Uncharted Leadership 1.0

P a g e | 1
Uncharted Leadership
Lewis and Clark in the Unknown
Obstacles to Effective Decision Making
Version 1.0
CASE STUDY

P a g e | 2
CONTENTS
Introduction to this work .....................................................6
Historiography: ....................................................................7
Outline: ..............................................................................10
Outcome of this Work and the Expedition:.........................11
The leadership Within the Lewis and Clark Expedition .......11
Managers in the Making.............................................................11
Lewis and Clark as Leaders: .......................................................11
Meriwether Lewis......................................................................12
William Clark............................................................................13
Personalities ...................................................................................13
Leadership Styles..........................................................................15
The Corps........................................................................................19
leadership Skills In Action.......................................................21
Obstacles to Effective Decision Making: .............................28
Judgement Bias..............................................................................29
Biases within Lewis and Clark................................................29
Groupthink......................................................................................33
Escalation of Commitment............................................................34
90% Complete ..........................................................................36
Perceived vs. Actual Knowledge ...............................................38
Enlightened Geography: ........................................................38
Topography, Biology and Climate of Montana:....................44
Luckiest men west of the Mississippi..................................48
The Marias......................................................................................48
The Cottonwood ............................................................................49
Searching for the Shoshone ........................................................49
An Ambush? ....................................................................................51
Who Was Sakakawea? ..............................................................52
Horses..............................................................................................53
Bitterroots........................................................................................54
Conclusion:.........................................................................55
Concluding remarks ......................................................................55
Bibliography...................................................................................56
Primary Sources:......................................................................56
Secondary Sources (Books):..................................................56
Secondary Sources (Articles):...............................................56
Maps and Images: ...................................................................59

P a g e | 3
19 May 2014 Version 1.0
Executive Summary
By MatthewWells, Consultant
Central Minnesota Small Business Development Center – Leadership Development Seminar
UNCHARTED LEADERSHIP SUMMARY
Purpose:
The purpose of this seminar is to critically analyze key leadership and managerial principles that impact
effective decision making through the lens of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Attendees should leave
with a greater understanding and awareness of these obstacles within themselves and inside of their
organizations. Awareness and recognition is incredibly important for success when there are great
levels of ambiguity seen within the environment.
Approach/Methodology:
Numerous sources from both the historical and managerial sciences have been brought together in
order to properly identify the leadership capacity within the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Attempting
to expand on the leadership of the young captains, this work fills a much needed gap of critical analysis
and research by combining the two fields, which seems to be missing in current scholarship.
Mainstream historical scholars tends to overlook or overgeneralize the managerial and leadership
abilities of Lewis and Clark, sometimes irresponsibly.
Findings:
The problematic managerial techniques and leadership biases displayed by Lewis and Clark along with
the topography, biology, and climate of Western Montana and Idaho should have crushed the Corps of
Discovery, prematurely forcing them to return to the East as failures or never returning at all.
However, due to an incredible amount of luck and a handful of innovative leadership techniques
employed by the young captains, the mission was a success
Project Limitations:
The limitations of this project are defined by the lack of sources and scholarly works focused on the
specific topic of leadership. The journals themselves provide little support to the application of
managerial principles, since this was not a primary focus of its documentation. As a result, this project
incorporates the works of numerous authors in an attempt to provide proper support for its thesis
statement.
Practical Application
The application of this seminar, paper and topics should allow an individual to begin to understand,
identify and minimize their internal and habitual obstacles that impact effective decision making.
POINTS OF INTEREST:
Leadership Planning in the
Unknown
 Understanding and
Effectively using
Leadership Styles and
Skills within your
Environment
 Identifying Obstacles to
Effective Decision
Making
 Minimizing Luck by
Increasing Knowledge,
Awareness and
Strengthening
Leadership Skills
HIGHLIGHTED TOPICS:
Leadership Styles
Leadership Skills
Escalation of Commitment
Judgment Biases
Groupthink
90% Complete Syndrome
Perceived Knowledge vs.
Actual Knowledge
Copyright © Matthew R. Wells, 2014. Version 1.0, May 19th 2014

P a g e | 4
11- FORT CLATSOP1- CAMP DUBOIS
2- FORT MANDAN
3- MARIAS RIVER
4- GREAT FALLS
5- THREE FORKS
6- TWIN BRIDGES
7- LEMHI PASS
8- SHOSHONE
9- FLATHEAD
10- BITTERROOTS

P a g e | 6
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION TO THIS WORK
The expedition of Lewis and Clark has been
forever engrained in the ideals and image of
America and its perceived destiny to conquer the
continent. From the moment the two young
captains and their crew returned to St. Louis from
their journey west on September 23rd 1806, the
romanticized transcontinental crossing embedded
itself into the minds of generations of Americans.
The image of these patriotic American explorers
wandering into the unknown and triumphing over
the obstacles paints a great portrait, but it is never
that simple. By no means does this work attempt to
refute some of the leadership abilities of the
captains or the trials they faced, but the heroic, all
American, manifest destiny, cultural framework that
the expedition is commonly portrayed is simply not
true or even justified.
The thesis for this work is quite broad but is
essential within the larger context of scholarly and
historical work regarding the expedition. The
problematic managerial techniques and leadership
biases displayed by Lewis and Clark along with the
topography, biology, and climate of Western
Montana and Idaho should have crushed the Corps
of Discovery, prematurely forcing them to return to
the East as failures or never returning at all.
However, due to an incredible amount of luck and a
handful of innovative leadership techniques
employed by the young captains, the mission was a
success and they became forever immortalized for
their trials in the west. Some may refute using the
term “luck”, as it is virtually impossible to prove, but
be it luck, divine intervention or statistical
improbability, one has to account for some other
factor that led to their safe return than just sheer
heroics as the expedition is commonly portrayed.
As James Ronda put it so elegantly, “The stars had
danced for Lewis and Clark.”1 Although the trials
and tribulations of the entire expedition were by no
1 James Ronda, Lewis and Clark among the Indians (Albuquerque:
University of New Mexico Press, 1984), 147.
means easy, what the expedition faced in the
daunting shadow of the Rockies was incredible. If it
wasn’t the scorching heat and bone chilling nights,
it was the random rapids and collapsing banks of the
Missouri. If it wasn’t the constant harassment by
grizzly bears, it was the startling surprise of
rattlesnakes in their bed rolls. From prickly pears, to
hail, impassable rivers, to razor sharp cliffs, the
Corps of Discovery, somehow, took all that Western
Montana and Idaho could throw at them, and
survived.
While comparing and contrasting the views
from a variety of scholarly sources, their
interpretations and experiences of the expedition in
Western Montana, the question of luck seems to
never grace the pages. Luck, or what have you, is
never addressed as a major factor of its success.
Scholars seems to be split between the perceived
superior management and leadership skills of the
captains or their overriding sense of courage and
purpose that resulted in success. The scholarship
that does specifically addresses leadership, only
accounts for the positive techniques, but offers no
suggestion into the biases or obstacles that
influenced and inhibited Lewis and Clark. Most of
the scholarship fails to view leadership within a
managerial scientific framework. A majority of
scholars and historians that focus on the leadership
of Lewis and Clark rarely go farther than the claim of
being fantastic managers or leaders in the face of
adversity. This maybe the case in some instances,
but to properly assess leadership, historians must
either incorporate proven managerial science
techniques and theories or refrain from addressing
leadership all together. The study of leadership and
effective decision making is much deeper and must
be used to justify such claims. Jack Uldrich describes
the leadership of the two young captains were “like
the binding of a good book, it provided the
expedition its structure and moved the members of
the Corps of Discovery 8,000 miles over the course
of 863 days towards the actualization of a goal that
was, in its time, equivalent of man landing on the
moon”.2 This is a nice illustration of Lewis and Clark
as managers, but in all fairness, one must look
2 Jack Uldrich, Into the Unknown: Leadership Lessons from Lewis and
Clark’s Daring Westward Adventure (New York: AMMCON, 2004), 5.

P a g e | 7
beyond their success and into the obstacles that
clouded their decision making before making such a
statement like that, which by itself is rather
preposterous. Many more variables were in play
during the expedition. It is understandable that
historians offer such blanket views of effective
leadership as they have not been trained to view
history through a managerial lens.
It is also fairly evident that Lewis and Clark’s
geographic perceptions of the west attributed to
their misinterpretations and restricted their thought
processes. James Ronda, in his work Finding the
West summarizes these expectations powerfully
with this passage:
The Explorers expected clarity, the clear, well-defined
lines of imperial ambition etched on maps from
London, Madrid, Philadelphia, or Washington. What
Lewis and Clark found was a West far murkier, far
more complex than they had ever suspected. Without
using the word, the explorers had come upon
ambiguity. Like all travelers, Lewis and Clark learned
that the places and events had many sides and many
explanations. Individuals have many faces. Things
are often not what they seem to be. And in the glare
of the plains sun or the shroud of the North Coast fog,
the lines of imperial ambition blurred. Grounded in
the Enlightenment tradition that celebrated the fact of
precision, Lewis and Clark found ambiguity an
unwelcome discovery.3
Ambiguity flowed freely as the expedition
moved west and every new step challenged their
core principles and knowledge bases.
The expedition’s interactions and
perceptions of the natives in the Rocky Mountains
changed from the beginning of their journey. Was
the perception strictly based off generalized
geographic information or was there a general lack
of communication or possibly racism? For example,
during the desperate search for the Shoshone, Lewis
and Clark did not incorporate Sakakawea. Instead,
groups of heavily armed men wandered around the
country side shouting a Shoshone word that
3 Ronda, “Among the Indians,” 35.
4 Stephen Ambrose, Undaunted Courage: Meriwether Lewis, Thomas
Jefferson and the Opening of the American West (New York: Simon
and Schuster, 1995), 256.
5 See James Ronda, “Counting Cats in Zanzibar, or Lewis and Clark
Reconsidered,” in The Western Historical Quarterly, 33 (Spring,
2002), 7.
supposedly meant “stranger” or “enemy”. 4 The
expedition seemed less open or willing to accept any
help from the natives in the Rockies, especially
regarding geographic information in their pursuit of
the Pacific without extensively testing it first.
The main focus of this work is centered in
Western Montana and parts of present day Idaho.
The lack of any major scholarship devoted to the
expedition in the Rocky Mountains is rather
intriguing. Most scholarship tends to sum up the
expedition in western Montana into a few desolate
chapters. It seems rather meager to attempt to
describe the events, interactions and hardships the
expedition faced from the Great Falls of the
Missouri to their westward descent into the
Columbia River basin, into a handful of chapters
within a broader context of the expedition. The lack
of coverage devoted to the most challenging facet
of the expedition and the irresponsible
generalizations of leadership from historical
scholars is what fueled the overriding focus of this
paper.
HISTORIOGRAPHY:
Upon their return from the trek across the
continent, the field notes of the Meriwether Lewis,
William Clark and their journals were given to
Nicholas Biddle to publish. Biddle was instructed to
write a comprehensive narrative of the findings
during their voyage west. In 1814 he published the
History of the Expedition under the Command of
Captains Lewis and Clark5. Biddle’s work however,
was a brief summary of the journey, and much of
the scientific and historical data was omitted from
the published work.6 There were various attempts
to organize and produce a more complete account
of the journals, most notably by Bernard DeVoto but
not until 1953, almost a 150 years later.7 Although
DeVoto’s work provided actual excerpts of the
journals of Lewis and Clark, many entries, detailed
explanations of facts, illustrations and
6 See John T. Allen review of “The Lewis and Clark Journals: An
American Epic of Discover,” Journal of the Early Republic 23
(Autumn, 2003), 478.
7 Bernard DeVoto, The Journals of Lewis and Clark (Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Company, 1953).

P a g e | 8
methodologies were not included in his work. The
work produced by DeVoto and others placed
exclusive emphasis on the actual journals
themselves; this left scholars with limited sources to
expand the story of Lewis and Clark. It was not until
the 1980’s that a comprehensive Lewis and Clark
primary source collection began to be assembled.
Gary Moulton began working on a twenty year
collection of the journals in 1983 and published his
thirteen volume collection in 2003.8 He was able to
build off of two generations of Lewis and Clark
scholarship that included seven journals, Lewis and
Clark’s field notes and the personal journals of
Patrick Gass, John Ordway, Charles Floyd and Joseph
Whitehouse, along with previously undiscovered
materials such as correspondence letters, newly
acquired journal materials, sales receipts and
invoices. Much of the scholarship today suggests
that Moulton’s work is the most comprehensive
collection of the journals to date.9
The scholarship that was produced prior to
the 1950s was confined to very narrow viewpoints.
Most of the motivations or generalizations were
limited by the minimal access to primary
documentation and lack of secondary sources.
Jeannette Mirsky’s The Westward Crossing: Balboa,
Mackenzie, Lewis and Clark written in 1946, is one
such scholar’s writing that falls into this category.
She suggests that the only inherit mission of the
expedition was to find and establish possible means
of commercial and economic expansion. Mirsky
argues that the only reason for the expedition was
to establish new fur trading posts and commerce
with the natives to settle the newly acquired
Louisiana Territory. 10 Another early scholar to
categorize the expedition is Ralph B Guinness.
Guinness suggests that the mission had only political
and commercial motives, in which Lewis and Clark
were to establish fur trading posts and commercial
8 Gary E. Moulton, The Lewis and Clark Journals: An American Epic of
Discovery (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2003).
9Allen, review of “The Lewis and Clark Journals”, 478.
10 R. S. Cotterill’s review of Jeannette Mirsky’s “The Westward
Crossing: Balboa, Mackenzie, Lewis and Clark,” The Mississippi Valley
Historical Review 33 (Mar. 1947), 647.
11 Ralph B. Guinness, “The Purpose of the Lewis and Clark
Expedition,” The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 20 (Jun. 1933),
90-100.
12 John Bakeless, Lewis and Clark, Partners in Discovery, (William
Morrow and Co., 1947), 1-498.
ties with native populations for the expansion of
white settlers.11 In John Bakeless’s book Lewis and
Clark, Partners in Discovery12, published in 1947,
suggests that Lewis and Clark were exclusively
conducting a military expedition for the
government, with no regards to any commercial,
political or scientific motivations. 13 Now we
understand that it truly was a mix of all of the above.
The mindset of scholars began to change
around the mid-1950s. Broader views and
motivations of the expedition began to emerge.
More emphasis began to be placed on a generalized
view and the sub topics within the journey. In a
lecture in 1955, Bernard DeVoto called for more
research and specialization to be conducted in the
field of Lewis and Clark. He stated that there is a
much larger story than what the journals can
portray. The expedition was not just the story of
Lewis and Clark, but a mix of many different voices,
motivations, people, and events rather than the
common story portrayed through the eyes of
Jefferson, Lewis and Clark. 14 Recent scholars such
as James P. Ronda15 and P. D. Thomas16 among
others, seem to reiterate the viewpoint that DeVoto
was calling for. James Ronda suggests that
scholarship should be cautious when reviewing the
expedition of Lewis and Clark:
In recent years some have been tempted to reconstruct
the Lewis and Clark journey as a national epic with
places, words and roles for all Americans. Nations
need shared stories but telling the Lewis and Clark
journey as a single narrative promising common
ground for all ignores the profound historical, cultural
and ethnic differences in this and all other exploration
experiences. Denying such differences only widens the
cultural divide, producing a national history that
speaks in one master voice allows only one
predetermined conclusion. What we say about the
many meanings of the Lewis and Clark stories matters
13 In a review by Charles D. Roberts of “Lewis and Clark, Partners in
Discovery,” Military Affairs 12 (Autumn 1948), 186-187.
14 “An Interference regarding the Expedition of Lewis and Clark”,
Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 99 (Aug 30,
1955), 185-194.
15 “Counting Cats in Zanzibar, or Lewis and Clark Reconsidered,” The
Western Historical Quarterly, 33 (Spring, 2002), 4-18.
16 “Thomas Jefferson, Meriwether Lewis, the Corps of Discovery and
the investigation of Western Fauna” Transactions of the Kansas
Academy of Science, 99 (Dec. 1996), 69-85.

