Allegiance, Ability, and Achievement in the American Civil War: Commander Traits and Battlefield Military Effectiveness

Abstract

We investigate the role of leadership in the outcome of militarized conflict. Specifically, we examine whether commanding officers systematically affected the outcome of battles during the American Civil War. Using battle-level data and biographical information about hundreds of leaders on both sides, we determine whether different commanders can produce different outcomes, and which attributes of military leaders are most closely associated with battlefield success. Our analysis suggests higher-quality leaders do generate better outcomes on the battlefield, whereas the effects of loyalty are mixed. These results have implications for the study of conflict as well as bureaucratic politics.