In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

In

Educational Leadership
In the
Social Science

Graduate School
Philippine Normal University
MAED in Teaching
Social Science
2017

By: Jordan Mitchell C. Cruz

To: Dr. Zenaida Q. Reyes

I.

Thesis: Che Guevara is one of the great leaders of the societies, in the history of

II.

the world.
Sub-Thesis:
a. Che Guevara united the Cuban people in overthrowing the prior government
before his.
b. Guevara improved the economy and industry of Cuba.
c. Guevara upped the literacy rate of Cuba by building several universities
throughout the state.
d. Guevara was an exceptional military leader who was able to defeat large troupes
with an army of a much lesser number.
e. Guevara is a symbol of radical revolution for those who are underrepresented
because of capitalistic society.

III.

Insights:

Ernesto Guevara, more commonly known as Che, is a figure in which face can be
seen painted on walls, banners, shirts and/or on any space that can serve as a
canvass. Indeed, Che Guevara is an iconic figure of the current generations pop culture
(Carter, 2012). Thus showing how Che exhibits a charismatic personality which not
even death has diluted throughout times. And when he stressed his famous last words,
before the life-ending bullet which has pursed in his chest: I know you are here to kill
me. Shoot, coward, you are only going to kill a man [not himself], maybe he truly meant
it and maybe now, for some [or many] now he still lives, through his ideas.
But it should be understood that his ideas and beliefs does not end on just the 20 th up to
the 21st century pop culture, but extends on the modern politics as well. One of the great
leaders, Nelson Mandela, president of South Africa from 1994 to 1999, quoted him as
An inspiration for every human being who loves freedom. In here, we can easily
disclose the whole of Ches advocacy in his lifetime.
But there is something more in Che Guevara that draws the attention of several leaders
globally. And when talking about leaders, it should be noted that Che himself was a
leader when he was still alive, although never the 1 st leader of his country, where he has
realized his nationalistic ideals, during his time. He might be the 2 nd or even the 3rd in
command, since the 1st in command was Fidel Castro, another revolutionary like

himself. But there must be a reason why his name [Che Guevara] is more widespread
than the later who should logically be the more renowned since he [Fidel Castro] was
the Prime Minister of Cuba during those times. Some pointed out that Guevara is the
more distinguished personality because he was considered as the heart and mind of the
revolution in that the ideal which the revolution, he and Castro share, embodies much of
his ideals and beliefs. Also his significant contributions to the movement, although Fidel
Castro was the head, were unmatched.
Being one of the important leaders of Cuba, in his time, he has a number of significant
influences in his country. Good or bad, these impacts will determine his place in the
history, either as a successful leader of 20 th century who has realized his socialist ideals
for the development of his country, or just another figure with infamous image as a
violent dictator, like Hitler, who for once had taken hold of the glory but later failed
miserably in their goals.
Luckily, there are pre-existing leadership theories that would serve as the guide in
defining where Che Guevara is within the scale of a good leader or the contrary. These
leadership theories would
help not only in knowing if Guevara is indeed a great leader but also in depicting
Guevaras leadership traits and style which might say something about his leadership
prowess.
Some believed that Che Guevara fits the standards of being a great man according to
The Great Man Theory, a theory first proposed by Thomas Carlyle on 1840s, if one will
refer to its classical definition. This is true since according to this theory great men are
those who have made a great impact and influence on the world thus making a part of
the history of the world their biography [their lives shaped the history directly and it is a
pre-requisite to understand their life in understanding these parts of history]. Also, this
definition takes any leader who has made a great influence in the history as a great man
because it was the necessity of the time otherwise he would have not succeeded in one
way or another. In here we can see the importance of some uncontrolled chances in the
picture. In here we can easily put Che in the spotlight of great leaders or great men, and