P a g e | 9
as much as what we say about slavery, the civil war,
and the social movements of the 1960’s.17
Currently, more emphasis is being placed on
the people that were directly and indirectly
involved, the discovery/exploratory process and
scientific aspects of the expedition. Some works still
remain focused on the main characters in the story,
like Donald Jackson’s article on Thomas Jefferson
and his relationship with Meriwether Lewis 18 or
James Holmberg’s collection of letters from William
Clark to his brother.19 While other scholars such as
James Ronda, have focused on the impact of Lewis
and Clark and the Native Americans. 20 Gunther
Barth, like Ronda has placed emphasis on the
interactions with the Native Americans, but also
explores other interactions as well. By using the
journals, Barth covers topics that most scholars
overlook. Such as interactions with traders, the
contributions of York the slave, the use of festive
occasions for moral and the sexual relations
between the crew and Native American Women.21
Research has also lead way to a new view regarding
the scientific or lack of scientific aspects of the
expedition. Albert Furtwangler 22 and Paul
Cutright23 portray the mission of Lewis and Clark as
very important figures to the early American
scientific movements. But other scholars such as
James Ronda, argue that the mission had no
scientific objectives and was a failure.24 He states
that because of their lack of training, the scientific
and exploratory process was minimal at best and
the Northwest Passage did not exist.
Along with DeVoto and Moulton, John Allen
is another scholar that has helped build the
17 James Ronda, Finding the West: Explorations with Lewis and Clark
(University of New Mexico Press, 2001), Xvii.
18 “Jefferson, Meriwether Lewis and the Reduction of the United
States Army,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society,
123 (Apr., 1980), 91-96.
19 Dear Brother: Letters of William Clark to Jonathan Clark (Yale
University Press, 2002) reviewed by Gene A. Smith The Virginia
Magazine of History and Biography 110 (2002), 268-269.
20 James P. Ronda, Lewis and Clark Among the Indians (University of
Nebraska Press, 2002).
21 See The Lewis and Clark Expedition: Selections from the Journals
Arranged by Topic (Bedford/St. Martin’s, 1998).
22 Acts of Discovery: Visions of America in the Lewis and Clark
Journals, (University of Illinois Press, 1993) reviewed by James P.
Rhonda The Western Historical Quarterly, 25 (Summer, 1994), 223-
234.
foundation for new research and ideas in this field
of study.25 Allen has focused much of his research
on the geographical and exploratory processes of
the expedition. His work, Passage through the
Garden: Lewis and Clark and the Image of the
American Northwest,26 examines the geographical
knowledge and exploratory lessoned learned by the
expedition and how it benefited science and the
country. Allen also breaks down the zones of
knowledge and the misconceptions that lead to
failures of Lewis and Clark in the Rocky Mountains.
Martin Bruckner is another scholar who describes
the Lewis and Clark expedition in terms of
geography. However, unlike Allen, Bruckner only
details the impact of the native geographic lore from
Fort Mandan and how that shaped the decision
making during the rest of the journey.27
Other new areas of emerging scholarship
can be associated with such authors as David
Hawke, Stephen Amrbose and Jack Uldrich. David
Hawke’s Those Tremendous Mountains 28 and
Stephen Ambrose’s Undaunted Courage29 portray
the expedition in a very heroic and patriotic light.
Hawke and Ambrose place a large amount of
emphasis on the leadership abilities of Lewis and
Clark and the great odds that the crew overcame to
reach the pacific. Jack Uldrich is another scholar
that exemplifies the leadership roles of Lewis and
Clark. However, Uldrich does incorporate
management principles to offer more concrete
conclusions into the leadership of the captains
during the expedition rather than
overgeneralizations. Uldrich claims that the
expedition is the perfect historical example of
23 Lewis and Clark: Pioneering Naturalists (University of Illinois Press,
1969) reviewed by Richard G. Beidlemann Forest History 13 (Oct.,
1969), 35-37.
24 Finding the West: Explorations with Lewis and Clark (University of
New Mexico Press, 2001) reviewed by Thomas P. Slaughter Journal
of the Early Republic 21 (Winter, 2001), 706-707.
25 See James Ronda, “Counting Cats in Zanzibar, or Lewis and Clark
Reconsidered”.
26 (University of Illinois Press, 1975) reviewed by Donald Jackson The
Western Historical Quarterly, 3 (Jul., 1976), 309-310.
27 See Martin Bruckner The Geographic Revolution in Early America:
Maps, Literacy, and National Identity. (Chapel Hill : Published for the
Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture by
University of North Carolina Press, 2006).
28 The Story of the Lewis and Clark Expedition (Norton, 1980).
29 Meriwether Lewis, Thomas Jefferson and the Opening of the
American West (Simon and Schuster, 1996).

P a g e | 10
management techniques in the face of extreme
stress and obstacles.30
Current scholarship and research devoted to
Lewis and Clark is still growing and expanding.
DeVoto’s call for a more comprehensive view of the
subject, helped lead the story of Lewis and Clark out
of its infancy stage, while Moulton’s definitive
collection of the journals has produced a more
descriptive scholarship base in recent years.
Scholars like Ronda, Gunther, Uldrich and Allen have
challenged and expanded the limited view the story
which has lead to a more complete story that was
omitted from works prior to the 1950s.
OUTLINE:
In an attempt to answer the questions that
emerged through research, this paper will be
broken into multiple segments. The following work
is not a chronological account of the Corps of
Discovery, rather it is an in-depth observation of
three distinct variables that seem to be overlooked
or given little emphasis by mainstream scholarship.
The first section will address the leadership and
managerial techniques displayed by Lewis and Clark,
and how this played a pivotal role in the overall
return of the expedition. Largely incorporating
works by scholars in both the historical and
managerial science fields, specific leadership traits
and tactics will be clearly defined and examined.31
This work will also inspect the managerial
deficiencies displayed by Lewis and Clark (chapters
two and three).
The second section will clarify the
geographic misconceptions, lore, and
misunderstanding of the west that Lewis and Clark
brought with them. Scholarly works devoted
primarily to the geographic and exploratory aspects
of the expedition will be referenced.32 Zones of
knowledge will be used to describe the information
base and a comparison between Plains Indian
geographic lore with information obtained in the
30 See Preface.
31 Ambrose, Undaunted Courage, Uldrich, Into the Unknown,
Vecchio, Organizational Behavior: Core Concepts.
32 Primarily the works by John Allen, Passage Through the Garden
and An Analysis of the Exploratory Process, James Ronda, Finding the
mountains, and how it was interpreted, accepted or
denied by Lewis and Clark (chapter three).
The final section will be exclusively focused
on the interpretation of luck. Examining the
situations within Western Montana and Idaho
where the expedition could and in most instances
should have failed. Focusing primarily on the search
and interactions with the Shoshone and Flathead
tribes, the paper will use various journal entries and
scholarly works to demonstrate how Lewis and Clark
were “lucky” to survive the cross over the Rockies
(chapter four).33
By incorporating the journals of Meriwether
Lewis, William Clark, with a large mix of secondary
sources from John Allen, James Ronda, Stephen
Ambrose, Jack Uldrich and others, this paper will
depict the Corps of Discovery in Western Montana
and Idaho. Since much of the scholarship on the
subject of Lewis and Clark does not focus on this
specific geographic area, the use of a variety of
different sources should offer many different
viewpoints of the expedition in its desperate search
for the Columbia over the Continental Divide.
However, like most historians would believe,
the story of Lewis and Clark is not complete. Most
arguments or conclusions that can be offered must
be derived from the journals themselves which tend
to embellish Lewis and Clark as super heroes. Much
of what can be declared as fact is based upon a few
short passages. The view of the expedition has
largely been interpreted through an ethnocentric
standpoint. Other than what little is stated about
Sakakawea and the brief record of natives in the
journals, the Native American voice is omitted from
the story. Although it is accepted that the journals
are very accurate, it is hard to assume that every
aspect, every event, every emotion, and transaction
were transferred to the pages of the journals. But
like most of history, some aspects will always be up
for debate.
West and Martin Bruckner, The Geographic Revolution in Early
America.
33 See works by James Ronda, Among the Indians and Gunther Barth,
The Lewis and Clark Expedition: Selections from the Journals
Arranged by Topic.

P a g e | 11
OUTCOME OF THIS WORK AND THE EXPEDITION:
Hopefully, this project will help provide a
deeper understanding of the area that was
completely unknown to Lewis and Clark, the area
between the Great Falls of the Missouri to the
Columbia River Basin. By understanding and
realizing the complexity and difficulties these men
and their only woman, Sakakawea, faced while
viewing tremendous mountain ranges and
impassable rivers, one can begin to understand the
true nature of the Lewis and Clark expedition.
Contrary from the romanticized version, the
expedition was a test of will, strength, endurance
and perseverance without which the outcome could
have been incredibly different. The expedition
directly and indirectly affected a variety of people,
from those within the expedition to the various
Native American tribes that would forever be
changed by the following expansion of the United
States and the whites who saw a blank slate for
expansion. The expedition and the Louisiana
Purchase forever changed the face of the continent
and the country. The story of Lewis and Clark is not
just that of a group of men and their trek into the
unknown west, it is a story of our nation, its people
and its history.
CHAPTER 2
THE LEADERSHIP WITHIN THE LEWIS AND CLARK
EXPEDITION
MANAGERS IN THE MAKING
The leadership and management styles of
Meriwether Lewis and William Clark are an
undeniable factor for the return of the expedition,
but not the only one. The challenge of the continent
created a very unique situation regarding the
implementation of effective managerial techniques.
The fierce rapids of the Missouri River, the
seemingly endless peaks and valleys of the
continental divide, descending the Columbia to
taste the Pacific air, then to cross it again was a
massive task in itself, but the ability to transform a
34 Gunther Barth The Lewis and Clark Expedition: Selections from the
Journals Arranged by Topic (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), 48.
rag tag group of famers and black smiths,
professional soldiers and volunteers, illiterate and
educated, Yankees and southerners, immigrants
and mixed-bloods, young and old into an effective
regiment that was able to face the continent and
safely return, reiterates the leadership skills of the
young captains.34 The expedition is a perfect case
study for the implementation of innovative and
effective leadership techniques but also shows how
personal biases can influence and create major
obstacles to effective decision making.
This section will attempt to describe the
leadership characteristics of Lewis and Clark by
applying modern managerial theories and
terminology into the expedition. Although the
captains were most likely unaware of any science
behind their management styles, it is very important
to place their leadership within the boundaries of
managerial sciences. By doing this, one can achieve
a better understanding of the innovative leadership
and the obstacles to effective decision making that
could have easily hampered the entire expedition.
Western Montana proved to be a testing ground for
the techniques instilled upon the party by Lewis and
Clark and also directly tested the deficiencies that
the captains brought with them into the west. To
understand the possible failures of their leadership,
one can better understand the amazing task and
circumstances that had to be overcome. Without
strong leadership, the mission would have surely
failed once they reached the Rocky Mountains,
Meriwether Lewis, William Clark and Sakakawea
would have been lost to the history books.
LEWIS AND CLARK AS LEADERS:
To begin to understand the leadership and
managerial abilities of Lewis and Clark, it is
necessary to understand where these men came
from. Both were products of eighteenth century
Virginia, where a sense of prestige and honor was
implanted in men from childhood. Both the Lewis
and Clark’s families were considered in the upper
echelons of the social and political hierarchy within
Virginian society. The men were also children of the
Enlightenment, where in Virginia the movement

