The Different Leadership Styles in the Battle of Gettysburg

Introduction 

The Battle of Gettysburg that occurred on July 1-3, 1863, was one of the significant engagements during the American Civil War ( Gottfried, 2012) . General Robert Lee had a great victory at Chancellorsville over the Union, and he decided to march his army into Pennsylvania. The Confederates clashed with Union’s forces that were commanded by General George Meade in Gettysburg. The second day experienced heavy fighting after both sides received reinforcements. Furthermore, the Confederates attacked the Union’s forces on both the right and left. On the third day, General Lee ordered an attack on the Union’s forces with less than 15000 troops on their center at the Cemetery Ridge ( Gottfried, 2012) . The assault was famously known as the ‘Pickett's Charge,' and they succeeded in piercing the Union's lines ( Gottfried, 2012) . However, the assault came at a large number of casualties, and it failed. General Lee withdrew his army on July 4 th , 1863 towards Virginia ( Gottfried, 2012) . The research paper will compare the leadership styles if General George Lee and General Robert Lee, evaluate the use of the six principles of command, and highlight takeaways from the battle for platoon leaders. 

Comparison of Leadership Style 

Teamwork 

During the battle, General Meade used to meet his war council up to four times daily to discuss the progress, receive feedback, and re-evaluate their strategies. Furthermore, he ensured that he clearly communicated the roles of each member and unit. On the contrary, General Lee did not consider the opinions of his subordinates, especially on the third day. He ignored their advice to make a defensive move. Instead, General Lee ordered about 15000 men to pierce the Union’s forces in the Pickett’s Charge ( Spruill, 2011) . Meade was a good team player while Lee appeared to be a lone wolf. Ultimately, General Lee’s mistakes allowed the Union to win the Battle of Gettysburg. 

Ability to Inspire 

Regardless of the outcome, General Lee had inspired the Confederates to several victories against the Union. Additionally, his victories inspired the Confederates, and they believed in Lee’s ability. On the other hand, although General Meade was new to the position after replacing General Joseph Hooker, he inspired confidence in his men through communication ( Gottfried, 2012) . He had frequent war council meetings that ensure that every member knew their roles. Additionally, he received feedback from all units through the war council. The Union believed in his ability to make strategic decisions. Ultimately, he inspired the Union to victory against the Confederates. 

Ego 

As mentioned earlier, Lee was an experienced leader and had won many battles against the Union. However, the victories could have clouded his judgements, and he overestimated the Confederate's abilities ( Spruill, 2011) . Additionally, he ignored the advice of his subordinates. On the other hand, General Meade was aware of Lee’s victories and the threat posed by his army. Moreover, Meade was aware that the Confederate had a larger army than the Union. Therefore, Meade relied on tactical decisions while Lee was confident in his individual decisions. 

Decisiveness 

General Lee was decisive. He was willing to take risks to ensure that the Confederate Army won the battle. His victory against the Union at Chancellorsville even made the Union’s army commander, Joseph Hooker, to be reluctant to confront the Confederate’s army. President Abraham Lincoln was forced to replace General Hooker with General Meade to restore confidence in the Union’s ability ( Gottfried, 2012) . On the other hand, after the Confederate’s army had retreated after the failed Pickett’s Charge, General Meade failed to pursue General Lee. Even the weather favored the Union because it had rained heavily and the Confederates had been trapped between the surging Potomac River and the Union. If Meade had attacked the Confederates, they would have had an advantage because Lee’s army had no hopes of resupply or reinforcement. Meade’s indecisiveness allowed Lee’s army to escape and re-strategize. 

Six Principles of Mission Command 

Building Cohesive Teams through Mutual Trust 

General Lee did not trust the advice of James Longstreet, his second in command, to attack the Union forces where they stood. Longstreet was defensive minded, but General Lee ordered Longstreet to attack Union's forces from the left early in the morning, but Longstreet could not get the Confederates in position until 4 pm ( Hess, 2011) . There was a lack of trust between the Lee and Longstreet, and there were over 35000 casualties on day two as they fought along the Devil’s Den ( Hess, 2011) . 

Creating Shared Understanding 

General Lee and James Longstreet did not have a shared understanding. While Longstreet was defensive minded, General Lee ignored Longstreet’s advice ( Hess, 2011) . 

Providing Clear Commander’s Intent 

Although the Confederates experienced more casualties than the Union’s forces on the second day, General Lee had a clear intent. Although Union’s corps that were commanded by Daniel Sickles had an advantage, the Confederates were able to take over the Devil’s Den, an orchard, and a field ( Hess, 2011) . 

Exercising Disciplined Initiative 

Although both sides experienced many casualties, they exercised discipline by maintaining professional conduct and bearing at all times ( Hess, 2011) . Even though the Picket’s Charge caused the loss of over two-thirds of the 15000 men, they maintained their professional conduct by obeying orders from General Lee ( Hess, 2011) . 

Using Mission Orders 

Although Sickle’s III Corps had occupied the lower southern end of the cemetery ridge, he moved his forces to occupy a wheat field that was northeast of the Devil’s Den, and south of the peach orchard. He made a decision that gave his corps a better position while retaining mission orders. 

