Crimson tide and the aspects of leadership Published: 23, March 2015 The lm is based on on the time period when when there was imbalance imbalance in ussia! ussia! ussian ussian rebel truehearted to their leader had obtained dominance o"er the installation of some nuclear missile and the# are threatenin$ thermonuclear thermonuclear warhead if the ussian ussian $o"ernment or %mericans tried to confront him! &n attempt to watch o"er the dele$ation, the 'nited (tates ordered the '(( %labama: a nuclear submarine to be read# to ta)e an# action to sustain the stri)e! %mon$ the %labama submarine crew was Captain *ran) amse#, who was the commandin$ o+cer and amon$ the "er# few commanders remainin$ in the a"# with e-perience in combat! .e chooses /ieutenant Commander on .unter, who was hi$hl# educated when it comes to militar# histor# and maneu"er, howe"er had no e-perience re$ardin$ combat as the -ecuti"e +cer (econd in Command! 4urin$ their embar) at sea, latent hostilit# arose between amse# and .unter due to indierent personalities, .unter was more anal#tic and conser"ati"e towards his mission and the men and as for amse#, he was more hotheaded, 6#7b#7the7seat7of7 6#7b#7the7seat7of7 his7pants $o about! % satellite report came throu$h to the %mericans that the ussians ussians who $ot the nuclear installation were fuelin$ the missiles, and the %labama was ordered to plun$e its missiles to those ussians! % second messa$e came throu$h for %labama to disable their missiles, but unfortunatel# the messa$e was not recei"ed b# the crew after the communication unit was badl# destro#ed b# the ussian ussian submarine attac)! The %labama was too deep to restore communication and had 8ust been hit and there was an outstandin$ order to launch the missiles, thus Captain amse# opted to continue with the order the# had at the time which was authenticated! .unter on the other hand was a$ainst the missile launch and tried to win o"er support from amse# to conrm the second messa$e before proceedin$ with the launch, because he had hope that it was possibl# an ab8uration of the pre"ious command! .unter ar$ued that e"en if the# launched the missiles later than e-pected other '( submarines in the area would proceed with the mission as per the 6eet9s redundanc# protocol measures! /ad# usin$ a tablet Professional ssa# riters ;et #our $rade or #our mone# bac) usin$ our ssa# ritin$ ritin$ (er"ice<
((%= &T&; (>&C %s the situation in the command became intense, amse# presents .unter as an upstart $raduate from .ar"ard who does not honor his place in the chain of command! There came a point where amse# wanted to e-cuse .unter from bein$ a (econd in Command, 8ust because .unter was still a$ainst the launch of the missiles! &nstead amse# was arrested in the attempt to outsmart the protocols re$ardin$ the launch of the nuclear! The Chief of the ?oat a$reed with .unter and proceeded with the arrest of amse# thou$h the# were old friends, and he was ta)en from the Con and loc)ed in his bedroom! Thou$h the %labama crew was sha)en order was retained! The ussian submarine re7emer$ed 8ust as .unter was underta)in$ the eort to corroborate the second messa$e concernin$ the missile launch! %n underwater combat resulted and the ussian submarine was destro#ed, and unfortunatel# the %labama $ot dama$ed badl#! The ship lost its communications, deaths of se"eral crew members were encountered, and the boat nearl# san) past its crush depth which resulted from the water which had entered into the boat after the hit from the combat with the ussians! %s .unter was waitin$ for the communications to be reestablished, some o+cers who were lo#al to the Captain left the Con alto$ether! ith the help of the lo#al o+cers, amse# mana$ed to $et out of the place where he was held in attempt to present .unter with char$es of rebellion, placin$ the -ecuti"e +cer and o+cers who ser"ed with him under arrest! The launchin$ of the missiles was nearl# successful hadn9t it been for the weapon o+cer who was persuaded to stall or dela# amse#, while .unter was in the mission of recapturin$ the brid$e, amon$ him was his main drafted sta o+cers! &n the end, a tie resulted, thus the o+cers who had disputes a$reed to wait until the last potential second to plun$e the missiles! %t lon$ last the communications were up to speed and it was disco"ered that the ussian arm# had stabili@ed the situation and the ussian rebellions had been sub8u$ated, thus no need to continue with the order of launchin$ %merican9s missiles! /ad# usin$ a tablet Comprehensi"e ritin$ (er"ices Pla$iarism7free %lwa#s on Time Mar)ed to (tandard