P a g e | 12
flourished outwardly into the early colonies and
later states.35 The call of the expedition and its
purpose was a chance for Lewis and Clark to search
for God’s natural order and contribute to the
scientific community.36 The Captains also had very
strong family legacies to uphold as children of the
Revolution. Clark’s older brother was a war hero,
Lewis’s father served as a lieutenant under George
Washington.37 On top of that, Thomas Jefferson,
President and a founding father, entrusted this duty
upon them. Lewis and Clark were driven by a much
higher purpose than their personal ambitions. For
their country, legacies and mankind, Lewis and Clark
were able to instill this same sense of duty on the
men of their expedition.
Lewis and Clark both displayed a high degree
of an internal locus of control. This incredibly
important dimension of personality and is the
degree to which an individual believes that their
lives are controlled by their own actions not their
external environment. Someone who believes
strongly that they personally control the events in
their life, project a high level of internal locus of
control whereas someone who believes they are at
the mercy of their environment displays a high level
of external locus of control.38
It has been shown through studies that
upper-class individuals tend to produce a much
higher internal locus of control versus someone who
comes from less privileged backgrounds.39 Both
Lewis and Clark came out of fairly stable, upper
class, white and patriotic family lineages in Virginia.
The young captains held a greater sense of being,
one in which they could shape their future and the
future of America. These types of personalities,
although enjoy extrinsic rewards, often find
themselves chasing feelings of self-accomplishment
or achievement on larger scales. This could be the
reason for the high sense of arrogance, at least to
some degree displayed by the captains.
On April 7th, 1805 when the main party
embarked from their winter camp at Fort Mandan,
35 Jack Uldrich, Into the Unknown: Leadership lessons from Lewis and
Clark’s Daring Westward Adventure (New York: AMACOM, 2004),
38.
36 Uldrich, 39.
37 Uldrich, 41.
Lewis referred to the “little fleet” as comparable to
the ships of Christopher Columbus and Captain
Cook.40 To place the expedition up the Missouri in
the same breath as Columbus’s world changing
exploration of the American Continents and Cook’s
charting of the Pacific is quite a reach. Yes,
scientific, cartography and cultural records
procured by the expedition had a long lasting effect,
but it is hard to argue the expedition has any major
comparisons to that of Columbus much less Cook,
but duty and arrogance can be precursors to great
leadership.
It is also safe to assume that the “frontier
lifestyle” that many who made up the Corps of
Discovery would be classified in was incredibly
important. This suggests a very high internal locus
of control. It takes an incredibly high level of self-
efficacy and outlook on the world to live a frontier
lifestyle. This mindset was not new, from the
founding of the colonies there had always been a
motive to move in the “wilderness”. Men and
women kept expanding outwards as the colonies
and eventually states grew, these people almost
entirely believed that they could and would control
their own destiny. One can jump to generalizations
fairly easily, but it is safe to assume that if the Corps
and/or Lewis and Clark were made up of individuals
with a high degree of external locus, the results of
the expedition may have been completely different,
especially when things became tough in the shadow
of the Rockies.
MERIWETHER LEWIS
Meriwether Lewis was born in 1774 in
Albemarle County, Virginia. His father had severed
as a lieutenant in the Continental Army during the
War for Independence but had died from
phenomena when he was just five years old. His
mother remarried, another army officer and raised
Meriwether and his siblings on a plantation just 10
miles from Thomas Jefferson’s home of Monticello.
Lewis spent his youth exploring the Virginia
countryside and learning skills of exploration,
38 Vecchio, Robert P. Organizational Behavior: Core Concepts (Mason:
Thomson, 2006), 31.
39 Vecchio, 32.
40 Bernard DeVoto, The Journals of Lewis and Clark (Cambridge: The
Riverside Press, 1953), 92.

P a g e | 13
survival, studying flora and fauna while also
interacting with Natives which would later suit him
well during the expedition.41 He received no formal
education until the age 13 and then graduated from
Liberty Hall University in 1793.42
By age twenty, Lewis followed in his father’s
footsteps and enlisted in the Frontier Army and
would raise the ranks of Captain by 1800. After
posting on the frontier and helping put down the
Whiskey Rebellion, Lewis would be reunited with his
childhood idol in 1801 when he was appointed
President Thomas Jefferson’s personal secretary.
Lewis saw the world much like Jefferson. He was a
staunch Republican, craved education, longed for a
sense of exploration and understanding of the
natural order in the world. Jefferson personally saw
that Lewis received the top education possible for
the expedition and procured experts in biology,
topography, geography, cartography, astronomy
and navigation to aid in preparing the young captain
for his journey.43
Expedition Emphasis = Planning/Reporting
WILLIAM CLARK
William Clark was born in 1770 in Carline
County, Virginia, neighboring Lewis and Jefferson’s
home counties. He was the ninth or ten children.
The Clark Family were planters in Virginia, in the
middle classes of society. The family owned a
moderate sized estate and had several slaves. Five
of Clark’s brothers fought in the War for
Independence and held prominent ranks in the
Virginia militia after the war. 44 Oddly enough,
Jefferson tried to enlist the services of Clark’s older
brother George to lead a similar expedition west of
the Mississippi in 1783 but he had declined.45 When
Clark was 15, his family moved to the frontier of
Kentucky where he learned wilderness and survival
skills.
41 “Meriwether Lewis.” New Perspectives on the West.
http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/people/i_r/lewis.htm (Accessed
April, 2014).
42 “Meriwether Lewis.”
http://www2.vcdh.virginia.edu/lewisandclark/biddle/biographies_ht
ml/lewis.html (Accessed April, 2014).
43 PBS. “Meriwether Lewis, New Perspectives on the West”
At age 19, Clark joined the Kentucky militia
to fight in the Northwest Indian War. He would be
propelled through various ranks within state militias
and this is where he would befriend Meriwether
Lewis. By 1792, Clark would became an officer
within the regular army where he served in various
military engagements along the frontier.
Lewis requested the services of Clark to co-
captain the expedition in 1803. At this time, Clark
had resigned from a military life to return home and
manage his family’s plantation. Although Congress
would not raise his official ranking to captain for the
expedition, the members of the Corp were unaware.
Clark would officially join Lewis near Wood River in
Illinois and begin the great expedition into the
west.46
Expedition Emphasis = Rules/Structure
PERSONALITIES
Each manager and leader has unique,
independent and special personality traits that
guide their actions and interactions within their
environment. These personality traits can be
defined as a relatively stable pattern of behavior
when certain ideas, objects and people within an
44 ”William Clark.”
http://www2.vcdh.virginia.edu/lewisandclark/biddle/biographies_ht
ml/lewis.html (Accessed April, 2014).
45 “Jefferson’s Letter to Meriwether Lewis” Library of Congress.
http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/journey/jefferson-transcript.html.
(Accessed April, 2014).
46 “William Clark”, New Perspectives on the West.
http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/people/a_c/clark.htm (Accessed
April, 2014).

P a g e | 14
environment are presented to the individual.47 Each
circumstance can change the outcome of behavior
for a manager and/or leader, but it is important to
identify that the behavioral traits are common or
averaged over a long period of time. It is also
imperative to state that not every manager can be a
leader and traits may be exhibited in one or both
areas.
A leader is one who can bring change and
provide motivation or integrity for an organizations
members, while a manager maintains stability and
creates efficiency. 48 Luckily for the expedition,
Lewis and Clark possessed complimentary
leadership and management skills as a duo.
Personalities are seen at the core of a leader’s
behavior traits. Commonly referred to as the Big 5
Personality Dimensions, which frames the context
of a person’s personality and how that impacts their
leadership or managerial behaviors. Situations may
change in the environment, but a person’s core
personality in the five areas of emotional stability,
openness, extraversion or introversions,
agreeableness and consciousness fall within a long
term pattern of behavior, feelings or thinking.49
Lewis and Clark were similar in some
respects, at least to their backgrounds and
personality dimensions, but dramatically differed in
terms of their emotional traits. Pairing these two
together offered a balanced approach to leadership
47 Alkahtani, Ali. “The Impact of personality and Leadership Styles on
Leading Change Capability of Malaysian Managers.” Australian
Journal of Business Management and Research 1, no. 2 (May 2011):
71.
Alkahtani, “The Impact of personality and Leadership Styles on
Leading Change Capability of Malaysian Managers.” 73.
within the expedition. Although the appointment of
both captains was probably not planned entirely by
their complimenting nature of their leadership skills
and personalities, it is important to mark the
differences of their personalities.
Lewis exhibited much more of an emotional
leadership style within the expedition. He instilled
the mission’s epic grandeur and importance among
the men to shape their passion and motivation of
the journey. By heart, he was a hopeless romantic
48 Alkahtani, “The Impact of personality and Leadership Styles on
Leading Change Capability of Malaysian Managers.” 71.
49Oliver, John and Srivastava, Sanjay. “The Big-Five Trait Taxonomy:
History, Measurement, and Theoretical Perspectives.” (March 2009):
3.
Extraversion
23%
Agreeableness
20%
Consiousness
23%
Emotional
Stability
10%
Openness
24%
PERSONALITY PERSONA: LEWIS
0 5 10 15 20
EXTRAVERSION
AGREEABLENESS
CONSIOUSNESS
EMOTIONAL STABILITY
OPENNESS
Personality Ratings
0-20 Scale
Clark Lewis
Extraversion
21%
Agreeableness
11%
Consiousness
25%
Emotional
Stability
26%
Openness
17%
PERSONALITY PERSONA: CLARK

P a g e | 15
for nature, knowledge, God and country. Clark on
the other hand was more rigid and by the books.
Clark essentialy was the backbone and held up the
emotional short comings of Lewis. It can be
presumed that this emotional stability between the
leadership styles of Lewis and Clark was one of the
many factors that lead to the expedition completing
their journey over the mountains and back. Due to
the highly ambiguous situation, the balance that
Clark was able to offer Lewis allowed for effective
leadership. Similarly, if there had been a severe
lack of personality balance among the captains it is
hard to assume that the expedition would have
been successful.
Imagine a leadership core driven by two hard
headed leaders similar to Clark. This may have led
to constant infighting, struggling for dominance,
with a shortcoming for the human relationships
with the members of the Corps. Or two emotional
unstable leaders such as Lewis where difficulties
may have arisen from the lack of true rigid
leadership when times become tough.
Compare the two journal passage below to
gain a slight insight into the different personality
and leadership identities of the captains:
Lewis, August 18th 1805
This day I completed my thirty first year, and
conceived that I had in all human probability now
existed about half the period which I am to remain in
this Sublunary world. I reflected that I had as yet done
but little, very little indeed, to further the hapiness of
the human race, or to advance the information of the
succeeding generation. I viewed with regret the many
hours I have spent in indolence, and now soarly feel
the want of that information which those hours would
have given me had they been judiciously expended.
but since they are past and cannot be recalled, I dash
from me the gloomy thought and resolved in future, to
redouble my exertions and at least indeavour to
promote those two primary objects of human
existance, by giving them the aid of that portion of
talents which nature and fortune have bestoed on me;
or in future, to live formankind, as I have heretofore
lived for myself
50 Uldrich, 202.
51 Warrick, D. D. “Leadership Styles and their Consequences.”
Journal of Experiential Learning and Simulation 3, no. 4 (1981) 155
Clark, July 14th 1805
a fine morning Calm and worm musquetors & Knats
verry troublesom. The Canoes arrive at 12 oClock &
unloade to Dry &c. finished & Lanced the 2 Canoes,
Some rain this afternoon. all prepareing to Set out
on tomorrow.
LEADERSHIP STYLES
The mission from the beginning was founded
on the notion of innovative leadership, which the
captains made sure of. This leadership had to be
uniquely different from the traditional rank and file
system of the military, adaptation was the key to
survival.50 Upon the appointing of William Clark as
Lewis’s co-commander, which technically was not
an official title, it was very obvious this mission
would be of unordinary sorts. This co-commandant
clearly shows the overwhelming allegiance to the
mission and its success. It is hard to imagine that a
strict military style of leadership and discipline
would have been successful in light of all the
obstacles that lay ahead of them. This was not a
traditional military campaign where the outcomes
were straight forward and the scenarios were
somewhat standard. As much as the captains would
have probably disagreed, they had no real idea of
what to expect, so flexibility was essential.
Few leaders understand the full significance of how
influential their leadership style is on the performance
and satisfaction of their employees. Leaders control
both the interpersonal and material rewards and
punishments that often shape employee behavior and
influence an employee’s performance, motivation and
attitude. They can affect an employee’s self-image
and resulting potential in either a positive or negative
way by being supportive, fair and encouraging or
unsupportive, inconsistent and critical.51
When referring to leadership there are two
key components, style and skills. Effective leaders
may change their skills depending on the situation
and their requirements to lead a group, but they will
maintain a consistent leadership style over a long
period of time.52 Which seems to be the case, as the
captains displayed fairly steady and consistent
leadership qualities through the expedition. A solid
52 Warrick, 170.

P a g e | 16
leadership core was established which helped the
Corps navigate through the unknown and accept
that they did not know what lay ahead of them, a
“comfort with discomfort”.53
However, personalities tend to shape
leadership styles and as we have established, both
Lewis and Clark held different personality
characteristics. As a result, we see differences in
their leadership styles as well. Effective leaders will
not change their styles, rather they will adjust their
skills to manage the situation at hand. In
managerial science, there are four basic leadership
styles that leaders and managers will fall into when
faced with differing situations both internally and
externally:54
HUMAN RELATIONS LEADER –
Low emphasis is placed on performance, but
a high emphasis is placed on the person
within the organization. This style relies on
teamwork, participative decision making
and harmony amongst all in the group to
finish a task.
LAISSEZ FAIRE LEADER –
Low emphasis is placed on performance and
people. This style assumes people will rise
to the occasion to get a job done, and
leaders tend to stay out of the way. Little to
no motivation activities take place.
AUTOCRATIC LEADER –
High emphasis is placed on performance, but
little is placed on people. Central planning,
organizing and controls should be
accomplished by the leader with minimal to
no employee involvement. Leaders use
authority, power, and manipulation to
complete a task.
DEMOCRATIC LEADER –
High emphasis is placed on both
performance and people. Strives for a well-
organized and challenging work
environment. Tasks are completed through
motivating individuals and groups to their
53 White, Randall and Shullman, Sandra. “Ambiguity Leadership: It’s
OK to be Uncertain.” Chief Learning Officer (April 2010): 18
54Warrick, 160.
full potential. Both the organization and
individual benefits from their efforts.
The leadership model within the expedition
transitioned over time as the group moved west.
What had initially started as autocratic transformed
into democratic by the time the expedition left
Mandan in the spring of 1805. Lewis and Clark
would have both fallen into the category of a
democratic leader by this point, although they both
were pulled to different corners of the leadership
spectrum. Lewis cared deeply about the task at
hand, and leaned more towards the human
relations leader side of the democratic spectrum.
Whereas Clark pulled more towards the autocratic
style. In reality, this combination worked well as the
two complimented each other leadership styles and
become one of the many key components that lead
to the success of the expedition.55
The initial autocratic leadership was
primarily used at Camp Dubois and Mandan to
create the structure and rules within the enlisted
men.
The formal, centralized structure was
created under this style which established the tight
controls and hierarchy within the group.56
Obedience was the norm and relations
remained very formal at Camp Dubois. But as the
expedition moved up the Missouri there was a clear
shift towards a democratic style. Democratic
leadership produces high employee productivity,
cooperation and commitment. It reduces the needs
for controls and formal rules. Towards the fall and
winter of 1805, there was little need to reinforce the
structure of the group and its mission. Everyone
was working for the common goal and Lewis and
Clark were leading from within rather than from the
top.57
55 Warrick, 170.
56 Warrick, 162.
57 Warrick, 161.