Accepting Prudent Risk 

General Lee did not accept prudent risk when he sent about 15000 forces under George Picket against the Union center. He was willing to take a major risk because the troops who were commanded by George Picket would be under fire from all flanks. Ultimately, Pickett’s division lost approximately two-thirds of its members. 

Leadership Lessons to Platoon Leaders 

Leaders Must Communicate their Intent 

General Meade had a meeting with his war council almost four times daily during the battle. Although Meade was new to the role, the continuous communication allowed him to communicate better his strategies and tactics he desired to deploy in the battle while receiving feedback from the field ( Catton, 2018) . On the other hand, all leaders in the chain of command must show concisely and clearly the mission’s objective and be able to communicate the information to all their subordinates. The deep understanding of the overall mission allows platoon leaders to make choices that are consistent with the overall tactical and strategic objectives. 

Egos Should Not be brought into a Battle 

When Robert Lee went to Gettysburg, he was very confident after a succession of victories. Many historians believe that although Lee was a great tactician, the successive victories could have made him overconfident in his individual abilities and that of his army ( Pfanz, 2011) . Due to his overconfidence and against the advice of one of the senior generals, he ordered the Pickett’s Charge against a Union Army position. The outcome was disastrous, and it was a major turning battle during the American Civil war. The lesson in Lee's failure to platoon leaders is that whenever they are on a ‘winning streak,' it is essential to listen to and consult with team members and evaluate the alternatives. 

Personal Lessons from the Battle of Gettysburg 

Learning to Adapt 

It is essential to note that the Gettysburg Battle was unplanned and both commanders had to be agile by adapting to their surroundings. General Meade adapted to his surrounding, and General's Lee's mistakes allowed the Union to defeat the Confederates ( Catton, 2018) . The personal lesson is that adaptability is important in every profession. Also, how well managers and their employees embrace problems or shifts in the market or community is a measure of an organization’s efficiency. Managers and their employee should identify new skills and strategies when taking on new roles while focusing on ways to realign their organization structure to achieve their overall objectives. Although the Unions forces were outnumbered, they made maximum use of the available forces. Therefore, managers and their employees should leverage the available resources to achieve the desired outcomes while taking advantage of community partnerships. 

Leaders Must Inspire their Followers 

One of the most inspiring actions during the battle was the leadership of Colonel Chamberlain. He commanded the 20 th Maine and held the Little Round Top’s left flank ( Hess, 2011) . He charged down the hill with his men after they ran out of ammunition. Even after experiencing heavy casualties, they attacked again with bayonets. If Colonel Chamberlain had decided to withdraw after running out of ammunition, the Union's left flank could have collapsed, and it would have had a negative outcome for the Union. A leader must inspire and motivate their teams to achieve the desired goals. Furthermore, leaders should lead by example, such as Colonel Chamberlain. Moreover, leaders should not impose fear but push their teams to their limits. Also, a leader should show confidence in their abilities while being accountable. 

Value of Teamwork 

On the second day of the Battle of Gettysburg, General Meade held a war council to evaluate and discuss battle tactics and strategies. On the other hand, General Lee made all the essential decisions alone. General Meade’s decisions and trust in the war council showed that he invested in the mission and in people while General Lee made decisions without accepting input from his subordinates ( Pfanz, 2011) . Building trust in a team develops a strong and cohesive group. It is highly likely that General Meade earned the trusts of his subordinates by efficiently defining their roles and expectations. Additionally, he did not overload the units with excessive commitments. 

Importance of Decisiveness 

Ultimately, General Meade won the Battle of Gettysburg, preserved the Union, and protected Washington by defeating the Confederate Army. However, he made a tactical error by not following up on the victory at Gettysburg ( Catton, 2018) . After the failed Pickett’s Charge, General Lee and his army withdrew from the battle. General Meade’s indecisiveness and inability to pursue the Confederate Army caused the Civil War to drag for an additional two years. Therefore, it is essential for leaders to make strategic and timely decisions. Failure to make favorable decisions currently could have a negative impact in the future. 

Conclusion 

Although the Confederates won the battle for the Devil’s Den, the Pickett's Charge destroyed all the gains that the Confederates had made during the Battle of Gettysburg. General Meade's leadership was tactical, and it ensured that his entire team was motivated. Due to the decisive defeat at Gettysburg, Lee's army retreated. The Union's victory is arguably one of the key turning points in the Civil war because the Confederates suffered a huge loss and it gave the Union a numerical advantage over the South. The outcome offered great insight into the importance of strategic leadership and the principles of mission command. Furthermore, the outcome of the Battle of Gettysburg could be greatly attributed to the different leadership styles used by General Meade and General Lee. 

References 

Catton, B. (2018). Gettysburg . New Word City. 

Gottfried, B. M. (2012). Brigades of Gettysburg: The Union and Confederate Brigades at the Battle of Gettysburg . Sky horse Publishing Inc. 

Hess, E. J. (2011). Pickett's Charge--The Last Attack at Gettysburg : UNC Press Books. 

Pfanz, H. W. (2011). Gettysburg--The Second Day : UNC Press Books. 

Spruill, M. (2011). Decisions at Gettysburg: the nineteen critical decisions that defined the campaign : Univ. of Tennessee Press.