Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain Case
Essay Preview: Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain Case
Report this essay
Summary
“Come out for your country – answer the call”, part of a speech made by Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, “be ready to stand at your post”(Useem, p. 130). The main focus of this case was on Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, and the decisions he made, first to enlist, then as leader of the 20th Regiment of Infantry, Maine. The period was 1862; Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain a college professor, wished to enlist, but the administration at the college where he was employed, Bowdoin College felt that he was too valuable to the college, and that he was a “no fighter”(Useem, p. 131). Therefore, when Chamberlain requested a leave of absence from the college, his request was rejected. In addition, the college also sent a message to warn the governor, who nevertheless commissioned him a lieutenant colonel for the union.
Joshua L. Chamberlains unit was a part of the army led by General George Meade who had succeeded General Joseph Hooker. They were fighting against General Robert E. Lee, leader of the confederate army, and his three army corps under the command of Richard Ewell, A. P. Hill, and James Longstreet. The civil war was between the union, and the confederate armies. The confederate was invading union territory.
Initially the 20th Maine had 1,000 men, but the number had since dwindled, due in part to desertion, injuries, and death. However, Colonel Chamberlain was about to receive a 120 men addition, unfortunately they were mutineers. They were from the 2nd Maine that had been decommissioned.
How would Colonel Chamberlain handle the mutineers, would he force them to the fight, or would he wait until they were negligent and shoot them as he had been instructed?
Colonel Chamberlain did not have any military training, therefore his ability to guide the mutineers, and the speech he made to them after listening to their grievances, motivated, and turned them around completely, from mutineers to soldiers ready for battle. The 20th Maine therefore received strength in numbers.
Chamberlain did not agree with his commanding officer at the battle, he changed their plan, turning the strategic vision of his into reality. Despite his lack of military training it was his goal to succeed, so he read as much military literature as was available to him, he also engaged military leaders; instead of hiding from challenges (the mutineers) he faced them with a successful plan. Because of this attitude he was able to devise a plan that brought his men together, and aided them in winning the war.
His leadership ability lay in his motivational skills, moral compass, that is his loyalty to Maine and to the men he had been assigned.
Key Leadership Issues
As defined in Northouse, “Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal”(Northouse, p.3). The key issues include but are not limited to Colonel Chamberlains ability to successfully turn the mutineers from their mutiny (motivational skills), and complaining to being fighting soldiers again. In addition, the war as depicted by Useem, included men with “West point pedigree, formal military training “(Useem, p.132). Yet, he, a mere nine months after he had enlisted was promoted, and was able to successfully command 20th Maine, as well as the aggrieved men of the 2nd Maine. Despite him disregarding the orders he received regarding the mutineers to “make them do duty or shoot them down the moment they refused”(Useem, p. 128), he utilized his superior leadership skills, and because of his morality he was able to galvanize the aggrieved men of 2nd Maine to fight alongside him. His leadership ability lay in his motivational skills, his moral principles, and is his loyalty to Maine and to the men he had been assigned.
Colonel Chamberlain can be considered a transformational leader. Needless to say as a transformational leader his skill was critical to the abrupt change in the manner of the mutineers, it must be noted that leaders and their followers are somewhat tied together in the transformation process. Northouse defines transformational leadership as “the process whereby a person engages with others and creates a connection that raises the level of motivation and morality in both the leader and the follower”(Northouse, p172). This definition describes Colonel Chamberlain, his concern apart from learning all he could about the military was always for the safety of his men. Even when the situation seemed hopeless after the 15th Alabama attack, his solution to protect his men and their ground was to use bayonets, “offense was to replace defense”, he also “ordered the right end of his line to remain fixed while the rest rotated around it like a giant hinge” (Useem, p. 140). He raised the level of morality of his followers, he knew as much as they were motivated to be part of the civil war, it was their desire to be at home with their families. Similarly, his loyalty and his sense of morality dictated how the mutineers were treated despite the commands he received. Morality dictated how he treated his men as opposed to the enemy. He realized that people are compelled to perform amoral, indecent, criminal acts, they would not have normally done. Because he was not military trained it allowed to understand exactly how his men felt, as opposed to the military training which may have made him coldhearted, his lack of training was definitely an advantage. He had empathy and he was able to influence his men making them believe in themselves and become stronger, he was also self-motivated. For a leader to be effective and efficient he must be self-motivated.
In contrast there are some leaders (Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler, Jim Jones, and David Koresh) who had the ability to transform but in a negative way, Bass in Northouse, “coined the term pseudotransformational leadership”, referencing leaders that are thought to be “self-consumed, exploitive, and power oriented, with warped moral values”(Northouse, p. 173).
However, authentic leadership, the skill set utilized by Colonel Chamberlain is “socialized leadership” proving the point that it engages the interest of all, a responsibility shared by leader and follower alike. According to the very apt definition by Bass and Burns in an article by Grant; “Transformational leadership is typically conceptualized as a collection of four dimensions of leader behavior: inspirational motivation, idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration”(Grant, 2012) a definition that summarizes the leadership role played by Colonel Chamberlain.