P a g e | 17
Democratic Leadership Description in the Lewis and Clark Expedition
Management Skills Outcomes or Actions During the Expedition
Planning and Setting
Objectives
Planning ahead and establishing clear objectives are
essential to effective performance and are best
accomplished with heavy employee involvement
Camp Dubois
Mandan
Organizing
Decentralized and flexible structure is used to clearly define
roles and responsibilities.
Great Falls
Marias
Three Forks
Decision Making
Leaders are decisive decisions makers in some instances,
other times will involve group
Marias
Twin Bridges
Shoshone
Motivating Provide good working conditions and assure that the jobs
are challenging an offer growth, and recognition
Throughout the Expedition
Developing Emphasizes personal and team development Mandan
Rewards and
Punishments
Good work is rewarded, punishment is a means of last
resort
Dubois
Mandan
Conflict Conflict is handled in the open Dubois
Mandan
Interpersonal
Relationships
Maintain close, but objective relationships with employees Throughout the Expedition
Power and Authority Power and authority are earned, not legislated Special Missions Throughout the
Expedition

P a g e | 19
THE CORPS
It is also essential to understand the makeup
of the expedition as they are often secondary to
Lewis and Clark. Although this was a military
expedition, it was far from the traditional view of a
military unit as we see even today, especially in the
1800s.
With the authority of the United States
Government, Jefferson turned to the Army for this
expedition because they possessed the
organization, logistics, toughness, training,
discipline and teamwork necessary to handle such a
massive endeavor. Few national institutions existed
at the time, much less any that were formal enough
to complete such a task of gathering detailed
information on the geography of the new territory,
flora, fauna and information about its inhabitants.58
The regular United States Army was in a
transition period during the late 1700s and early
1800s. With the War for Independence fresh in the
minds of the newly formed country, citizens did not
look favorably towards a large standing army for
defense. It was a common view that a militia could
support the needs of defense. 59 Even being
surrounded by the imperial ambitions of Spain,
France and England, America had a false sense of
security (which would be shattered during the war
of 1812). The Army went through five major
reorganizations from 1784 through 1803 as it
struggled to find its place and structure within the
new nation.60 It began to take shape as more of a
contemporary view of the Army of the 1800s under
Jefferson’s presidency. Growing as the country’s
defense needs changed with the rapidly changing
frontier borders.
The fluid situation of contracting and
expanding frontier borders and threats from foreign
super powers positioned much of the military on the
frontier protecting forts and garrisons from natives
and formal enemy army posts for much of the 1700s
and early 1800s. The Army’s primary role was to
58 Charles, Collins Jr. “The Corps of Discover: Staff Ride Handbook for
the Lewis and Clark Expedition.” Combat Studies Institute (2003): 1
59 Collins, 19.
60 Collins, 19.
protect the forts, negotiate treaties with Indian
tribes, administer frontier law and manage affairs or
disputes among white settlers and local tribes in the
blurred lines of the new world.61
The Army, because of its remote frontier assignments,
had the proven ability to organize, equip, train and
lead a small unit into the unknown West. The
captains, Lewis and Clark, had the logistics skills
needed for planning executing a major operation.
The captains and their sergeants had the leadership
skills needed to build and maintain a functioning team.
Most importantly, the individual soldiers and the team
as a whole had the tenacity, training and
determination needed for the journey into the
unknown.62
Traditional soldiers during this time period
were volunteers and usually came from a rural
backgrounds and were much older as the average
member was 26 in 1803.63
Jefferson commissioned Lewis with the
authorization to recruit noncommissioned officers
and men from any of the western army posts to fill
the company. The Corps of Discovery were a very
interesting and diverse group of individuals. All
volunteered (other than Lewis, Clark and his slave
York) along various frontier posts as the expedition
moved west. Camp Dubois served as the final
recruitment location for the official military roster,
but additional resources such as interpreters,
explorers and natives were added in Mandan. The
Corps ranged from 17 to 44 years of age. Each
member varied in background, skill, and ethnicity. It
is important to identify that the US army in 1803 had
no existing model for such an expedition.64 Lewis
and Clark formed several modified versions of a
military unit throughout the expedition depending
on the situation. There were four different
formations of the Corps which varied due to the
goals at hand. The Camp Dubois and Mandan
formations included several people that were
brought into the Corps for local or short term
support. The main expedition that left Mandan and
61 Collins, 19.
62 Collins, 21.
63 Collins, 20.
64 Collins, 21.

P a g e | 20
crossed the mountains will be the main focus for this
paper. The captains organized the Corps into a
modified infantry company. Multiple squads were
organized to provide flexibility while allowing
officers to accomplish their tasks and soldiers to
focus on their work.65
65 Collins, 21.
Lewis and Clark were at the top, but work
was delegated down to the men placed into three
units, led by Sergeants Gass, Ordway and Pryor.
There was also a “support” column outside of the
standard rank and file which included York,
Sakakawea and interrupters that the captains would
call upon for various situations.

P a g e | 21
LEADERSHIP SKILLS IN ACTION
Effective leaders, once they have established
their styles, will often change their skills and the
way that they are applied depending on a certain
situation.
The leadership of Lewis and Clark
complimented each other well, but precedent was
established by Clark, who remained very rigid.
Discipline was tough, especially in the early stages
of the expedition. Clark made sure that men were
on constant alert of their actions and its impact on
the expedition. Each had tasks to accomplish on
both the river and land. Insubordination was dealt
with swiftly, but rewards for distinguished work
were common. While Lewis focused on planning
and recording their journey, Clark ran the men. It
seemed to be incredibly effective only five
infractions were recorded during the two and half
year expedition.66 This was nearly unheard of at a
time when army units, especially those on the
frontiers, displayed many issues of insubordination
and misbehavior due in part to the rough and rowdy
culture of early America. Clark typically led the men
from the boats while Lewis walked the shore to
record his scientific observations throughout the
journey.67
Camp Dubois was established December 13,
1803 outside present day St. Louis, Missouri. This
winter camp comprised almost everyone that would
make up the main party of the expedition after Fort
Mandan. Camp Dubois served as a boot camp and
training facility for the mission. The standard army
methods did not suit the assignment, Lewis and
Clark had to be creative and innovative in their
disciplinary actions and training techniques. “They
often lectured the men on the fatal consequences of
disobedience, negligence and drunkenness both for
themselves and for the outcome of the
expedition.” 68 Constant training and drills
eventually sank in daily routine and became
habitual.69 The captains used various disciplinary
66 Collins, 5.
67 Collins, 6.
68 Barth, 45.
69 Barth, 45.
techniques than the standard operating procedures
they were accustomed to.
A democratic system, unheard of in the
traditional military command system, was used
when large decisions needed to be made. This
included giving votes to York, Clark’s black slave and
Sakakawea, an Indian Woman long before any such
notion would be accepted in the east. Ethnicity was
not an issue, those who were mixed blood, Indian,
black or white all received equal rewards and
punishments under Lewis and Clark.70
A great example of this was seen June 1804,
as one private was court martialed for becoming
intoxicated while on duty, another was caught
stealing whiskey from the cache without being
authorized. Lewis and Clark deemed the
punishment to be issued out by their peers.71 By
allowing the enlisted men to make the decision,
Lewis and Clark made it obvious to the other
members of the expedition that the success of the
mission rested on everyone adhering to the rules
issued by the captain’s.
PATH-GOAL THEORY
The primary innovative leadership technique
displayed by the captains was their proactive
approach to decision making.72 The captains were
primarily in the mix, overseeing and planning. One
leadership theory that Lewis and Clark
demonstrated and excelled in is known as the Path-
70 See Barth chapter 2
71 Uldrich, 114.
72 Uldrich, 134.

P a g e | 22
Goal Theory. This theory suggests that leaders can
directly influence the satisfaction, motivation and
performance of their subordinates through four
main leadership roles and can be adopted
differently depending on the situation:73
The Path-Goal Theory can also help leaders
clarify paths to expected outcomes by removing
various obstacles to the performance of their
subordinates,74 in other words it allowed Lewis and
Clark to establish means for the members of the
expedition to complete and understand their tasks
within the overall goals of the mission.
The more ambiguous the situation, the more
direction or initiation of structure by leaders is
needed. When levels of ambiguity are high on the
tactical level rather than the strategic level,
employees tend to follow leaders who are perceived
to have larger involvement in decisions and remain
flexible to the circumstances.75
Leaders become much more effective when
they engage in behaviors that complement the
environment or the subordinate’s abilities to
minimize their deficiencies.76 This is why the impact
of Path-Goal Theory can be contributed as another
major factor for the success of the expedition. Tasks
that become highly repetitive, like hauling boats,
canoes and goods up the Missouri River every day,
and areas with weak formal authority, as there was
no other formal support systems or chain of
command in place that far into the west. The Path-
goal Theory is truly a theory, as it is incredibly
difficult to prove since many different variables
affect leadership. However, Path-goal is a great
base to begin to understand and conceptualize
leadership in action.77 It only scratches the surface
of leadership, but it can provide fairly clear and
invaluable insights into leadership and how leaders
73 Vecchio, 162.
74 Vecchio, 162.
75 Sagie, Abraham and Koslowsky, Meni. “Organizational Attitudes
and Behaviors as a Functional Participation in Strategic and Tactical
Change Decisions: An Application of Path-goal Theory.” Journal of
Organizational Behavior 15, Vol. 1 (Jan, 1994): 40.
76 Knight Andre, Steynberg, Gary and Hanges, Paul. “Path Goal
Anaysis” Encyclopedia of Leadership (Feb 2011). 1164.
77 Anderson, Marian. “Path-Goal Theory Approach.” University of
Arkansas (Presented 2013).
can begin to at a minimum, monitor their leadership
skills in different environmental situations.
The Path-Goal Theory and its application is
clearly visible throughout the entire mission,
although Lewis and Clark were probably unaware of
their changing leadership roles.
The first role, directive leadership, involves
giving specific orders or setting strict rules for
subordinates to follow.78 This was used primarily in
the early stages of the mission, at Camp Dubois and
Fort Mandan to instill rules, routines and shape
behaviors of the men.
Goals = Reduce role ambiguity, clarify effort and
goal attainment, link goals to extrinsic rewards.79
Supportive leadership, the second
technique, this includes being friendly and sensitive
to the needs of subordinates.80 The captains paid
particular attention to the moral of the group.
Liquor played an important role in the lives of the
men. Coming from a very hard drinking society,
alcohol was a cure all for hunger, pain, cold,
loneliness and fear.81 The captains would often
issue an extra gill of whiskey after particularly
strenuous days, which were quite often.82 Festive
occasions were also used as a means to reduce
stress and build camaraderie. “Nostalgic memories
of holidays and home, good food, hard liquor and
fiddle music” were the means to which supportive
leadership was used.83
Goals = create an enjoyable environment,
understand personal needs, increase value and
worth. Investing in the employee will increase
effort.84
When the expedition came upon the flooded
Marias River where it flowed into the Missouri, the
78 Vecchio, 162.
79 Knight Andre, Steynberg, Gary and Hanges, Paul. “Path Goal
Anaysis” Encyclopedia of Leadership (Feb 2011). 1166.
80 Vecchio, 162.
81 Barth, 50.
82 Barth, 50.
83 Barth, 75.
84 Knight, 1166.

P a g e | 23
correct fork to take was not apparent to the party.
In response, both Lewis and Clark took separate
parties to investigate and survey the land. Before
making their final decision, they included everyone
in sharing the gathered information and consulted
the group before making a final executive
decision.85 By sharing information and consulting
their subordinates, Lewis and Clark exhibited
participative leadership. 86 This leadership style
reiterates that subordinates, although not in charge,
have something to offer to the overall mission.
Goals = Show lack of strict hierarchy, understand
value of subordinates work and efforts, seek out
input and opinions.87
The final leadership behavior is called
achievement-oriented leadership, which entails
using challenging goals and emphasizing excellence,
while simultaneously showing confidence that
85 Gary E. Moulton. The Journals of the Lewis & Clark Expedition
(Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1987, 234.
86 Vecchio, 162.
87 Knight, 1166.
subordinates can perform the task at hand.88 Lewis
and Clark demanded excellence and personal
responsibility on all tasks, such as hunting or
building canoes. Established early in the mission,
laziness, work that was not excellent, or the lack of
personal responsibility for ones actions would lead
to failure or death of the entire expedition.
Goals = enhance follower performance through
inspiration and self-motivation.89
The Path-Goal Theory proved, in the case of
Lewis and Clark, to be a very effective tool in a very
stressful and unique environment. In ambiguous
situations, subordinates will be more satisfied and
trustworthy of a leader who can differentiate their
leadership techniques,90 and it was very obvious
that this theory contributed to the overall success of
the expedition. Path-Goal places exclusive
emphasis on the behaviors of leaders and managers
rather than their personality traits.91
88 Vecchio, 162.
89 Knight, 1167.
90 Vecchio, 162.
91 Knight, 1166.

P a g e | 25
SUBORDINATE MATURITY
Path-goal theory in the general sense works,
as leaders can adjust their skills for the
environments that face a group of people.
However, this is idealistic and suggest that all
members are ready and willing to accept the
leadership and all are on the same level of maturity.
The level of subordinate maturity will
dictate if the leadership application of Path-goal will
actually work. This important concept is defined as
an individual’s capacity to set high, but attainable
goals, the willingness to accept responsibility
combined with their relevant knowledge, skills and
abilities.92 A leader’s leadership skills will evolve
and change over time as a follower’s maturity
increases, requiring less direct leadership.
Subordinates who exhibit immature
behavior tend to not have the needed technical
skills or psychological levels required to navigate
properly within their environment. Thus, the most
effective way to obtain the desired results requires
a more directive and autocratic leadership skill.
These immature subordinates need a task oriented
based direction to understand their expectations
and learn the needed knowledge, skills or abilities to
perform.
Overtime, as the subordinate matures both
physically and psychologically, a leaders then is able
92 Vecchio, 163.
93 Vecchio, 164.
to adjust their skills towards more of a delegating
structure. Possessing the skills, subordinates
become more self-motivated to perform and can be
trusted much more to rely on their own abilities as
they have been molded to understand the
organizational structure.93
CHARISMATIC BASED LEADERSHIP
Ideally, a leader will hope (and maybe pray)
that a group will mature together, thus making their
ability to influence the subordinate’s outcomes
much easier. In reality, this is much different. As a
result, great leaders often will display high levels of
fervor to temporarily boost a subordinates maturity
or dedication for a desired result and/or behavior.
To influence via emotions, a leader can enact
motivation with personal pride, patriotism or
enthusiasm and create a temporary impulse of
passion.94 Why is it that some of history’s most
famous leaders have been figures that seem larger
than life? Charisma plays a huge role in perceived
leadership and its effectiveness.
Another incredibly important, but difficult to
measure leadership skill is that of a charismatic
leader or value based leader. Developed from the
Path-Goal theory, this leadership skill is attributed
to someone who is able to tap into and appeal to a
subordinates cherished values, self-efficacy, and
94 Clauswitz, Carl Von. “On War.” 1832. 37.

