
Lastly in the third example the battalions were showing more tendencies to accept more changes that could come to them.
3. Comparison and contrasts of the leadership styles of the two lieutenant colonels:
Both of them have exhibited distinct kind of leadership style in complex military operation and evacuation plan. Thus the various contexts and situations were advantageous from various leadership approaches. Both of their leadership models adopted the outlook that has been long term. Both of them focused on the development and improvement of their followers.
With the transformational leadership, the method of Yaron could place the wellbeing of the organization above all. This transformational leadership also ensures their timelessness. The model of Daniel’s style on the other hand would not only place the organization but all the individuals involved above everything (Nazir & Shah, 2014). Every leader possesses distinct method to track the challenges faced by the leaders in Israel currently. The trust is the primary issue to be found in that nation today (Arnold & Loughlin, 2013). Yaron would most likely handle the issue keeping the good of the state in mind. Daniel would concentrate more over the rising trust of the people to keep belief over their leaders.
4. Interrelationship of the leaderships using Jung theory and personality traits:
Carl Jung proposed an idea regarding four various psychological types (McCleskey, 2014). They are described below:
- Sensation:This is the perception through which the immediate apprehension of the relationship is visible between the subject and the object.
- Intuition:This is perception of the processes at the background.
- Thinking:This is the function of the intellectual cognition and the formation of logical conclusions.
- Feeling:This is the function of subjective estimation and the value related thinking.
The Yaron has been holding the “A” type personality while Daniel showed “C”.
The three examples by which the leadership might hinder the team performance are:
- Yaron was very much goal oriented, while Daniel was detailed oriented. Yaron has wanted to assure that the environment has been controlled.
- Daniel has been more interested in creating the mission plan than Yaron. This plan was for the complex operations and was much more logical and accurate in manner.
- Daniel acquired the detailed report of the psychological influence of the soldiers during the operation. Yaron could utilize that data to curb the soldier’s feelings to comprehend the soldiers to achieve greater good of that evacuation.
Each of the commanding officers possessed distinct type of leadership style. These faced various difficulties along with benefits for their process. Yaron displayed a very transformational style of leadership throughout. The style of Daniel on the other hand has been effective in the long term process. However, it became hazardous in implanting this properly as the decisions needs have to be made in the short term processes.
Arnold, K. A., & Loughlin, C. (2013). Integrating transformational and participative versus directive leadership theories: Examining intellectual stimulation in male and female leaders across three contexts. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 34(1), 67-84.
McCleskey, J. A. (2014). Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and leadership development. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 5(4), 117.
Mesu, J., Sanders, K., & Riemsdijk, M. V. (2015). Transformational leadership and organisational commitment in manufacturing and service small to medium-sized enterprises: The moderating effects of directive and participative leadership. Personnel Review, 44(6), 970-990.
Nazir, T., & Shah, S. F. H. (2014). Mediating effect of knowledge sharing between participative decision making, transformational leadership and organization performance. Journal of Management Info, 1(1), 1-12.
Nijstad, B. A., Berger-Selman, F., & De Dreu, C. K. (2014). Innovation in top management teams: Minority dissent, transformational leadership, and radical innovations. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 23(2), 310-322.
Vann, B. A., Coleman, A. N., & Simpson, J. A. (2014). Development of the Vannsimpco leadership survey: a delineation of hybrid leadership styles. Swiss Business School Journal of Applied Business Research, 3, 28-38.