in doing so, we would also include in that spotlight Nero, Stalin, Hitler and the like,
which many historians and sociologists do not see as great leaders, but ruthless
dictators who have failed miserably in the end.
Hence, in taking this theory [Great Man Theory] one might use its psychological
definition which states that great men were great men because they were born to be
great men, not only by divine intervention [like its classical definition], but because they
were bred to be which means that their future of becoming leaders were already
prepared beforehand. All they have to do is walk through it. Che Guevara was of an
aristocratic family who have had been exposed to a wide spectrum of political
perspective, even on his youth, due to his fathers association with the republicans on
his time. Because of this, one might say that it would be very reasonable for such a man
to become who he was, a political personality, but it should also be noted that Che
Guevara has done much in turning his fate to be where he is now in the history. Some
of these were the fact that he has had asthma on his early life, which no one would
have thought that he would become a good military soldier-leader later in his life. Also
the political belief of his father, which for most would be laid down to their sons, is
contradictory to his political belief which is Socialism. Also, he had graduated as a
Medicine student, not related in any way on politics, but he extended his discipline to
politics that today he is known in the history not as a medical figure, but a political
figure. In this it can be seen that not all of his achievements were passively acquired by
breeding, but most of his achievements were actively gained by struggles and effort, or
utmost maybe a divine intervention which controlled the chances [if not his own
strivings] for him to become who he is known in the history.
Related with the Great Man Theory, stems out another theory which also states that,
Leaders are born, not made known as Trait Leadership Theory, by the same theorist,
Carlyle with Francis Galton who believed that some particular traits are possessed by
these individuals who allowed them to become effective leaders. If theory will be used
in the case of Guevara, specifically the model as presented by Stephen Zaccaro (2004),
there will be traits which Che Guevara possesses, and others he did not.

Che Guevara was known to being extraverted, which there will be lacking of proof
besides the testimonies of online and the popular world. But some might also infer that
he is extraverted based on how he is able to convince people on his ideals, and attract
people to side in his struggle. Also he was able to extend his social circle to a distant
world of Fidel Castro, a distant world of rebels which at that time must have been very
detached from his lifestyle as a medical personnel. If not from extraversion, his ability to
attract people towards his ideals was from his Charisma which might have been from
his character which might be the same reason that until now he is still luring youth
towards his ideals and beliefs when he was still alive. That goes the same for the youths
he has recruited via telecast on Radio, otherwise known as Radio Rebelde, which they
have done to overthrow the government led by Fulgencio Batista. Undeniably his
charisma can be attributed to the substance of his ideals and beliefs which were open in
a sense that they were nonconforming and unconventional; and at the same time
honest to himself and towards others in a sense that he does not compromise his words
and actions, and by being direct.
While the trait of conscientiousness remains a question in his character. He was seen
as a very conscientious person throughout his life if one would check only on his ideals
and beliefs he, himself, quoted. His conscientiousness is especially true in the early part
of his life, based on the stories of people accounting his bibliography, and also from his
autobiography, however, his act of ruthless execution of the criminal tells otherwise.
Some who were executioned were said to be the innocents and this was because of the
summary execution he has done a lot during his reign. From these executions, although
deemed as an unconscientious act, sociologists might see this as a need for power and
control which is a trait also included in Zaccaros model of traits of leaders hand in hand
with conscientiousness.
Intelligence is no question with this man who shrouded himself with his wise ideals and
philosophies. And going back to his early life, intelligence is not uncommon to him in his
schooling up until he completed his medical schooling before he became associated
with the rebels. Competence was a trait Guevara did not lose even after his studies
when he joined the rebels when he was assigned by Castro to lead a vastly

outnumbered troupe against Fulgencio Batistas troupe. Several times has this been the
case before they have gained enough recognition so as to recruit more guerillas than
ever [e.g. Radio Rebelde]. Most of these skirmishes ended in their victory which can be
attributed to his ability to make intelligent decisions many times during the warfare,
solve problems and manage a group of people well which can directly evidence his
aptitude in military tactics and leadership. All of which were traits of a competent leader
which allowed him to gain reputation as a leader from the soldiers under him which has
taken up their loyalty towards him.
Rather than focusing on the innate traits of the leaders which shapes them in becoming
great men, another of the theories that might give light to the leadership of Che Guevara
is the Behaviorist Theory of Leadership. The main concern of this theory is obviously the
behavior of the leader in reaching his goal which, in contrast with the trait of leadership
theory, can be learned. A leader can either be task-oriented or people oriented. From
here will he build the leadership style he will use for the attainment of his objectives.
Che Guevara, although seen as compassionate to the poor and ruthless to the enemy,
is obviously an task-oriented leader wherein he focuses on the end of his mission,
which is freedom. Because of this, a more punitive leadership style was utilized by him
and Fidel Castro when they have had took hold of the government of Cuba. He was a
directive type of leader or in the political term, an autocrat or a dictator and the desiredend of his advocacy was freedom, the removal of injustices through socialism.
Che Guevaras leadership style or his focus on his leadership might tell something
about the way he led, but it does not tell anything about its effectiveness. All of the
leadership styles can be effective in one way or another, maybe on the way a certain
leader executed a certain leadership style, or maybe depending on the circumstance or
the situation by which a certain leadership style is applied. In this, we are already
touching yet another theories namely Contingency Theory of Leadership, Situational
Theory of Leadership and Implicit Leadership.
Based on the Situational Theory of Leadership alone, as developed by Paul Hersey and
Ken Blanchard, we can say that Guevara is not an effective leader because he himself
asserted that no compromises shall be made, in that he is even stiffer than the head of