P a g e | 26
self-worth by leveraging the mission or vision of the
leader.95
A great force of mind and influence is
incredibly important when leaders venture into the
unknown. Subordinates look towards their leaders
when ambiguity consumes them. Leaders must
possess a strong reliance on self and be able to stand
up to the pressures facing a group, or at least
enough to have subordinates perceive a strong self.
Prussian military leader of the 19th Century, Carl Von
Clauswitz elaborates on the importance of a strong
and charismatic leaders, called a “chief”, and their
effects on a group:96
As long as his men full of good courage fight with
zeal and spirit, it is seldom necessary for the Chief to
show great energy of purpose in the pursuit of his
object. But as soon as difficulties arise – and that
must always happen when great results are at stake –
then things no longer move on themselves like a well-
oiled machine, the machine itself then begins to offer
resistance and to overcome this the commander must
have a great force of will. By this resistance we must
not exactly suppose disobedience and murmurs,
although these are frequent enough with particular
individuals; it is the whole feeling of dissolution of all
physical and moral power…….As the forces in one
individual after another comes prostrated, and can no
longer be excited and supported by an effort of his
own will, the while inertia of the mass gradually rests
its weight on the Will of the Commander: by the spark
in his breast, by the light of his spirit, the spark of
purpose, the light of hope must be kindled afresh in
others: insofar only as he is equal to this, he stands
above the masses and continues to be their master;
whenever that influence ceases, and his own spirit is no
longer strong enough to revive the spirit of all others,
the masses drawing him down with them sink into the
lower region of animal nature, which shrinks from
danger and knows not shame. These are the weights
which the courage and intelligent faculties of the
Military Commander have to overcome if he is to
make his name illustrious.
95 House, Robert. “Path-Goal Theory of Leadership: Lessons, Legacy
and a Reformulated Theory.” Leadership Quarterly 7, Vol. 3 (1996):
327.
96 Clauswitz, 42.
97 Clauswitz, 38.
98 House, 343.
This leveraging of personal ideals leads to a
short or medium term motivation that increases
productivity based on a heighten sense of
emotion.97 This becomes much more effective in
situations that requires a highly involved leadership
plus emotional commitment and extraordinary
effort from both the leaders and followers.98 Which
almost entirely sums up the requirements of the
expedition. Jefferson instilled this sense of duty into
Lewis, who handed it off to Clark, who both
influenced their men.
The Marias River decision, almost exclusively
exhibits the charismatic influence of Lewis and
Clark. Everyone in the expedition believed that the
right fork of the river was the Missouri. Lewis and
Clark thought it was the left fork and did not leave it
up to a vote (like later decisions). Lewis noted in
early June 1805 that the men “were ready to follow
us anywhere we thought proper to direct”99
Leaders can use the following means to motivate
through charisma:100
 Articulating a vision of a better future, or
claiming a moral right
 Self-sacrifice in the interest of the vision as a
collective
 Confidence in self and vision which is
persistent to the overall vision or mission
 Extraordinary personal risks in the interest of
the collective vision
 Symbolic behaviors that emphasize values of
the vision
 Frequent positive evaluation within the
context of the original vision
SUBSTITUTES FOR LEADERSHIP
As it has been stated earlier, many scholars,
opinions, interpretations and overgeneralizations
are commonly seen in regards to Lewis and Clark’s
leadership qualities, and are sometimes overblown
99 National Geographic. “Reliving Lewis and Clark: At A Fork in the
Missouri River.” Accessed April, 2014.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/07/0713_050713_l
ewisclark11_2.html
100 House, 343.

P a g e | 27
in this author’s opinion. These estimations often
come pre-wrapped in red, white and blue flags
waving a banner of American exceptionalism. Not
to downgrade the great feat of trudging up the
Missouri River and crossing the Rocky Mountains,
but one can argue other factors were just as
responsible for a successful expedition than simply,
great leadership, like a high group maturity and
ample neutralizers which were very visable.
Substitutes or neutralizers of leadership
allows an observer to keep a proper perspective on
the role of leadership within work groups.101 Yes,
leadership is incredibly important and critical to
performance, but understanding leadership
substitutes and neutralizers is just as important.
These factors make the overall study of leadership
theory fairly irrelevant if one does not at least factor
in these relationships as well. A person can argue,
just as strongly as the diehard Lewis and Clark
leadership advocates, that during the most trying
times of the expedition, between Great Falls and the
Columbia River, that the expedition had no choice
but to make it over the mountains. Winter was
closing in fast, leaving the Corps three options, find
horses to cross the mountains, die trying to cross on
foot or return home. Obviously this is an
overgeneralization, but it is hard to believe that
when the Corps found themselves in 10 foot high
snow drifts, bitter cold, starving and no end to the
mountains in sight, that Lewis and Clark where
simply willing the men to make it over the mountain
out of love for country and purpose.
There are three factors that may result in
substitutes or neutralizers for leadership within
groups: the characteristics of the individual
subordinates (or group), the characteristics of the
task at hand and the characteristics of the
organization102.
SUBORDINATE CHARACTERISTICS –
 Experience, ability or previous training can
reduce a leader’s impact if the subordinate
has the same or better knowledge, skills and
101 Vecchio, 170.
abilities to handle the environmental
factors.
o Many of the members of the Corp
had specific talents as hunters,
interpreters, fishermen, etc.
 Indifference toward the organizational goals
and rewards.
o In the case of the Lewis and Clark
expedition, the indifference towards
goals and rewards would be dying in
the mountains. I doubt any member
really cared about honor or prestige
at this moment, survival was their
only motivation.
TASK CHARACTERISTICS –
 Structured tasks or routine tasks can also
become substitutes. Once a behavior or
process is learned, leadership efforts to
reproduce the activity will diminish over
time. It becomes habitual or second nature.
ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS –
 Cohesive work groups can replace leaders
and the team can evolve into its own
separate entity. Once established, a change
leader may find it difficult to penetrate to
cohesiveness of such a group.
 Once goals and plans become formalized
leadership is less important to reiterate the
mission or vision of tasks leading to that
goal. The goals are obvious, if every member
buys into the final plan, a leader will become
repetitive and unneeded to motivate as they
have already established motivation to
reach the end result.
o When the expedition was traveling
with the current back to St. Louis in
1806, it is hard to imagine that the
men needed any motivation. They
were hell bent on reaching St. Louis
as fast as possible, Lewis and Clark
did not need to display any
leadership to get them there.
102 Vecchio, 169.

P a g e | 28
Decision Making Process
 Rigid rules and procedures can also replace
leadership if the group buys into them. If
accepted, norms and culture are understood
within the context of the rules. Leadership
will be ineffective to reinforce what is
already accepted as the model.
Humans can achieve amazing results when
faced with extreme options. Why is it so often that
some of history’s most famous leaders tend to
emerge in life and death situations? Should this
change the lens we view leaders through?
Something to consider.
CHAPTER 3
OBSTACLES TO EFFECTIVE DECISION MAKING:
The decision making process is driven by two core
principles:103
Decision Inertia –
 Refers to inertia that is driving a specific
course of action or decision. As things
are moving a particular direction,
decision makers will be reluctant to
change as new or contradictory
information flows in. Even if the new
information is perceived to be correct.
Decision Distortion –
 Refers to the distortion of new
information to the initial decision. When
decision makers become entrenched in
an outcome, they may begin to
improperly weigh new information in
order to justify their initial belief or
decision. Simply ignoring contradictory
evidence, while amplifying supporting
evidence.
Although Lewis and Clark were very effective
in establishing group cohesion, responsibility, and
variable leadership techniques within the Corps,
103 Keil, Mark, Dpledge, Gordon and Rai Arun. “Escalation: The Role
of Problem Recognition and Cognitive Bias.” Decision Sciences 38,
Vol. 3 (Aug. 2007): 394.
there were several major managerial faults
displayed by the Captains. These faults could have
dramatically changed or altered the outcome of the
mission. We can see observable problems with their
leadership skills on multiple occasions. But
somehow the obstacles to effective decision making
that Lewis and Clark brought with them into the
American West did not lead the party astray. The
following theories are difficult to specifically apply
for every decision or outcome that was seen within
the expedition, but it is important to understand
these obstacles and the conceivable outcomes that
may have resulted. Obstacles to effective decision
making must be viewed in a fluid sense as one may
be seen in multiple environments and applications
and often play off each other.

P a g e | 29
JUDGEMENT BIAS
Leaders, managers and decision makers are
routinely forced to make judgment calls with
insufficient information, facts, outcomes or
incomplete relationships. 104 This is not a new
phenomenon, but the effectiveness of the decisions
are dependent on the degree to which the decision
maker is influenced (in a negative way) by their
biases. These biases are ingrained in each person
and some may have more dominant biases than
others due to their past experiences in life, business
and personal interactions. They are often unaware
of the presence or even the effect of their cognitive
biases on their decision making, but it is important
to note that:105
Information is not simply data, it is data that has
will be interpreted by an individual. Then this
interpreted data will be used to formulate or
justify decisions both in the short and long term.
Managerial judgments are often very
difficult to change, especially when it becomes
institutional within an organization or trade.
Decision makers are often cut off from core
experiences which may led them to alter, abandon
or revise their judgments.106 They become trapped
in the same, reoccurring thought patterns which
reinforce bad habits over the long run. Known as
institutional overconfidence, people and
organizations become locked in patters of similar
behavior which can lead to a misinterpreted
environment. Positive short-term results mask
long-term risks. 107 The demises of industries,
organizations and individuals when reality finally
catches up is usually not a pretty sight.
104 Brownie, Douglas and Spender, Jason. “Managerial Judgment in
Strategic Marketing: Some Preliminary Thoughts.” Management
Decision 33, Vol. 6 (1995): 42.
105 Brownie, 41.
106 Brownie, 47.
107 Rizzi, J.V. “Behavioral Bias: The Hidden Risk in Risk Management.”
Commercial Lending Review 18, Vol. 6 (Nov 2003): 3.
108 Adapted From Glover, Steven and Prawitt, Douglas. “Enhancing
Board Oversight: Avoiding Judgment Traps and Biases.” Committee
of Sponsoring Organization of the Tread way Commission (March
2012): 3.
Typical Judgment Process:108
Decisions makers often will skip step 1 in a typical
judgment process because of an artificially
constrained set of alternatives or experiences that
are drawn upon. A set of judgments bias triggers are
activated which can mask the situation or validity of
a proper problem definition.109
Steps to Avoid Biases:110
1.) Become aware of your judgment biases.
2.) Review/evaluate past decisions to see if you
are susceptible to certain biases.
3.) Use the input of unbiased parties.
4.) Establish means to get rapid feedback.
5.) Identify your habitual frames
BIASES WITHIN LEWIS AND CLARK
Biases are intensified when placed into the
context of unstructured problems or ambiguous
situations.111 This is one of the main culprits to why
109 Huning, Tobias, and Thomson, Neal. “Escalation of Commitment:
An Attribution Theory Perspective.” Proceeding of the Academy of
Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict 16, Vol. 1
(2011): 3.
110 Borchardt, John. “An Examination of Cognitive Biases that Cause
us to Make Poor Decisions.” Contract Management (June 2010): 60.
111 Keil, Mark, Dpledge, Gordon and Rai Arun. “Escalation: The Role
of Problem Recognition and Cognitive Bias.” Decision Sciences 38,
Vol. 3 (Aug. 2007): 409.

