首先，领导常常在处理冲突和控制局势中扮演不可或缺的角色。对于校园种族冲突，领导有责任防止冲突，控制仇恨的蔓延。不幸的是，密苏里州的领导层做得很糟糕。面对持续不断的种族冲突，他们总是采取沉默的政策。10月5日，在为即将到来的返校典礼表演进行排练时，一名喝醉的白人男学生使用了一个不带有种族歧视色彩的词汇来称呼黑人大学生军团的成员。事件发生时在场的校园安全官员没有做出任何紧急反应，进一步加剧了该群体的愤怒(Fortunato, 2017)。学校安全官员的不作为伤害了学生的感情，因此，学生感到不安全和不受保护。尽管大声辱骂的学生最终被学校开除，但他们仍然担心校园气氛。密苏里学生抗议事件爆发后，沃尔夫总统不但没能抑制种族冲突的爆发，甚至加剧了局势的严重性。当沃尔夫离开会场时，一群学生遇到了他。有人问他如何定义“系统性压迫”。他的回答不仅麻木不仁，而且似乎反智。系统性压迫是因为你不相信自己有平等的成功机会(Chang, 2016，第41页)。这些带有严重偏见的回答引起了学生们的不满，然后又向他抛出了更多的问题:“蒂姆·沃尔夫，你刚才是不是因为系统性的压迫而指责我们?”你刚才是责怪黑人学生吗?(Chang, 2016，第41页)。沃尔夫选择了迅速离开。关注此事的1950学生团体为迈克尔·布朗成立了激进组织MU，最终会见了伍尔夫总统，并发表了以下声明:“沃尔夫口头上承认他关心密苏里大学的黑人学生，然而，他也报告说，他‘不完全’意识到校园里的系统性种族主义、性别歧视和父权制度”(Lzadi, 2015)。沃尔夫不负责任的行为和对校园歧视的冷漠最终让他吃下了这颗苦果。
学校橄榄球队参加了抗议，拒绝参加比赛，因为学校每场比赛要花费100万美元(张，41页)。在抗议的巨大压力下，沃尔夫总统最终选择了辞职。我们有充分的理由认为，作为一名领导人，有一种危机感是必要的。一个合格的领导者需要预测事件的发展趋势，能够发现并干预事件的发展，将可能发生的危机扼杀在摇篮之中。Fortunato et al解释说,密苏里大学的领导人无力开发和维护必要的通过沟通与关键利益相关者的关系可能导致不能完全识别或至少承认校园事件的严重程度”(j . A。,因为仇杀Gigliotti, r·A。&鲁本b.d.(2017)，第201页)。
To begin with, leadership often plays an indispensable role in handling conflicts and controlling the situation. For campus racial conflicts, leadership is obliged to prevent conflicts and control the spread of hatred. Unfortunately, the leadership of Missouri did a terrible job. They always took a silent policy to face the ongoing ethnic conflicts. On October 5, during a rehearsal for an upcoming Homecoming ceremony performance, a drunk, White, male student used a racially insensitive term to call out the Members of the Legion of Black Collegians. The campus safety officer present during the incident did not respond with any urgency, furthering the group’s anger (Fortunato, 2017). The inaction of school safety officer hurt the feelings of the students and because of this, the student felt unsafe and unprotected. Although the student who yelled the slur was eventually expelled from the school, they were still worried about the campus climate. After protests of Missouri students broke out, the president Wolfe not only failed to suppress the outbreak of ethnic conflicts, even aggravated the seriousness of the situation. A group of students confronted Wolfe as he left a meeting. One asks him to define “systematic oppression.” His answer was not just insensitive, it seemed anti-intellectual. Systematic oppression is because you don’t believe you have the equal opportunity for success (Chang, 2016, page 41). The severely biased answers aroused student dissatisfaction, and then peppered him with more questions:” Did you just blame us for systematic oppression, Tim Wolfe? Did you just blame Black students?” (Chang, 2016, page 41). Wolfe chose to walk away quickly. The Concerned Student 1950 group who started the activist group MU for Michael Brown eventually met with President Wolfe, and issued the following statement: “Wolfe verbally acknowledged that he cared for Black students at the University of Missouri, however, he also reported he was ‘not completely’ aware of systemic racism, sexism, and patriarchy on campus” (Lzadi, 2015).The irresponsible behavior of Wolfe and the apathetic response to campus discrimination finally made him eat this bitter fruit.
School football team joined in protests and refused to participate in competitions, which would cost $1million per game for school (Chang, page 41). Under the huge pressure of protest, President Wolfe eventually chose to resign. There is every reason to suggest that as a leader, having a sense of crisis is necessary. A qualified leader needs to predict the trend of events, be able to find and intervene in this situation, and nip the possible crisis in the cradle. Fortunato et al explains that the inability of leaders at the University of Missouri to develop and maintain the necessary relationships through communication with key stakeholders perhaps contributed to an inability to fully recognize-or at least acknowledge—the severity of the events on campus”(Fortunato, J. A., Gigliotti, R. A., & Ruben, B. D. (2017), page 201).