August 2013 - Parks & Recreation - 43

which he described the path that shaped
this man who would lead the Union
to Victory at Gettysburg. Referring to
how he was with his men, Weddle described Meade as " much like Patton....
He [knew] which ones needed a kick
in the pants and which ones needed
an arm around the shoulder. " This is a
great characterization of Management
by Style. Good managers know that
what motivates one employee is not
necessarily going to work for another
employee. The different hard-wiring
and life experiences we each bring to a
situation influence how we respond to
the people, actions and demands in our
environment. Knowing those nuances about each of your employees gives
you a great advantage in bringing out
their top performance. A great way to
learn how to recognize those differences and the distinctive needs of different
type of personalities is through the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). To
get a good overview of the MBTI and
its applications to management and
leadership, check out NRPA's Supervisors Management School in November. Using the MBTI can help elevate
you past the Golden Rule (treat others
the way you'd like to be treated) up to
the Platinum Rule: treat others the way
they'd like to be treated.
Collaborative Leadership
Gen. Robert E. Lee was known for being a strong and aggressive leader. Far
from collaborative, Lee had always had a
strong " number two " who was his main
collaborator and sole sounding board on
military strategy. Up until Gettysburg,
that number two was Thomas " Stonewall " Jackson. But Lee and Stonewall
were so like-minded that Lee never really
had to clarify what he meant or what he
wanted when he issued orders. Unfortunately for Lee, Jackson was mortally
wounded at Chancellorsville, so Gettys-

burg was Lee's first engagement without
his trusted partner and confidant. This
is where Meade's Collaborative Leadership style gave him a distinct advantage
over Lee. Although Meade was criticized at the time for gathering his " senior
team " (his corps commanders) at the end
of day one to determine the standing of
each commander's troops and take stock
of the movements, losses and intelligence
each had to report, this collaborative approach to determine the next day's battle
strategy was exactly what this moment in
time required to secure the victory. If Lee
had taken this collaborative approach,
recognizing that Jackson's death and
absence left him far more exposed than
he might have expected, he may have obtained better intelligence and made better
decisions (and there may never have been
a Pickett's Charge to haunt him through
history). Although a Collaborative Leadership style may have been viewed as
weak and insecure compared to Lee's
commanding independent leadership
style, it built the confidence of Meade's
new team and helped gain buy-in going
into the next day's battle and ultimate
victory over Lee.
Situational Leadership
The natural leadership extension of
Management by Style is Situational
Leadership. A departure from the
process-driven, one-size-fits-all style
of leadership that penetrated corporate culture through the growth of an
industrial economy in the last century, Situational Leadership is now
gaining popularity. Why? Because
it's effective. Managers must have the
ability to read a situation and recognize that previously successful tactics may not necessarily generate the
same results in a different instance.
Against Lincoln's strong urging to
" follow up and attack Gen. Lee as
soon as possible before he can cross

the river, " Meade pursued Lee's army
enough to " drive the invaders from our
soil. " He knew the situation was not as
Lincoln perceived it just because the
numbers indicated a decisive victory
might be possible. After all the battle's losses, Meade may have still had
20,000 more men than Lee, but Meade
had lost 11 corps commanders. Seven
days into his command, three-quarters
of his new senior team was brand-new
again. He knew he would need to learn
the personalities and styles of these new
commanders as individuals before he
could lead them as a team in a successful attack. Meade also knew better than
to press a poor position on the move.
This was not the high ground he had
at Gettysburg. This situation required a
different approach than the last time he
had these same odds, and Meade knew
different action was required.
I think Denis McLaughlin said it best
in his article Is There a Best Theory of
Leadership?:
Over the last hundred years or so,
there have been many advances in our
understanding of the theory of leadership. In many ways, I believe when we
moved into the industrial age around
the 1900s, there was much that seemed
to be forgotten from the thousands of
years of leadership lessons in the family, on the farm and in past civilizations
that had to be relearned.
While there are certainly some great
emerging leadership experts today
who identify new trends in leadership
and management techniques, perhaps
we need not look much further than
our American history books to find
the tried-and-true practices re-emerging as " new " and " innovative " styles
of leading our corporate troops to
business victory.
Lauren Yost is NRPA's Vice President of
Operations (lyost@nrpa.org).

W W W. N R PA . O R G | A U G U S T 2 0 1 3 |

Parks & Recreation

August 2013 - Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of August 2013 - Parks & Recreation