P a g e | 30
we see such a high degree of judgment biases within
the expedition, since ambiguity was overflowing for
Lewis and Clark. The Captains went westward with
major judgment biases that clouded their thought
processes. Decision makers often find themselves
influenced by a cognitive bias that will cause them
to misinterpret a situation due to the lack of proper
problem recognition which leads to improper
decisions or behaviors. Biases have a much greater
impact in areas of ambiguity, especially when there
is little to no negative feedback for the decision
maker.112 Difficulties arise when feedback is unclear
or not observable. Sometimes decision makers
simply are not aware of the feedback. Other times,
this lack of awareness is shaped by simple cognitive
blocks via judgment biases or lack of problem
recognition/definitions.
There were many observable judgment
biases exhibited by Lewis and Clark, but the most
common biases were their implicit favorite,
selective perception and personal experience
biases.
IMPLICIT FAVORITE BIAS
The first bias that Lewis and Clark were guilty
of possessing is called an implicit favorite bias,
which creates a preferred alternative in the mind of
the decision maker and redirects following decisions
to conform to the preferred or desired
alternative.113 This preferred alternative judgment
bias can be seen in their desperate attempt to forge
up the almost impassable Jefferson River from
August 4th through the 17th looking for the
112 Keli, 409.
113 Vecchio, 188.
headwaters of the Missouri, and Lewis’s overland
trek up to Lemhi pass where he was convinced that
he would see the Columbia River, but instead was
only greeted by mountains are far as he could see
(picture 1 and 2).
SELECTIVE PERCEPTION BIAS
The selective perception bias, the second
bias, results in the decision maker to be influenced
by prior expectations and to interpret only selected
information in order to meet their perceptions.114
The expedition was informed by the Natives at Fort
Mandan during the winter of 1804 and spring 1805
that the Missouri River would continue to flow west
until it reached the mountains. But on August 3rd
the River changed its course from westerly to
southwesterly. They were also well-informed of the
Great Falls, but instead of finding just one fall they
found five. From this point on Lewis and Clark’s
perception of Native geography drastically changed,
they no longer would trust it without properly
testing the information for themselves.
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE BIAS
Their personal experience bias also, became
a factor in the
decision making of
the party which can
cause past
experiences to shape
current decisions. 115
From the experiences
interacting, trading
and communicating with the plains tribes, Lewis and
Clark felt very confident that they would be
welcomed by the Shoshone and could easily
communicate with them through signs. The
personal experience bias can be seen in the
overwhelming confidence of the captains of their
Indian diplomacy that they did not include
Sakakawea, their Shoshone guide in any of their
overland searches for the Shoshones.
114 Vecchio, 189.
115 Vecchio, 189.
1
2

P a g e | 33
GROUPTHINK
Lewis and Clark were able to form a highly
cohesive group, which can be an effective tool, but
can also pose a major threat to any organization.
One cannot deny that the expedition was suffering
from groupthink, but due to the lack of evidence it
is difficult to determine how much it actually
affected leadership.
This managerial term suggests that highly
cohesive groups, by nature, can create serious
errors in effective decision making. A deterioration
of mental efficiency, reality and judgments due to
pressures of groups becomes evident over time.116
Decision making processes in groups operating
under groupthink have a tendency to be slanted
towards seeking consensus rather than seeking
correct or alternative forms of action. 117
Commonly, groupthink is seen with groups that
remain very insulated from others, and this
insulation can lead to uniformity in decision making,
loss of perspective and objectivity and closed
mindedness.118 The expedition falls well within the
bounds of groupthink. You cannot get much more
insulated that being alone, a thousand miles from
white civilization. The symptoms and defects of
groupthink on effective decision making bare many
resemblances to what is portrayed during the Corps
of Discovery.
Symptoms of Groupthink119
 An illusion of invincibility
 An unquestioned belief in the group’s
inherent mortality
 Collective efforts to rationalize
 Stereotyped views of rivals as evil, weak or
stupid
 Self-censorship and a lack of deviating from
the groups consensus
116 Neck, Christopher and Moorhead, Gregory. “Groupthink
Remolded: The Importance of Leadership, Time Pressure and
Methodical Decision-Making Procedures.” Human Relations 48, Vol.
5 (May 1995): 548.
117 Robert Vecchio, Organizational Behavior: Core Concepts (Mason:
Thompson South-Western, 2006), 190.
118 Neck and Moorhead, 548.
 Shared illusion of unanimity
 Direct pressure on members who express
arguments against the norm
Groupthink Decision Making Defects120
 Incomplete survey of alternatives
 Incomplete survey of objectives
 Failure to examine risks of preferred choice
 Failure to reappraise initially rejected
alternatives
 Poor information search
 Selective bias in process the information
 Failure to work out contingency plans
Steps to Avoid Groupthink:121
1.) Lead group from an impartial stance.
Leaders should minimize their options or
leading of group discussions
2.) Encourage members to add their own
solutions/ideas
3.) Divide into smaller groups for more accurate
and safe input from members
4.) Assign someone to be a devil’s advocate for
each idea presented
5.) Include an impartial outsider’s criticism
6.) Continually to question all outcomes,
processes, evaluations and information
LEWIS AND CLARK, LEWIS OR CLARK, LEWIS CLARK?
Small groups develop a set of shared
illusions and norms that will interfere with their
critical thinking skills and alter reality.122 And as the
expedition was confronted with contradictory
information, they seemed to brush it off. This is
easily seen searching for the Shoshones. The group
was so convinced that the tribe would be between
Great Falls and Three Forks, but day after day
119 Neck, Christopher. “Letterman or Leno: A Groupthink Analysis of
Successive Decision Made by the National Broadcasting Company.”
Journal of Managerial Psychology 11, Vol. 8 (1993).
120 Neck, 2.
121 Tronshaw, Oubria. “How to minimize Groupthink.” Accessed
April, 2014. http://www.ehow.com/how_12038603_minimize-
groupthink.html
122 Sims, Ronald. “Linking Groupthink to Unethical Behavior in
Organizations.” Journal of Business Ethics 11, Vol. 9 (Sept. 1992): 532

P a g e | 34
passed. It was clear that Lewis and Clark had not
developed a contingency plan. Anxiety is one of the
possible causes, as it seems to be a precursors for
concurrence seeking among individuals and group.
There is no doubt that as the expedition entered
Southwest Montana that they were operating under
high levels of anxiety and stress.123 They were going
to find the Shoshone, that was the plan. What
would happened had they not met the Shoshone?
Would they have just wondered aimlessly around
the headwaters of the Missouri still searching?
Decision makers often do not even realize
when they have fallen into this trap for effective
decision making. 124 Leaders frequently see
everything as fine, until well after a failure. Quick
agreements and overconfidence build over time,
until it explodes usually catastrophically. It is
somewhat unclear to the role groupthink may have
played within the expedition, primarily because the
only real record of group dynamics are the official
journals which are most likely oozing groupthink
from every page. It is safe to assume that because
they were being kept for military purposes, that
things were subjective or entirely omitted within the
journals. However, groupthink seems to be very
prevalent between Lewis and Clark or at least it
appears that way. Their journals offer no entries
that suggest any major differences or
confrontations between the captains. This could be
interpreted that Lewis and Clark had a tendency to
seek a consensus among each other. There is also
no real evidence within the journals of issues or
insubordination that would hurt the group after
Mandan with the members of the expedition. If this
is the case, the Corps were operating in dangerous
areas of groupthink and somehow this did not affect
the outcome, but in all likelihood could have. It is
under the author’s opinion that the levels of group
think did not remain steady throughout the entire
expedition, as many of the daily tasks were routine.
123 Chapman, Judith. “Anxiety and defective decision making: an
elaboration of the groupthink model.” Management Decisions 44,
Vol. 10 (2006): 1399.
124 Glover, Steven and Prawitt, Douglas. “Enhancing Board Oversight:
Avoiding Judgment Traps and Biases.” Committee of Sponsoring
Organization of the Tread way Commission (March 2012): 5.
However, when times of key decisions or when
information was presented to the expedition, it
seems that they were unwilling to waver from their
original ideas or plans.
ESCALATION OF COMMITMENT
As people invest
more time, energy, money
and resources into a
project or outcome, they
begin to feel a need to
justify and rationalize their
initial course of action.125
It is as if these individuals
will put on blinders and
shelter themselves from
the truth, to show
themselves or the world
that they were right. In an
all-out blitz to avoid failing,
they become entrenched
in behaviors and activities
that can in fact, lead to a higher degree of failure.
Escalating behaviors can been seen
throughout our history. Simply look at any major
event that failed or lasted an extended period of
time. One of the most famous examples in modern
time is the buildup in Vietnam (picture 3).
Drivers to Escalate Behavior:126
Cost of Withdrawal –
 Decision makers will be considered
failures by others
o Lewis and Clark held the nations
hopes and dreams on their
shoulders
 Sunk Cost effect
o The US invested too highly in this
new territory to fail
125 Ku, Gillian. “Learning to De-escalate: The Effects of Regret in
Escalation of Commitment.” Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes 105 (2008): 221.
126 Pan, Shan, Pan, Gary, Newman, Michael, and Flynn, Donal.
“Escalation and De-Escalation of Commitment to Information
Systems Projects: Insights from a Project Evaluation Model.”
European Journal of Operational Research 173 (2006): 1142.
3

P a g e | 35
Rewards for Success
 To be viewed as a success, gain status or
promotion
o Return home as American heroes
 The organization will reap the benefits of
the project
o Returning will verify Jefferson’s
idea of the west and the country
can grow
Proximity to Goal
 the completion effect
o Lewis and Clark believed that the
Pacific was closer than originally
anticipated, but knew it was
there
Ambiguity
 The confidence that the project can be
turned around
 The visibility of project completion
o The end goal was the Pacific, it
was not an ambiguous outcome
Steps to Avoid Escalating Activities:
1.) Remove originating decision makers from
the project group.
2.) Establish key milestones
3.) Make sure negative feedback is properly
being identified and used.
4.) Establish policies that require ongoing
projects to be regularly evaluated at
different steps that include people that were
not responsible for the initial decisions.
5.) Oversight managers must be aware that
their direction may impact the framing of an
outcome.
127 Ku, Gillian. “Learning to De-escalate: The Effects of Regret in
Escalation of Commitment.” Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes 105 (2008): 223.
128 Rutledge, Robert. “Escalation of Commitment in Groups and the
Moderating Effects of Information Framing.” Journal of Applied
Business Research 11, Vol. 2 (Spring 1995): 20.
LEWIS AND CLARK, THE ESCALATORS
Pairing the judgment biases of Lewis and
Clark, particularly their selective perceptions and
illusions of control, with the symptoms of
groupthink and the increased stress of Southwest
Montana, you can see the steady escalation of
commitment as knowledge levels fall when the
expedition enters into the unknown. The party was
informed by the natives at Fort Mandan and by
Sakakawea that they would find the Shoshone near
Three Forks. As miles and days went by, it is fairly
obvious that desperation began to set in. If they did
not find the Shoshones and obtain horses, they
would not be able to cross the mountains before
winter set in. Although it is speculation, since they
were able to find the Shoshone, the escalation of
commitment to reach the Columbia may have led
the expedition to attempt to push through the
mountains on foot in late fall, where they surely
would not have survived the winter.
Escalation of commitment suggests that
people in decision making situations become
unwilling to change their course of action due to
their fear of failing or the refusal to see reality. The
over commitment is also followed by an attempt by
managers or leaders to justify their original plan.127
Escalation behavior is common when negative
feedback is returned through ambiguous
messages. 128 Leaders may also find themselves
much more committed to an outcome if they are the
ones responsible for the original outcome or where
the leader appointed for the project.129 As Lewis
and Clark were the originating leaders (Note:
Jefferson was an originating source, but he was not
inside the group, so would not apply in this
situation), their commitment levels were much
higher than someone who had not been an
originating framer of the goals 130 . It was also
difficult for them to intake the information
presented to them as the ambiguity created mixed
129 Rutledge, 21.
130 Huning, Tobias, and Thomson, Neal. “Escalation of Commitment:
An Attribution Theory Perspective.” Proceeding of the Academy of
Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict 16, Vol. 1
(2011): 13.

P a g e | 36
messages. This extra burden of commitment led the
young captains to display heightening signs of
escalating behaviors after Great Falls.
Lewis and Clark were both too
psychologically committed to the expedition, which
could be argued good and bad. However, it became
apparent that the captains were operating under
highly escalated behavior searching for the
Shoshone. Decision making becomes highly
escalated among those who are responsible for the
original investment.131 Lewis and Clark were both
fully committed to success and needed to justify
their actions by finding the Pacific and returning
home. This behavior could have easily led them to
make hasty or misguided decisions, costing the
entire expedition their lives. Highly escalated
individuals often will overlook failures, negative
feedback or rarely deviate from their original
plan.132 This entrapment locks an individual into a
pervious course of action because of their
unwillingness to admit, to themselves or others that
the prior resources had been allocated in.133 For a
great example of an over escalation of commitment
in action, see Lt. Colonel George Armstrong Custer
at the Battle of the Little Big Horn. Custer
rationalized his behaviors by framing the
information to his irrational view of the situation,
the sunk costs of the Indian Wars, the rewards for
his success and the proximity to the end goal of
stomping the uprising were his drivers. Escalated
individuals show a higher degree of their internal
locus of control during escalation. They begin to
push harder and harder to force an outcome, in
spite of the environmental forces stacking up
against them.134
131 Rutledge, Robert. “Escalation of Commitment in Groups and the
Moderating Effects of Information Framing.” Journal of Applied
Business Research 11, Vol. 2 (Spring 1995): 20.
132 Ku, 222.
133 Brockner, Joel. “The Escalation of Commitment to a Failing
Course of Action: Toward Theoretical Progress.” Academy of
Management Review 17, Vol. 1 (1992): 40.
134 Huning, 18.
90% COMPLETE
A subsection of escalation of commitment is
the theory of perceived completion. An illusion of
completion is commonly seen in most avenues of
life, but particularly in business where individuals
attempt to justify a project by framing it to its
completion. This illusion of proximity to completion
will often lead to escalated behaviors by investing
more time, money or resources to a project even if
it perceived to be a failure. Decision makers often
justify the percentage and allocate more resources
to finish. It is usually not a lie, but the completion
rate is typically much farther than anticipated, 90%
complete may actually be more like 70%.135 A 90%
completion rate avoids rationalizing sunk costs, and
emphasizes completion because it is apparently
close to a conclusion. A point of no return is
reached.
Causes of 90% Complete Syndrome:136
 Unrealistic estimates
 Inadequate planning
 Misleading status tracking
 Lack of proper planning and identification of
milestones
THE EXPEDITION AT 90%
It seems that Lemhi pass was the 90% point for the
expedition. Ascending the mountain to see the
Columbia River Basin marked the end of the major
obstacles of the journey. What a life shattering
moment when Lewis stared into the West and saw
at a seeming less endless mountain range in front of
him. His 90% turned more into a 60 or 70%
complete.
135 Armour, Phillip. “The Business of Software: How we Build
Things.” Communications of the ACM 56, Vol. 1 (Jan 2013): 32.
136 Gack, Gary. “Avoiding the 90 Percentage Syndrome: Why
Software Project Status Reports are Often Wrong (and What you
Can Do About it).” Accessed April, 2014.
http://www.complianceonline.com/ecommerce/control/trainingFoc
us/~product_id=702107/~Avoiding__90_Percentage_Syndrome:_W
hy_Stware