4 %t the end of the mo"ie, a re"iew too) place at Pacic *leet headAuarters in .awaii where "arious admirals con"e#ed serious concerns about the collapse of command which too) place in the %labama and durin$ the wartime concernin$ the launchin$ of the nuclear missiles! amse# nall# decided to withdraw from the a"# and ad"ocated .unter for the command! The two men .unter and amse# settled their disputes at the end of the lm! . &(B% T. /%4( & T. M>& There are two main leaders namel#: ;ene .ac)man pla#in$ Captain *ran) amse#: an old white male, na"# "eteran, probabl# in his ft#9s! 4en@el ashin$ton pla#in$ /ieutenant Commander on .unter: a #oun$ %frican7 %merican male fresh o .ar"ard 'ni"ersit#! T. /%4 (9( / & T. M>& /ieutenant Commander .unter pla#ed a number of roles in the Crimson tide lm which included him bein$ in the submarine to ma)e sure that Captain amse# made the correct choices, for e-ample, the launchin$ of the nuclear missiles! /oo)in$ at the situation, amse# was $oin$ to $o ahead and launch the missiles without conrmin$ the second messa$e which was interrupted b# the dama$e from the ussian rebels! ;oin$ throu$h with the launch of the missiles would ha"e caused a nuclear warhead which was pre"ented due to .unter9s 8ud$ment! %lso .unter pla#ed a role of bein$ a complementar# leader towards amse#, that is, he pro"ided certain leadership aspects which amse# lac)ed! Those aspects includes, .unter bein$ a moti"ator, in the lm we concluded that amse# was a strict and arro$ant leader who ne"er moti"ated his crew, but with the in6uence from .unter, amse# $a"e a moti"ational speech after the crew restored all operations after the ussian attac)! The other aspect that amse# lac)ed was compassion towards his crew, but .unter stepped in and showed compassion to his fellow submarines after a few crew members lost their li"es in the lower compartment in the boat! /ast but not least, amse# was impatient, he could not wait for the communication unit to restore their s#stems for the second messa$e to come throu$h and insisted on proceedin$ with the missile launch, whereas .unter possessed that abilit# and was willin$ to put on hold the idea of $oin$ ahead with the order at hand of launchin$ the nuclear missiles! .unter9s choice to wait turned out to be the best choice
because if it has not been for him, the %labama attac) would ha"e cause the start of a nuclear war! n the other hand, amse#9s roles included testin$ the lo#alt# of the boat9s crew, that is, had he not been there none of the con6icts between him and .unter would not ha"e arose, and there would not ha"e been a time where the o+cers in char$e had to choose sides o"er the boat9s authorit#! +cers choosin$ sides made conrmation on who was followin$ the ri$ht protocol in the launch of the nuclear missiles, for e-amples, the crew under amse# 8ust followed the protocol to some e-tent and i$nored the one which was to conrm what the second command said before $oin$ ahead with the pre"ious order, whereas the ones under .unter did e"er#thin$ bu# the boo)s! %lso amse#9s purpose was to ma)e sure that e"er#one was prepared in case of a combat with the rebels! To support that, he carried down a number of drills in the boat durin$ their 8ourne# at sea to ensure that e"er#one sta#ed focused no matter what, also before the# left the base and while the# were on the ship he made a few speeches about the situation at hand, and one of the speech when li)e this, we are here to preser"e democrac#, not to practice it! DP/%& T. CTDT * %C. &C&4T /%T&; T /%4(.&P %(PCT( & T. (=P(&( &C&4T( &T.&; T. M>& &>/>&; T. /%4( There were a number of incidents that too) place durin$ the mission to ussia within the '(( %labama9s crew that in"ol"ed either .unter or amse# or both of them, below are some of those incidents: There was a time when two of the crew members $ot into a $ht o"er comic boo)s, at the time .unter was onl# a few feet awa# from the two men but could see what was happenin$! hen the two were stopped b# one of the crew members, .unter pulled the other one in"ol"ed in the $ht the super"isor aside and tried to understand the cause of the $ht, and when he full# understood what the Auarrel was all about he ad"ised the super"isor that in cases of Auarrels he should )now how to handle the situation since he was also a leader and should lead b# e-ample! The super"isor promised to handle disputes better ne-t time, and was once a$ain calm and proceeded to his assi$ned post! /ad# usin$ a tablet This ssa# is a (tudent9s or)
