Page 97 - Biobehavioral Resilence to Stress

74 Biobehavioral Resilience to Stress

Cultural issues and differences also present a host of potential stress-

ors. These are a common source of stress for those involved in multinational

peacekeeping efforts. Deployed personnel may be uncertain about how to
relate to foreign soldiers (Bartone & Vatikus, 1998) and how to deal with a
local population whose language and culture are unfamiliar (Downie, 2002).

They may also confront stressors associated with the navigation of strange
and potentially dangerous surroundings, assignments to locate unfamiliar
but important resources, and, frequently, the determination of appropriate
ways to relate to a population of civilian combatants (Litz et al., 1997).
Finally, even as deployment makes obvious the importance of good lead-

ership, it is often the case that leadership changes hands in deployed environ-
ments. Troops may feel uncertain about the competency and commitment
of a newly assigned and unfamiliar leader (Bartone & Vatikus, 1998). Faith
in leadership may also be compromised by inconsiderate commanders who
might neglect soldiers’ physical needs and well-being, including their desire
for regular briefings and up-to-date information about the operation in

which they are engaged (Downie, 2002; Yerks, 1993).

Leadership, Resilience, and Adverse Environments

How might military leaders exercise their influence to encourage or improve

resilience and buffer their troops from the wide variety of stressors they
may encounter in deployed and nondeployed settings? To address this ques-
tion now, we must rely heavily upon concepts, constructs, and relationships
hypothesized throughout this chapter and suggested by what is currently a
very limited body of empirical evidence. It is hoped that this eff ort might
provide a helpful early guidance to researchers.
To determine the potential impact of leadership on resilience, we must

first attend to the specifi c nature of the adverse environment or situation in
which resilience is needed. For example, some situations require resilience
to chronic strain (due to routine stressors) while others require resilience to
acute, episodic strain (due to extreme but temporary stressors). How might
eff ective leadership differ with respect to promoting resilience in each case?

In typical at-risk environments, the leader who wants to foster resilience will
focus on buffering and protecting followers from the stressors they encoun-

ter on a regular, perhaps even daily basis (see Luthar et al., 2000). Th is might
require the leader to do little or nothing more than what an eff ective leader
would strive to do in any event, that is, to engage in normal leadership.
Drawing on ideas put forth by Hersey and Blanchard (1993), we can
say that the effective leader normally attempts to provide followers with

help in clarifying their roles and reconciling task incompatibilities. Th e
effective leader would make resources and time available for followers to

1/21/2008 4:49:26 PM
CRC_71777_Ch004.indd 74 1/21/2008 4:49:26 PM
CRC_71777_Ch004.indd 74