P a g e | 38
PERCEIVED VS. ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE
ENLIGHTENED GEOGRAPHY:
To understand how the expedition viewed
the west, it is important to understand the
perceptions that Lewis and Clark operated under.
The geographic misconceptions that the Captains
brought with them into the west were obviously
flawed. But one cannot blame them, it was the
geographic science of the late eighteenth and early
nineteenth century that was directing them. The
great explorers and minds of the day were guilty of
overgeneralizations, which most certainly included
Jefferson who would later instill the same mindset
into Lewis and Clark. Those like Jefferson did not
see the west in terms of gold and gems, they
perceived the American west filled with lush
vegetation and temporal climates.137 All the farm
land a young expanding country could want was just
beyond the banks of the Mississippi, within the new
territory of Louisiana. With these generalizations of
the west came many other geographic
oversimplifications, one leading scholar in this field,
James Ronda suggests that:
Jefferson believed in a balance in nature. The natural
world, in all its varied terrain features, was
fundamentally symmetrical in construction. In practical
terms, this meant that the mountains of the American
West simply had to be, in shape and elevation, much
like those of the East. If the Appalachians were tree-
covered, relatively smooth, and cut through by passes
and water-gaps, then the Rockies were sure to be the
same. And if the rivers of the east- the Hudson, the
Potomac, and the Ohio- were navigable, then
certainly western rivers would be open.138
Jefferson’s and other naturalists in the late
eighteenth century view of the west is very
intriguing perspective. They were obviously aware
of how massive the Andes were in South America
from Spanish exploration and cartography. So why
was it assumed that the Rocky Mountains were
similar in size and structure to that of the
137 John Allen, “Geographic Knowledge & American Images of the
Louisiana Territory.” The Western Historical Quarterly 2, no. 2
(1971): 164.
Appalachians full of slow flowing rivers, rather than
the more logical comparison to the mammoths
found in South America?
Lewis and Clark went into the unknown with
several expectations of the west. First, it was an
empty west or a blank slate to mold it into whatever
they pleased.139 They also expected a simple west,
simple geography, that they already were extremely
familiar with growing up in the mountains of
Virginia. It was also viewed as a fertile garden, a
Garden of Eden, a place where agriculture would
flourish.140 But contrary to their beliefs they found a
west that was remarkably diverse in its geography
and topography. Western Montana must have been
absolutely astonishing, traveling short distances
would change from prairie like valleys, to rich and
fertile river banks, barrens wastelands to densely
forested mountains (see picture 4 and 5). Montana
challenged their basic geographic fundamentals and
foundations.
138 James Ronda, Finding the West: Explorations with Lewis and Clark
(Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2001), 26.
139 Ronda “Finding the West”, 31.
140 Ronda “Finding the West”, 33.
4
5

P a g e | 39
Camp Dubois and Fort Mandan had two vital
roles for the expedition, training as stated earlier,
along with geographical research and analysis. The
Captains were able to analyze the geographic data
they had brought with them on the journey. The
data came from a variety of different source such as
earlier transcribed maps from explorers and
cartographers, including one courteously of William
Henry Harrison, compact editions of Alexander
Mackenzie’s continental exploration of Canada in
1793, and journals from Jean Baptiste Trutea, who
had lived with the Arikara Indians.141 Lewis and
Clark were well aware that they would be entering
areas that were either complete speculation or
supported by shaky data, but still remained
confident in their “knowledge”.
From Camp Dubois the expedition had very
limited zones of real geographic knowledge.
According to John Allen, the first zone of knowledge
comprised the area of the Missouri to the Mandan
villages in present day North Dakota and the Pacific
Coast. This area of the river had been used for quite
some time and was an active commercial and
military area. Also included in the first zone were
the coastal areas of the Northwest and upwards
nearly one hundred miles inland from the Columbia
River delta.142 The second zone comprised the areas
along the Missouri between the Mandan villages
and the base of the Rocky Mountains. These areas
had been roughly projected and rumored by native
sources over their geographical conceptions.143 The
final, or third zone encompassed the unknown
sections of land in the Rocky Mountains. The only
information Lewis and Clark possessed about the
third region came from speculation from native
sources and the exploratory sources they had
brought with them.144
Many of the “geographic concepts” of the
west became concrete to Lewis and Clark during the
winter at Fort Mandan. The fort had a steady
141 David Freeman Hawke, Those Tremendous Mountains: The story
of the Lewis and Clark Expedition (New York: Norton, 1980), 47.
142 John Allen, “An Analysis of the Exploratory Process: The Lewis
and Clark Expedition of 1804-1806.” Geographical Review 63 (1972):
19.
143 Allen, “An Analysis”, 21.
stream of visitors, both British fur traders and
natives. The Captains gathered as much
information as they could from the visitors, even
though much of it was extremely generalized or
based off of Indian lore.145
It is no coincidence that the expedition was
awed by the mountains. They had left Fort Mandan
in the spring of 1805 fairly confident of what was to
be expected near the headwaters of the Missouri
River. Clark’s map (page 42) clearly depicts the
geographic mix of 18th century geography and
Indian lore. They would face a completely westward
journey up the Missouri, over one mountain range
and into the Columbia River Basin. Lewis and Clark
quickly realized, after starting their second leg of the
journey that they were traveling in western
conceptions of space. “
Rivers didn’t show up where they were supposed to be;
distances were off by hundreds of miles; projected
villages regularly went missing because they had long
since ceased to exist.146
146 Martin Bruckner, The Geographic Revolution in Early America:
Maps, Literacy and National Identity (Chapel hill: University of North
Carolina Press, 2006), 226.
6

P a g e | 41
DEFINED MILESTONES (ONCE EXPEDITION BEGAN)
1. Obtain supplies
2. Travel down Ohio River
3. Create basecamp at mouth of Missouri River
4. Create rank and file, mission structure,
guidance and discipline
5. Move up Missouri towards Mandan before
winter
6. Greet Mandan, build winter camp
7. Find great fall, cross fall
8. Find Northwest Passage
9. Obtain horses from Shoshone
10. Cross mountain range
11. Find Columbia river
12. Find Pacific
13. Create winter camp
14. Cross back over mountain range
15. Return to St. Louis
16. Report findings to Jefferson
GOALS OF EXPEDITION (PLANNING STAGE)
1. Explore and map the rivers flowing into
the Missouri
2. Learn about all routes and traders in the
new territory
3. Study every Indian tribe
4. Gather data on geography, flora and
fauna
5. Search for Northwest Passage

P a g e | 42
ACTUAL MAJOR MILESTONES
17. Obtain Supplies
18. Travel down Ohio River
19. Create base camp meeting of Ohio River and
Mississippi (Completed December 24, 1803)
20. Create rank and file, mission structure,
guidelines and discipline
21. Move up Missouri towards Mandan before
winter
22. Choose correct river at Marias fork
23. Survive the barren wasteland of Eastern
Montana in the summer heat
24. Find "big waterfall"
25. Survive constant harassment and attack from
grizzly bears
26. Construct crude carts and portage goods over
falls
27. Repeat four more times
28. Reach headwaters of Missouri
29. Scout for best option of the Jefferson, Madison
and Gallatin River
30. Pick Jefferson
31. Break out and search for Shoshone
32. Reach Twin Bridges
33. Decide to continue down the Jefferson
(Beaverhead) or Big Hole River
34. Find source of Missouri River
35. Search for Shoshone to obtain horses
36. Climb up Lemhi Pass
37. Realize how much farther they have to go
38. See first human in four months
39. Attempt to convince him that you are friendly
40. Encounter war party & attempt to calm
41. Negotiate with Cameahwait for horses
42. Negotiate with Cameahwait to visit Clark
43. Lead war party to Clark
44. Bring Clark and supplies back to Shoshone
camp
45. Establish Camp Fortunate
46. Test Salmon River
47. Convince Old Toby to guide party over the
mountains
48. Make way up Bitterroot Valley
49. Find Flatheads
50. Negotiate new horses
51. Cross over mountains
52. Survive elements and starvation
53. Negotiate with Nez Perce
54. Build canoes
55. Travel down Clearwater River
56. Travel to Snake river
57. Travel Down Columbia River into the Gorge
58. Reach Pacific
59. Find suitable place for winter camp
60. Build for Clatsop
61. Plan route back to St. Louis
62. Head back to Nez Perce
63. Snow blocks path, camp with Nez Perce until it
melts
64. Cross mountains
65. Split expedition into two, Clark explores
Yellowstone
66. Kill Blackfeet teenagers
67. Run for life
68. Construct Canoes, travel down Missouri and
Yellowstone Rivers
69. Continue down river
70. Re-converge group near mouth of Yellowstone
River
71. Say goodbye to Sakakawea and Charbonneau
72. Take Missouri back to St. Louis
73. Exchange harsh words with Sioux chief
74. Survive possible attack
75. Arrive in St. Louis, back from the dead
76. Travel to Washington D.C to report findings to
Jefferson
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

P a g e | 43
Clark’s First Map of the West

P a g e | 44
TOPOGRAPHY, BIOLOGY AND CLIMATE OF
MONTANA:
The explorers never thought that the
mountains would be the major obstacle during the
expedition.147 In hindsight, the mountains were just
one of many natural obstacles they had to face. It
would be irresponsible to suggest that the plains
and Columbia basin were not difficult feats,
however the bombardment of topography, biology
and climate they experienced from the plains of
Great Falls to the cliffs of the Bitterroots was by far
the hardest stretch of land they would encounter.
This is clearly displayed in comparing Clark’s final
map of the west with the one created at Fort
Mandan (See Map 2).
The first major obstacle, which had been the
one constant throughout the journey into Montana,
was the mighty Missouri (picture 7). Fierce currents,
collapsing banks, erratic flow and spot sawyers,
which were illusive drifting trees, became a daily
nuisance and threat to the overall mission.148 When
the party reached the Great Falls, reality began to
set in as it became obvious that the Native
geographic information of only one fall was
incorrect, there had been five separate falls (picture
7). So on June 16th the expedition began its portage
around the falls. Unknown to them at the time, this
feat would take a disheartening month to portage
only 25 miles. During the portage the expedition
147 Barth, 81.
148 Barth, 85.
149 Stephen Ambrose, Undaunted Courage: Meriwether Lewis,
Thomas Jefferson, and the Opening of the American West (New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1996), 244.
was assaulted by hail as big as apples, swarms of
mosquitoes, burning sun, freezing rain and immense
winds.149 The so called illusive grizzly bears were so
numerous around great falls that Lewis forbade any
man to go anywhere alone and ordered the party to
sleep with their rifles.150 Lewis had almost been
killed two days earlier when a grizzly chased him
into to the river.151 If Lewis had been killed or
seriously wounded, the expedition may have been
forced to return back East.
The party also had to be constantly aware
and on the lookout for rattlesnakes along the banks
of rivers. Other major nuisances were prickly pears
and needle grass that would penetrate the
moccasins and leather leggings of the explorers,
Lewis deemed these the “greatest pests of the
plains”152 and an “invention of the devil”.153 There
were also very few trees along the banks of the
Missouri in Western Montana. The Corps were
literally left out in the open to with no cover for the
majority of their trip so far. The constant heat, wind,
and rain began to take its toll on the party. They had
become a walking hospital and everyone was more
or less exhausted all the time during the Great Falls
portage.154
July 19th, 1805 Lewis deemed the area just
south of the Great Falls the “gates of the rocky
150 Ambrose, 244.
151 DeVoto, “Journals”, 139.
152 Moulton, “Journals”, 283.
154 Ambrose, 261.
7
8

P a g e | 45
mountains”.155 The expedition now entered an area
in which they would remain for the next two months
across the Continental Divide. The Missouri became
shallow in the “gates”, navigation now became a
matter of towing and poling the boats upstream
through narrow channels, islands and sand bars.
The men were exhausted and their feet were
constantly blistered and battered from the assault
by sharp rocks and prickly pears during their
overland towing of canoes and equipment.156
The Missouri was a challenge, but when the
party reached the three forks of the river on July
25th, they had a decision to make, which branch
would get them to the Columbia. They now realized
that the Madison, Jefferson and Gallatin rivers were
definitely no solution to a trans-continental
waterway via the Missouri. The Madison is a fast
flowing river which is not extremely deep and
extended to the south east along with the Gallatin
which followed roughly the same course as the
Madison but a much smaller river. So the party was
forced to continue down the Jefferson River which
was suggested by the native lore from Fort Mandan.
The Jefferson splits off near the current town of
Twin Bridges Montana into 3 separate river systems,
the Ruby, Jefferson (today’s Beaverhead) and
Wisdom (today’s Big Hole). The Jefferson which was
chosen, was by no means a solution for an upstream
passage. In late August the river systems in western
Montana are usually very low, this leaves much of
156 John Allen, Passage through the Garden: Lewis and Clark and the
Image of the American Northwest (Urbana: University of Illinois
Press, 1975), 286.
the river bed exposed. None of the rivers at Twin
Bridges were a very logical choice, but the Wisdom
was probably the more efficient and rational choice
because of its westerly flowing course and high
water levels (picture 8 and map 1). The natural
course of the Wisdom River would have led them in
a more direct route in the Mountains than the
Jefferson. Lewis and Clark had sent Rueben Fields
up the Wisdom where he followed it until the river
entered the mountains. Unknown to them at the
time, but the Wisdom eventually opens into a large
valley in Western Montana, miles from the Idaho
border at the Base of the Beaverhead Mountains
which would have been much easier for portaging
than the Jefferson.
It is hard for one to imagine how they must
have felt when they reached the mountains,
expecting to find the Appalachians but looking up to
massive formations twice as tall. The expedition
had first glimpsed the mountains Near Great Falls,
but as mile after mile passed and the mountains
became fiercer, the moral of the Corps must have
slowly declined. They could not imagine the
hardships that lay in front of them over the next few
months. On August 12th, Lewis climbed to the top of
Lemhi Pass and glimpsed to the west, massive snow
covered ranges, with no mighty river below, just a
simple small mountain stream. The distinction
between the real and perceived zones of geographic
knowledge had been clearly identified at the top of
Lemhi Pass.157
The short portage across the Rockies, had turned into
a month and-a-half long trek of almost 400 miles
over some of the wildest terrain imaginable. Shorter
routes were available and they had already heard of
the one from the Bitterroot to the Missouri. But the
route which had been so firmly fixed in the logic of
geography, the route from the head of the Missouri to
the west, had been the one that they had followed.158
158 Allen, “Passage through the Garden”, 305.
Jefferson River
Twin
Bridges
Map 1