This essa# has been submitted b# a student! This is not an e-ample of the wor) written b# our professional essa# writers! D%MP/( * ' E The other incident in"ol"in$ one of the leaders was when .unter rushed down to the )itchen durin$ the re to tr# and sustain the situation! This is a si$n that he does not interact with the crew durin$ times of issuin$ commands onl#, he came to an aid of his followers whereas amse# was bus# launchin$ a drill and not carin$ about what .unter had to sa# about the re downstairs! &C&4T( %4 T. /%4s9( &T%CT& &T.& T. CTDT * T. M>& amse# was a blind follower, he did almost e"er#thin$ without Auestionin$ whereas .unter was the opposite of that he followed orders but he did Auestion the authorit# where he felt it necessar#! ne e-ample which comes to mind is where the# were discussin$ about war, amse# felt that when it came to war if there was a threat made, the onl# action or measures to be ta)en was to attac) rst, he was more of a shoot rst and as) Auestions later t#pe of person! n the other hand, .unter thou$ht that attac)in$ the opposition part# in war would ma)e the situation worse, as he belie"ed that, in a nuclear world, true enem# cannot be destro#ed as the true enem# is war itself! The second incident where the two leaders interacted was when the %labama was hit and the second messa$e which was to be recei"ed aboard from the headAuarters was interrupted! hen the boat was stable from the hit, Captain amse# wanted to proceed with the order at hand which was to continue with the launchin$ of the nuclear missiles! ?ut .unter bein$ the -ecuti"e +cer he refused to concur the order because the# were unsure of what the incomin$ messa$e said and a hu$e ar$ument arose! The ar$ument led to amse# wantin$ to relie"e .unter of his dut#, but due to some re$ulations, .unter mana$ed to turn the tables and had amse# remo"ed from the Con to his stateroom b# the Chief of the ?oat! This incident shows that both men are rm in what the# each belie"e in! *or e-ample, amse# is more concerned about the worst that could happen if the# are not able to continue with the missile launch well on time, i!e! before the ussian rebels launch the attac), while .unter is concerned about the worst that could happen if the# actuall# do proceed with the launchin$ while there is no lon$er a threat from the ussian rebels! ?oth men were not about to be deterred from their lo$ic re$ardin$ the matter, in which both were respecti"el# ri$ht in their own wa#s! /ast but not least, was the incident which too) place in the )itchen! There was a re in the )itchen and while .unter was bus# maintain the situation downstairs, amse#
decided on carr#in$ out a drill, and .unter bein$ the second in command had to rush bac) upstairs to the Con to repeat the order! hen he $ot there he tried to e-plain to the Captain that is not a $ood time to be runnin$ the drill as the situation in the )itchen was still in the process of bein$ full# contained, but captain bein$ a suborn man, he dismissed .unter9s complaint and continued with the drill! .e later met with .unter at his stateroom and told him that the ne-t time he wanted to Auestion him, he should not do it in front of the crew, that he should wait for the ri$ht time when the# are alone to present the matter at hand! ?ut later on amse# shouted at .unter in front of the crew in the Con, which shows that amse# onl# compl# b# the boo)s where the rules fa"ors him onl#! %lso, this shows that amse# show little or no concern o"er his crew members as he carried out the drill thou$h there was re downstairs! E =' /%4(9( ?.%>' %4 C.