Effective Leaders In The Things They Carried By Tim O Brien

917 Words4 Pages

Effective Leaders The question “Would you rather be feared or respected?” is often asked when discussing how to be an effective leader. The war novel The Things They Carried by Tim O’Brien proves that leaders who are willing to compromise and listen to others when making a decision are more effective than leaders who are unwilling to compromise. Tim O’Brien was a soldier in the Vietnam War, who was in the same platoon as Jimmy Cross (Lieutenant), and other soldiers such as Kiowa and Curt Lemon. After the war ended, O’Brien went home to Minnesota and wrote different stories about his experiences in the war. Leaders who are willing to compromise are more effective than leaders who are unwilling to compromise because they listen to the voices …show more content…

In the vignette “Speaking of Courage” in The Things They Carried, Kiowa dies. The platoon was looking for a place to set up camp overnight after marching in the daytime; they came across a large field next to the River Tra Bong, and a couple of Vietnamese women ran up to them and warned Jimmy Cross not to sleep there overnight. However, Cross decided that that was where they would spend the night. Not listening to the women and not asking his soldiers if they thought it was a good idea is what ultimately lead to the death of Kiowa. Overnight the platoon took on enemy rounds, and thanks to the monsoon the field filled with muck and water. During this violent night, Kiowa sunk beneath the surface of all the muck after being shot at, and died because he wasn’t able to breathe. If Jimmy Cross listened to the women or even compromised with his soldiers on where to stay, then it is much more likely that Kiowa wouldn’t have died. This is an example of the consequences that can occur when a leader is unwilling to compromise, doesn’t listen to his/her people, and stubborn. Also, when leaders listen to the thoughts of the people he/she is ruling, he/she gets to hear the opinions about what they should do in a certain situation. This is more effective than not listening to others because it makes the population generally more satisfied with the decision made opposed …show more content…

If a leader is unwilling to compromise, then he/she simply makes a biased decision based on their own thoughts or beliefs. In this case, the leader is just trying to get the best outcome for him/herself. This selfish act causes many people to get frustrated and angry at him/her and makes them feel useless. Thus, the leader is less effective because he/she is striving for personal gain compared to the well-being of others. After World War I, George Clemenceau of France was part of the “Big Four” who helped compose the Treaty of Versailles. Clemenceau wanted to punish Germany and make them pay full reparations for the war, accept the war guilt, and not let them have an army. Clemenceau’s unfair ideas and actions in the Treaty infuriated the Germans and is what sparked World War II. This is an example of the consequences when a leader doesn’t compromise with others and seeks a result based off of individual thoughts compared to what is morally right. Leaders who are unwilling to compromise usually seek individual gain, thus they are less

Open Document