Fire at Mann Gulch is undoubtedly an exceptional case, striking example of the complexity and

intricacy of leadership as a skill, its mastery and its application. A multilateral case, generated an
incredible pool of material for in-depth and multi-layered analysis, not only on the role and
responsibilities of the leader, but also the strength and weaknesses of him. Because the tragedy
unfolded for all of them, involved in the building of the organization (smokejumpers team), in a
group with a hierarchical structure, where at each level there are precisely defined images with roles.
The results are facts of the dynamic within the group and actions inside of it, as a system. Therefore,
in my assignment I would like to consider the group relationships and acts, the consequences of
them, affecting the group and what happened to the group as a whole. For me, nothing happens by
itself, just without a reason. There isn`t accidental action and just alone result.

In the analysis of the study case, the opinion is indisputable about what is standing out on first the
surface, and mostly, of course is the lack of fundamental qualities of the successful development of a
team with a strong leader. The first thing in our mind is indicating and marking the fault only assigned
to the official first of the team, in our case particularly Dodge. Definitely, we might have not seen
only the lack of a base for building a well-functioning organization and clear responsibilities in the
team. Lack of communication among the leader and members, lack of empathy, lack of closer
relations among the leader and his people or the presence of the leader in the lives of his team
somehow, the leading of the first, the lack of a number of other key indicators, characteristics
typically for a strong leader. In the next lines, I would like to present one more opinion that present
my point of view over the presented case. My reflection which could completed and coloured the
perception of the problems in this study case.

The story conveys a case from my personal life where I had to go deeper into the psychology of the
topics about the leader and the herd, the herd instinct and the dynamics of the group. Then, I found
answers to questions not only about the qualities, roles and relationships of the leader and the herd,
about the leader and the winner of the group, but also answers of: ii) Is it necessary/possible for the
crowd (group) to be prone to self-preservation (the reaction of the group members)? iii) How
couldn`t be a victim of the crowd (group)? (Dodge's rescue plan)? iv) Can crowds be controlled? and
accordingly, v) How could be the crowd controlled? and etc. I would like to apply and share what I
have learned before about same relationships.

Science knows the concept of "crowd psychology". Explains what the mentality of the herd is and
how it manifests itself, namely:

- The crowd is easily emotional and suggestible;

- The crowd is unable to assess the situation with a "cold" mind;
- The crowd does not think or ask questions;

1
The main reason people gravitate towards the crowd is the feeling of security, because it is easier to
survive in a group. We mean the global negative manifestations of life: wars, cataclysms, epidemics,
etc. In this case, the herd is at the heart of the instinct for self-preservation. This is a fact.

- The crowd does not accept individuality;

- The mob acts on the orders of the leader, without thinking or weighing their own actions.

A Russian theorist sees the crowd as "a pliable mass, ready to follow the hero anywhere, moving
sluggishly and tensely from one leg to the other in anticipation of his appearance." At the same time,
the role of the "hero" was assigned to a situational leader - the one who captures by example, the
first to "break the ice" by taking a step that others inadvertently expect to follow blindly. This hero is
not a great man ", on the contrary, the most ordinary" man of the crowd "and therefore her
strengths, feelings, instincts, desires are concentrated in him. Isn't that exactly the image of Bill
Hellman, the team's Squad leader? I think so.

There are also studies on the causes of crowd behaviours, where after the physical impact of some
individuals on others, expressed in collisions, eye movements, noise during movements, is
transformed into nervous excitement in a person part of the group. This excitement, in turn, due to
the herd instinct, which involves imitating individuals who were the first to react to a critical change
in the situation, leads to unpredictable behaviour. In a crowd, this property would probably lead to
extreme cruelty and destructive activity, said a prominent professor in law. In many other places, the
information I found, advocated that the herd instinct was always evil, giving real examples of its
destructive action (Germany, in the time of Hitler, Russia - in the time of Putin), and that everything
was right and the good is done by people without this instinct.

The smokejumpers group in Fire at Mann Gulch, didn’t it react in the same way when they have been
realized the magnitude and possible consequences of the fire hell? What about Dodge, when he has
took the responsibility for probably the right and best decision at this critical moment, with the
decisive act of saving the team? Did he suffer from a lack of herd instinct? Maybe yes. The question is
whether his instincts were compatible with the social organization of his team members, with the
moral assessment of behaviour and responsibility for actions?

In the psychology, there is the concept of "auto synchronization" group process. It manifests in the
following way: when 5% of the pigeons in the flock have been scared, they probably would fly away;
then the whole flock would rise simultaneously.

In my opinion, the team of smokejumpers started this automatic synchronization, where people
were not aware of their own actions, did not think about the purpose and the reason. When the level
of self-control is low, there is no need to tell everyone what to do – the 5% of people in the
community / group will start do this process. In addition to this fact, I take into account the

2
approach, in order not to be overwhelmed by the negative energy of the crowd and not to fall victim
to the mentality of the herd, you need to show self-control and stay cool in all critical situations. The
crowd can both save and destroy. By showing awareness and "coolness" of your mind, people
definitely would avoid many negative influences.

At that critical moment, the team probably sensed Dodge's insecurity and fear. It was at this point
that he had to stay cool and affect the important 5% of the team members. Considering 5% of the 14-
member team, Dodge had to "drag" only one, single person with him, for the aim of rescue the rest.
In my opinion, it could be 10 points if it was Hellman, as the leader of the group, or Sally, who passed
Dodge's thoughts. With such act, definitely Dodge could increase significantly his opportunity to
reinforce his leadership position, and subsequently the trust of the group, in following him in the
solution of surviving.

What are the conclusions and advantages of the herd instinct? A crowd of people acting as a single
organism, without thinking, without asking questions, without having their own opinion, completely
trusting an authoritative person. This is a manifestation of the herd instinct. The vast majority of
reasonable people will not take a dangerous path if they have been warned about it, the herd
mentality in such cases will save the lives of other members of the group.

This is exactly how the group responded to Dodge's call to drop all equipment and joining him. But
no, they haven't heard his request, may be because of the noise of the burning fire, or because of the
panic in which whole team fold, we can only guess. But when Hellman screamed, the closest
members of the team heard him at this moment and immediately followed him.

Thus, we get the impression of a state in which the individual emotional impulse and the individual
intellectual act of the individual are too weak to manifest individually, and must wait for confirmation
of such repetition by others. The individual feels incomplete if alone. This fact can be seen in the
close relationship of two people from the team, who decide together, just the two of them!, to reach
the rocks and escape there from the fire. The contradiction of the herd is tantamount to separation
from it, and therefore contradictions are timidly avoided. But the herd rejects everything new,
unusual, it excludes critical thinking - the ability to analyse the situation and formulate possible
consequences. The herd instinct has completely overshadowed common sense.

Perhaps man would come to understand how dangerous and destructive is turning off the brain and
blindly following the majority? It is too dangerous for the life and health, and destructive - for the
personality. Thus, we tend to judge that the essence of the table without regarding the leader is
incomprehensible.