the state, his comrade, Fidel Castro which at times compromises. Che does not, hence
he is not able to adapt to the situation, and he openly admits it.
Based on Fred Edward Fiedlers Contingency theory of leadership, on the other hand,
we might say that he is might have been an effective leader, or if not, at least a credible
leader for the citizens of the time. According to Fiedler, good leadership depends on the
leaders innate trait or personality [which might go back to Carlyles Theories: Great
Man Theory and Leadership Traits Theory] and on the current situation. There must be
a fit between them, and in contrast with the Situational Theory of Leadership, the fit
between the two should be rigid, not just a mere adaptation of the leader for the current
circumstance, but the right leader for that certain circumstance.
Ches era in Cuba is marked by several injustices which started from the top, from the
government of state itself. This is when the government, which is governed by a dictator
Fulgencio Batista, who has avowed several restoration programs for economy, industry
and agriculture, but has not been felt by the Cuban citizens. Instead, they were more
aware of the corrupt activities of their government which causing further poverty.
Fulgencio Batista was known, especially by the rebels, as the puppet of the United
States in that they see that US, especially in his reign, has a very vast control of the
country, especially in its economy. In pointing out the economy of the state at the time,
extreme poverty was caused by a number of capitalistic industries erected by US inside
the Cuban state which made the Americans wealthier than ever and them, even poorer,
and thus the socialist idea would not be a bad idea. The situation is right for him, not the
other way around.
In this, Implicit Leadership Theory by Robert Lord can also be applied which states that
there is a good leader because of the presence of the followers who welcomes the reign
of a certain leader which in this case is Che Guevara. Although Che Guevara is cruel at
times that he might have had ended several innocent lives because of summary
executions, this was not far from what has been happening prior to him and Fidel
Castro, which was caused by the Batista Government, plus the mass famine, injustices
and mass corruptions. In contrast to the latter, there were improvements in Castros
government because they have realized the promises of former president Fulgencio

Batista which he has failed to do before he was overthrown from the position such as
the economic system and industry. Education were also given importance in that
Castros government, specifically Che Guevara, led the construction of several
universities and supported the journey towards the improvement of the literacy rate of
the country. Castro Government, in his leadership also, made several land reforms, and
endeavored to equally distribute the lands to the farmers so as to up the agriculture of
the country. All of which were not overseen by the people of the state, and so despite
the several cases of summary executions, possible warfare with other countries and
dictatorship, they have been very tolerable to them.
To command compliance from the people is one of the most difficult part of becoming a
leader, and also an integral part of being one. A motivation to follow rules is necessary.
These motivations come in forms of reward or punishment. Che Guevara is known to
use the second more often for he directly inflicts the punishment of those who deviate
from the law, a suspect of insurgence or a criminal. This punishment is mostly death,
and can be torture at times when necessary to gain information. Reward was often
overlooked in his reign since the good thing he laid to the people of the state cannot be
seen as rewards since he is providing these as a part of his program of governance and
not as rewards. Hence, using the transactional theory of leadership, one can say that
Che Guevara focuses on the punitive side of it. The rewards which Che Guevara
wanted the people to attain in following the laws of the state or believing in their
government are the internal motivators such as freedom and injustices, among many.
And because he is able to deliver it properly to the people, they actually work for some
as their motivator. This type of motivator is under another theory of leadership known as
Transformation Leadership Theory which is a more mature and pro-active type.
It is difficult to place Che Guevara among the individuals who have been a great leader
during their time because most of the time the definition of a good leader is quite
subjective. Some give it to the leaders who have had made a great impact one aspect,
the other on another. Some place it on the economy, while the other on agriculture,
while some even on spirituality or even religion. But through the several leadership
theories, it would be much more objective in determining if a certain leader is actually a

great leader or not. In this case in which many leadership theories were used in
analyzing Che Guevaras case, it can easily be seen that in plenty of the theories of
leadership Guevara has proven himself as a great leader, regardless of his ruthlessness
nor his wickedness as his critique would tell of him. But there were still few leadership
theories in which Che Guevara would not fit, and therefore considered as an ineffective
leader.