%%CT&(T&C( &n this part we will be loo)in$ at the dierent and similar leadership characteristics that .unter and amse# possess either bad or $ood! Commander .unter Caution: this can be dened as showin$ careful forethou$ht! This is illustrated in the lm where .unter $a"e i"etti the )e#s to the o+cers9 stateroom and other cabins in case amse# and his men were to loc) them up, and it did happen! .unter and his o+cers were arrested and i"etti came to their rescue! ptimistic: is e-pectin$ or presentin$ the best possible outcome in a $i"en solution! .unter displa#s this characteristic when the second messa$e was interrupted! .e refused to a$ree with amse# to continue launchin$ the nuclear missiles because he was e-pectin$ the $ood news from the headAuarters, and indeed the results came up positi"e, that the# should abort the pre"ious mission! aFG"e: ot initiatedH decient in rele"ant e-perience! amse# and other o+cers who were lo#al to him belie"ed that .unter was not e-perienced enou$h to ma)e the decisions re$ardin$ the combat! ell, partl# that was true because he had no practical e-perience in the eldH all he )new was what he read in the militar# boo)s! e"ertheless, he mana$ed to sustain all the possible distractions in the boat! %mbitious: .a"in$ a stron$ desire for success or achie"ement or reAuirin$ full use of #our abilities or resources! This is true for .unter because he wanted to )now what the second messa$e was sa#in$, and he made sure that he did! .e made it his
number one priorit# to ma)e sure of it, he )ept callin$ >ossler to conrm the pro$ress on the communications! .e had hardship in ma)in$ sure that those communications were wor)in$, he was e"en hit b# amse# but he did not $i"e up on the communication, at lon$ last amse# $a"e them a time frame to - the communications! %t lon$ last a transmission came true and the messa$e was recei"ed and a new orderBmission was read which was to stop the missile launch! Captain amse# "ercondent: it is a $ood si$n for a leader to be condent bein$ positi"e, but as for amse# he happen to be "er# condent which happens to be a bad aspect because o"ercondent can blind a leader9s abilit# to thin) twice! This is illustrated in the lm, where he did not $i"e a second thou$ht to stoppin$ the missiles, e"en after .unter presented him with man# reasons not to continue with the order at handH he i$nored then and went ahead with the launch! .adn9t he had been o"ercondentH he would ha"e too) the time to re"iew .unter9s su$$estions! &mpatient: can be dened as full of ea$erness, Captain amse# was a "er# impatient man, he was )een to proceedin$ with order or an#thin$ he felt was ri$ht at the time! *or e-ample, e"en after the re in the )itchen he was ea$er to proceed with the drill e"en after bein$ told of the situation downstairs, 8ust because he had planned for that drill and did not want to wait until the situation with the re was full# maintained! The other incident was when he 8ust wanted to continue with the nuclear missile launch, e"en after the boat had 8ust been hit and the incomin$ messa$e was interrupted! .e wanted to proceed with the launch with conrmin$ the second messa$e! 'npredictable: ot capable of bein$ foretold! ith amse# no one could actuall# tell what his ne-t step would be! *or e-ample, rst time he met with .unter it was li)e the two would $et alon$ 8ust ne, but when the# $ot to the ship his attitude towards .unter chan$ed from time to time until the time he made it clear that he was not )een of him because he did not ha"e an# e-perience about the combat, and because unli)e him, he had to wor) hard to obtain that position while .unter $ot it because he was a .ar"ard $raduate! The other e-ample is when lost his temper towards .unter and shouted at him in front of the crew, meanwhile he as)ed .unter not to address him in front of the crew! (trict: &ncapable of compromise or 6e-ibilit#! Captain amse# was not )een to an# su$$estions or ad"ises, he wanted to do thin$s his own wa# onl#!
