Style: General Lee seems to be an autocratic leader who believe in himself only and became arrogant and over confident too after winning number of battles, on the other hand Chamberlain was a liberal leader who believes in his soldiers.
Confidence: Lee, leader of Northern Virginia had a great confidence in his army and gave them a wider space for the battle. But it proved a failure as he won’t be able to bind them in crucial times of emergency, whereas Chamberlain believed in the capability of his soldiers (Jeffrey, 2013).
Communication: Lee was working with a comparatively new team in the battlefield which demands direct conversation among them. But lee failed to do the job, However colonel chamberlain was a man of language and knew well how to communicate effectively to get desired results.
Lack of consensus: Lack of consensus between two strong friends, Lee and Longstreet, also resulted into their defeat. Like a good leader, Lee was not capable to solve the differences where as Chamberlain knew how to play with words to motivate his force (Leadership experience, 2013).
Quick decisions: Lee and Strongman failed to predict the situation on the most important third day which results into their failure. On the other hand Chamberlain knew what to do. He believed in` Do or Die’ situation did not leave his position `little round top’ given to him.
Both Lee and Chamberlain were good enough in communication skills, but the former had a new team to work and communicate with which leads to disaster. However to achieve any goal, unity must be there. One should focus on organization’s goal instead of personal ego, which Lee failed to do. However we can say that Chamberlain’s leadership style had a great impact on the battle. He ignited the spark of victory among the force that loses all hope of winning just by saying a word `BAYONET’. He had been a simple college professor, who with dynamic leadership styles changed the whole scenario and turned the defeat into victory.