4(C&? %4 4&(C'(( .= T. /%4(.&P ?.%>&' %( **CT&> &**CT&> ecti"e: -ertin$ force or in6uence &neecti"e: /ac)in$ the abilit# or s)ill to perform eecti"el#H inadeAuate /%4(.&P ?.%>&'( T%(E &T4 % tas)7oriented leader is focused on accomplishments and if the leader is able to show the s)ills and commitment to his followers, obtainin$ a specic tas) won9t be a di+cult matter! That is, if the super"isor was to lead b# e-ample in doin$ a tas) & belie"e his followers would not hesitate to do the same, for e-ample, durin$ the re in the )itchen, .unter rushed there in an attempt to sa"e the personnel that were inside and others did li)ewise! &f he had not been there no one would ha"e ris)ed his life to $o into the re especiall# after the# were told b# others that it was too hot, but ne"ertheless .unter 8ust went ri$ht inside! %nother e-ample is when /t Paul .ellerman was ordered to close the hatch! There was a time when he was hesitatin$ to follow the order, but .unter paused and put himself in .ellerman9s shoes how he must ha"e felt thin)in$ about lea"in$ his man to die down there and tried to tal) to him bra"el# that if he did not close the hatch, the whole crew would $o down with the submarine rather than if he close the hatch and onl# a few are lost! %fter a short period of time .ellerman decided to close the hatch to sa"e others so as for them to continue with the mission! /%T& &T4 % relationship oriented leaders focus on the relationships amon$ the team9s members! This can be indicated in the lm where amse# tal)ed to his o+cer to $ather other o+cers so the# could $o and restore control o"er the Con! %nother e-ample is when .unter was lenient toward i"etti after his encounter with another crew member , 8ust bein$ lenient made i"etti to ha"e respect towards .unter and trust him, which was wh# he came to .unter9s rescue because of the relationship the# 8ust built durin$ that short time! &n $eneral Commander .unter had a friendl# relationship with almost half of the boat9s crew, and with those relationships the# all helped him to accomplish his mission, hadn9t he been friendl# and understandin$ none of them would ha"e come to his rescue! P%T&C&P%T&> &T4
% participati"e oriented leader relies mostl# in the leader bein$B operatin$ as an implementer rather than 8ust issuin$ order or ma)in$ assi$nments! &f we loo) at the Captain we could conclude that he was not a participati"e leader because there is not e"en one incident where he actuall# $ot in"ol"ed in an# of the tas)s carried out in the boat! C.%; %;T C%P%?&/&T&( e6ectin$ bac) to the mo"ie, & would sa# both leaders did not ha"e an# chan$e capabilit# because both men had stron$ belie"es in their actions, the# were rm in what the# each belie"ed in! neither amse# nor .unter wanted to chan$e his wa# of operatin$! ne of the e-amples is when .unter thou$ht it would be best if the Captain ac)nowled$ed the crew for their hard wor) and commitment in obtained order after the hit, but the captain $a"e a speech he would $i"e an# other da#!, which shows that he was not willin$ to chan$e his st#le 8ust for a minutes! %nother e-ample in"ol"es .unter, as mentioned abo"e, he was )een to Auestionin$ authorit# where he felt necessar# but there were a few occasions when amse# wanted him to 8ust perform orders at hand without Auestionin$, but due to the fact that he was not used to that, he refused to accommodate that thou$ht! ith this )ind of attitude we could conclude that the leaders were ineecti"e because the# could not a$ree in one aspect, the# alwa#s wanted thin$s to be done their wa#s, the# ne"er compromised! &4T&*= %4 DP/%& %T/%(T T 4&**T &C&4T( &>/>&; T. (%M /%4(! &* T. &C&4T( &>/> T &4&>&4'%/(B % ;'P M%E&; % 4C&(&, /%4(.&P ?.%>&' ?= T. 4&**T &4&>&4'%/ C% ? &4T&*&4 DC'T&> ('MM%= * T. T 4&**T (/CT4 &C&4T( The two incidents that ha"e been chosen are when a $roup of o+cers met outside the weapon unit on how the# were $oin$ to rescue the captain from his hold7up place, and the one where .unter and his o+cers were loc)ed up in the o+cers9 cabinet! &>/>MT * T. (/CT4 /%4s &T.& T. &C&4T %4 M%E&; 4C&(& &T.& T. T%M, ;'P %4 &4&>&4'%/ e$ardin$ the case where .unter and other o+cers were loc)ed up, .unter was in"ol"ed in the decision ma)in$ that too) place in the cabinet which was how to $et full control o"er the Con! .e planned for i"etti to come and rescue them, and after that he as)ed him to $ather a number of trusted crew members who would help in their mission! %fter the $atherin$ and acAuirin$ of the weapons and uniforms, he drew up a strate$ic wa# of how the# could access the Captain Ee# and stop the launch of the missiles without bein$ disrupted!
&n the second incident, Captain amse# had a con"ersation with one of his trusted o+cer to help him escape from his stateroom and obtain bac) his post from .unter! The# concluded that the best option was to recruit a few o+cers in"ol"in$ ebs who was a friend to the Commander! The o+cer carried out the order and the I o+cers helped the captain escape and selected the few that were lo#al to .unter and put all of them under arrest! C.%&(M%T&C %4 T%(*M%T&%/ /( .unter had a wa# of attractin$ and ma)in$ crew members chan$e their minds on certain aspects, and this was all because he had $ood interpersonal s)ills which helped him deal with others well despite their authorit# le"el! *or e-ample, he was able to con"inced ebs to stall the captain from launchin$ the missiles e"en thou$h ebs had helped in his arrest, as he himself went after the captain )e#! %nother e-ample is when he $ot the captain arrested, e"en thou$h Cob was amse#9s old friend, after .unter had e-plained the outcomes of launchin$ the missiles without conrmin$ the second messa$e and the statin$ the re$ulations Chief of the ?oat a$reed with him to relie"e amse# of his dut#! C&T&C%//= %%/=J %C. * T. TB M &C&4T( %4 C(&4 T. PT&( T. /%4s C'/4 .%> C(&44 %4 M%4 M%%;&%/ T%&T( %4 (E&//( This topic deals with the responsibilities and abilities of a leader! ne of the leaders amse# was impatient, and he bein$ impatient could ha"e led to a start of a nuclear warhead, he could ha"e 8ust $i"en the communication unit some time to restore the boat9s s#stems before he could en$a$e in the launchin$ of the missile, which could ha"e pre"ented an outbrea) between him and .unter! (econdl#, a leader should learn to minimi@e his condence le"el as o"ercondence could enable them to thin) twice before handlin$ a situation! &f amse# was able to lower his condence he could ha"e listened to .unter9s concerns and thou$ht throu$h the idea of launchin$ the missile! ('MM%= &n conclusion, there are two main t#pes of mana$ement st#les in Crimson Tide lm: one leader who did thin$s his own wa# amse# and the other one did thin$s but the boo) .unter! %nd the two leaders had to ma)e serious decisions and neither made it eas# for the other one, despite the man# disputes that arose when the# were aboard in the '(( %labama the# reconciled at the end! The reconcilement shows that the# were $ood leaders because a $ood leader should be able to admit to his mista)es ownin$ to them!
Crimson Tide Mo"ie7 %nal#@in$ the Con6icts in /eadership %u$ 10, 201I5,001 "iews3 /i)es2 Comments(hare on /in)ed&n(hare on *aceboo)(hare on Twitter 4enin$ leadership is di+cult! ne si@e ts all approach in leadership is ineecti"e as the elements in"ol"ed are both internal and e-ternal on which most of the leaders nd di+cult to control! /eadership is an art as much as itKs a science! & ha"e wriiten this lon$ post to distin$uish the beha"ior of 2 dened leadership theories when in crisis! Crimson Tide is a capti"atin$ mo"ie set in the bac)drop of an eminent nuclear crisis between nations and a drama that unra"els on board a '( nuclear submarine! %n intense mo"ie pla#ed b# ;ene .ac)man and 4en@el ashin$ton, & obser"ed a con6ict of leadership theories! This mo"ie b# far bein$ a thriller is a te-t boo) on leadership! The traits, of the theor#, as e-hibited b# the characters are discussed in this post! The leadership theories discussed are: (ituational /eadership and Contin$enc# /eadership hat is (ituational L Contin$enc# Theories There ha"e been eorts to classif# leadership in "arious forms li)e ?eha"ioral, Classical, (ituational, Contin$enc#, Contemporar# etc! "en thou$h Classical, ?eha"ioral and other forms of leadership can be dierentiated, there has been no clear demarcation between (ituation and Contin$enc# theories! n the retrospect, a closer anal#sis of these theories, there are commonalities the main one bein$ e-tension of beha"ioral $roup of leadership models! *urthermore the (ituational and Contin$enc# theories focuses on the "arious NsituationsN which leaders ma# nd themsel"es in! (ituational: This theor# focuses on the use of a leaderKs personal s)ills and natural abilit# to lead in a situation! % relationship is shared between the leader and the follower based on I indi"idual st#les! The theor# states that instead of usin$ 8ust one st#le, successful leaders should chan$e their leadership st#les based on the maturit# of the people the#9re leadin$ and the details of the tas)! The words Oshould chan$e hi$hli$hts an important facet of this theor# which is O?ein$ *le-ible
The simple matri- below shows the leadership st#le a$ainst the maturit# of the follower in"ol"ed!
ef: The .erse# and ?lanchardQ (ituational /eadership Theor# Contin$enc#: %mon$st the "arious contin$enc# dependent theories, & am referrin$ to the *red *iedler9s contin$enc# model! This model contains the relationship between leadership st#le and the fa"orable7ness of the situation! (ituational fa"orable7ness was described in terms of three empiricall# deri"ed dimensions: /eader7Member relationship Tas)7(tructure /eader7Position Position7Power