P a g e | 46
Clark’s Final Map of the West

P a g e | 48
CHAPTER 4
LUCKIEST MEN WEST OF THE MISSISSIPPI
As stated in earlier chapters, the Captains
were extremely lucky that their leadership
deficiencies, stubbornness and geographic
misconceptions did not lead to their failure or
death. These deficiencies seem to have been
magnified in Western Montana as it becomes
apparent that the expedition needed to find a lot of
luck, and they did. Although difficult to prove
“luck”, the following chapter will attempt to
describe the adherent failures and circumstances
displayed in Western Montana that should have
crushed the expedition, but somehow did not.
It is irresponsible to throw fault on the
captains due to their lack of true knowledge in
regards to what was reality, but it does seem that
they had developed an elementary generalized idea
of what to expect leaving Mandan in the spring of
1805. The projected versus actual milestones that
the expedition faced were quite different. Some can
be contributed to leadership and resolve, while the
others must be accounted with “luck”.
THE MARIAS
We have talked earlier about the decision at
the Marias River as a testament for the charismatic
leadership qualities of Lewis and Clark, however this
is an incredibly important decision as to the fate of
the entire expedition which scholarship places little
emphasis on.
June 2nd 1805, the Corps encountered the
intersection of two rivers, the Marias and the
Missouri. Due to heavy flooding from the snow melt
in Northern Montana, the Marias was actually
higher than the Missouri River. The river also
continued westerly while the Missouri took a
sudden southerly path (map 2). The expedition split
up as Lewis lead a group to explore the northwest
159 Collins, 40.
branch and Clark explored the southwestern
branch. The two would return, compare notes and
study their initial maps from St. Louis, which did not
conclusively reference the problem at hand. 159
Lewis and Clark believed that the southwestern
branch was the correct route, even though the rest
of the expedition felt otherwise.
This “decision” shows an unwillingness from
the group to fight for their opinions, rather they
submitted to the persuasion of the leaders. This is
the first real incident seen in the expedition that
groupthink affected an important outcome.
Although groupthink usually has negative
consequences, it may have actually saved the lives3
Map 2
Map 3

P a g e | 49
of the entire expedition. If the Corps had decided to
take the Marias, it may have wasted weeks of time,
effort and resources. This would have place them
into Southwestern Montana in the early winter, and
possibly missing the Shoshones entirely as the tribe
moved out of the mountains and into the foothills
near Three Forks in early winter. Also, they would
have been venturing deeper into Blackfoot territory
(map 3). As we will discuss later with an almost fatal
encounter, the Blackfeet were a fierce tribe and may
have seen this large party of white intruders as a
possible invasion.
Themes: Groupthink, Charismatic Leadership,
Perceived Knowledge, Biases, Luck
THE COTTONWOOD
Of course they were lucky just attempting to
move men and gear that far up the Missouri without
any incidents, but the second interjection involving
luck in Montana, would be in the form of a tree,
more specifically a cottonwood. 11 canoes were
constructed from cottonwood trees east of the
Rockies. Seven were constructed at Fort Mandan
and four at Great Falls. The cottonwoods near Great
Falls proved to be an oasis for the expedition.
Almost then entire landscape from Mandan to Great
Falls was barren, especially Eastern Montana which
is a rather dry and desolate area (see picture 9). This
region is a cross section where the dry northern
plains meet the foothills of the Rockies, trees are at
a premium. Of all the western trees, the
160 Paul Cutright, Lewis and Clark: Pioneering Naturalists (Chicago:
University of Illinois Press, 1969), 332.
161 Ambrose, 250.
cottonwood had more to do
with the success of the
mission than any other.
“Though we think it as
probable that they would
have successfully crossed
the continent without the
cottonwood, don’t ask us
how!” 160 At Great Falls,
cottonwoods were used to
faction wheels and axles to
move the canoes and cargo
over land (picture 10). It
took almost a month with
the assistance of the trees, without cottonwoods at
the Great Falls, the party may have been delayed
longer. This delay would have placed the expedition
into the mountains much later and may have once
again completely missed the Shoshones.
Cottonwoods also provided shade and shelter after
suffering the relentless heat of the open prairie, this
single grove of cottonwoods must have been a
welcome sight.161
Themes: Resource Allocation, Luck
SEARCHING FOR THE SHOSHONE
Lewis and Clark where in an arguable state
of panic as the expedition neared Three Forks. The
panic only became perpetuated as the weeks went
by with no sight of any natives. Lewis and Clark
knew the importance of finding the Shoshone, their
lives and the lives of the party depended on it. Lewis
feared that without Shoshone horses and
information, the expedition might as well turn
around and go home.162 Lewis and Clark had one
specific goal after leaving Fort Mandan in spring,
find the Shoshone. They were lead to believe, by the
Indian lore and Sakakawea, that they would
encounter the Shoshone somewhere between
Great Falls and Three Forks.163
It is understandable that they party became
anxious over the location of the Shoshone. They
had encountered many different tribes on their way
162 Ambrose, 259.
163 Ronda, “Among the Indians”, 133.
4
5-7
9
10

P a g e | 50
up the Missouri, but from the intersection of the
Yellowstone River and the Missouri near the border
of North Dakota and Montana, they had not seen a
single Native America, that’s more than two months
of traveling.164 Just above Three Forks, Clark led a
small party in search of the Shoshone as Lewis
continued to push up Missouri and establishing
camp to wait for Clark at three Forks. The captains
reconvened on August 6th and concluded that Lewis
was to push up the Jefferson on foot until he found
the headwaters or made contact with the Shoshone,
while Clark would continue with the boats up the
river. The following weeks would become the most
important of the entire expedition. The men were
at their lowest mentally and physically to date.
Everything that could go wrong did. The upper
Jefferson was difficult but the lower parts of the
river were barely navigable (see picture 11 and 12),
Clark’s boat crews slipped in the mud, tripped over
hidden rocks, and spent hours waist-deep in cold
water. Men who usually did not complain began
to. 165 Lewis and Clark were starting to lose the
support of the party.
Through the hand of God or sheer luck,
whichever one prefers, what Lewis experienced
after splitting from the main party defies all
probability. Unknown to the expedition the
Shoshone and Flathead Indians had been on high
alert, from constant raids and attacks by Blackfeet
tribes from the Northern plains of Montana. The
expedition had noticed several smoke signals
166 Ambrose, 263.
around the Three Forks area but had not taken any
major consideration as to what they could mean.
Lewis neglected to plan ahead or think thoroughly
about the situation that he was about to enter.
He just blundered ahead on the unshakable and
unacknowledged assumption that he was such an
expert in handling Indians that when he met a
Shoshone he would know instinctively what to do.166
In Clark’s search near the three forks and
now Lewis’, neither captain requested the aid of
Sakakawea. This is an incredibly strange scenario,
the most valued asset they had with them, a
member of the tribe they were searching for, is not
taken at the least, as a translator. The extent of any
interrogation of Sakakawea occurred when Clark
asked her the translation of white man into
Shoshone.167 So with no plan, no knowledge of the
Shoshone, and no guide, Lewis just arrogantly
proceeded into the Montana wilderness in search of
a group of people that were supposedly in the area.
The Shoshone where actually on the other side of
the Lemhi Mountains in Idaho, camped near the
Salmon River preparing for their journey in
September to Three Forks for their annual buffalo
hunt.168 In Lewis’s journal on July 18th he stated that
if the party was spotted moving up the river by the
Shoshone, they might “retreat to the mountains and
conceal themselves, supposing us to be their
enemies who visit them usually by the way of the
river.”169 He obviously has some inclination that the
167 Ambrose, 263.
11
12

P a g e | 51
party might scare off any natives, so why didn’t he
take any precautions before leaving? He did not
instruct the three men who accompanied him,
Drouillard, Shields and McNeal on how to act if and
when they came into contact with the natives.
Lewis believed that the Shoshone desperately
needed white goods, so he and his men would be
welcomed with open arms.170 This situation could
have resulted in a massive failure of the expedition,
due to the poor leadership displayed by Lewis. He
knew the importance of finding the Shoshone, it
meant life and death. Prior to this search, near
Three Forks, Lewis made the following journal entry
regarding the Shoshone:
we begin to feel considerable anxiety with rispect to
the Snake Indians. if we do not find them or some
other nation who have horses I fear the successfull
issue of our voyage will be very doubtfull or at all
events much more difficult in it’s accomplishment. we
are now several hundred miles within the bosom of this
wild and mountanous country, where game may
rationally be expected shortly to become scarce and
subsistence precarious without any information with
rispect to the country not knowing how far these
mountains continue, or wher to direct our course to
pass them171
The whole situation is rather strange. The captains
had taken extensive strides and planning during the
early stages of the mission, why at its most crucial
point were poor leadership and poor planning
displayed? And why was Sakakawea not
implemented in searching for the Shoshone? She
had been incredibly sick near Three Forks, but there
was no mention in the journals as to why or why not
they did not include her.
Themes: Escalation of Commitment, Perceived
Knowledge, Biases, Resource Allocation, Luck
AN AMBUSH?
After Lewis had ascended Lemhi Pass, at his
lowest point emotionally, realized that this was no
longer going to be a simple climb over a single
170 Ambrose, 264.
mountain range, he began following an old Indian
trail where he glimpsed a single Shoshone rider.
Lewis put down his gun and began to approach the
rider yelling Tab-Bo-Bone, which was the term he
thought meant white man, and flapping his blanket
making “the signal of friendship know to the Indians
of the Rocky Mountains.”172 This is a rather absurd
conclusion by Lewis since this was the first Rocky
Mountain tribe they had encountered and it was
obviously not interpreted by the Shoshone rider as
friendship. Drouillard and Shields at the same time
were pushing through the brush on both sides of the
Indian.173 Scared, the rider quickly rode off. Two
days later, following the same Indian trail, Lewis and
his men came across a group of Shoshone women,
where he offered gifts to gain their trust.
Convincing the Shoshone women to lead the party
to their village, they were intercepted by a war
party, roughly 60 warriors including their chief
Cameahwait.
Amazingly they were not killed on the spot.
Cameahwait’s tribe was starving, subsisting
exclusively on roots and berries.174 Days before the
arrival of Lewis, the tribe had been subject to a
punishing raid from Atsina warriors from the
north. 175 Somehow, Lewis was able to
communicate through the signing of Drouillard,
their intentions, which was the most remarkable
part of the entire interactions with the Shoshones.
The Shoshone territory spanned the area
known as the Great Basin and into current areas of
Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, Utah and California.176
Southern bands had been exposed to European
trade and goods from the Spanish, but there is no
evidence of the Lemhi Shoshone had ever been in
contact with whites before meeting Lewis on August
11th, 1805.177 This can be viewed several different
ways, either Cameahwait believed he could obtain
weapons and trade goods from these strange
intruders, or Lewis was exceedingly lucky to not be
killed from the suspicion of the recent raids. The
176 Steven Crum, The Road on Which We Came: A history of the
Western Shoshone (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1994), 1.
8

P a g e | 52
Shoshone tribe within the greater story of westward
expansion had been a relatively peaceful and
accommodating tribe, only marked by a few years of
violent conflict in the mid 1800s.178 The expedition
had not only arrived at the perfect timing, seeing
that Cameahwait’s band were in desperate need of
arms, but are lucky that the Shoshone were a
relatively peaceful tribe.
Prior to the introduction of horses, the
Shoshone had been nomads wandering the very
inhospitable arid landscape of the Great Basin and
Rocky Mountains. Horses dramatically changed the
culture and societies of Northern Shoshones,
allowing them to become more permanent
communities and hunt the large game of the
northern plains.179 Lewis and Clark arrived in a time
of transition of the Northern Shoshones, they were
able to exploit their need for trade goods and
weapons as bargaining tools for their assistance.
But as confident as Lewis was, rumors began
to spread around the camp fueled by the weapons
the white men carried, that they were assisting the
Blackfeet in an ambush. 180 This was a very
conceivable suspicion by the Shoshones, a group of
well-armed white strangers appear in their camp
and attempt to convince them to bring horses and
travel some 30 odd miles away to meet another
white man who would give more gifts.
To subdue the suspicions Lewis resorted to
lying to Cameahwait. Playing off the knowledge of
the previous raids from other tribes, Lewis claimed
that he had already induced the Hidatsas into
ending their raids against the Shoshone if
Cameahwait agreed to assist the expedition with
the passage across the Divide. Upon their safe
return to the East, Lewis claimed that he would send
traders with weapons and goods to help the
Shoshone.181 This may have convinced the chief,
but the warriors remained suspicious. This lead
Lewis to directly challenged the bravery of the
Shoshone warriors by stating “I still hope that there
178 Crum, 21.
179 Julian Steward. “Changes in Shoshonean Indian Culture.”
Scientific Monthly 49, No. 6 (Dec., 1939): 527.
were some among them not afraid to die”.182 How
Lewis was able to convey all of these messages
through Drouillard is beyond belief, but it was
extremely risky none the less. To show his bravery,
Cameahwait continued forth and rallied his warriors
behind him and escorted the party back to the
Jefferson to their rendezvous with Clark. Lewis was
taking a huge gamble. If Clark was delayed in forging
up the Jefferson, which was very possible, and did
not meet Lewis and the Shoshone, Cameahwait
would have most certainly killed them and retreat
back into the mountains.183
But Clark was able to make his way up the
Jefferson and meet Lewis and the Shoshones near
the area of the present day Clark Reservoir. After
reuniting, the expedition followed Cameahwait to
his camp on the Lemhi River in Idaho, and stayed
there for 17 days. While in the camp, Lewis and
Clark learned the geography of the region from their
hosts. But because of the bad geographic
information they had received from the natives at
Fort Mandan, Clark was unwilling to accept any
native geography without testing it first.184 Clark
proceeded several miles down the Salmon River
even though he was informed of its impassibility,
realizing the information was correct, he returned
to camp.
Themes: Luck, Biases, Perceived Knowledge, Resource
Allocation
WHO WAS SAKAKAWEA?
The expeditions search and interactions with
the Lemhi Shoshone is a very intriguing aspect of the
Story of Lewis and Clark, but so is the topic of
Sakakawea. Although most scholarship today
suggests that Sakakawea was Shoshone and sister of
Chief Cameahwait. However, there has been recent
scholarly work that refutes the notion that
Sakakawea was actually Shoshone. Honestly, the
evidence is not very strong for either argument. The
only real source that supports her being Shoshone is
what her husband, Charbonneau told Lewis and
181 Ambrose, 273.
183 Ambrose, 276.
184 Ambrose, 279.

P a g e | 53
Clark in North Dakota and her use of the term
“brother.” Supposedly, upon her reunion with
Cameahwait she called him “brother” and warm
fully embraced him.185 But according to James
Fenelon and Mary Defender- Wilson, Sakakawea
was Hidatsa and the term “brother” was a common
native term used as a form of respect when entering
into a foreign territory and meeting other tribes.186
If this conclusion is correct, it does explain why
Lewis and Clark did not seek Sakakawea’s help in
searching for the Shoshones. And if the story was
correct that she was abducted from the three forks
area five years prior to the expedition, why did she
not tell the expedition that the Jefferson was not
navigable or that the Shoshone were in the
mountains not near the rivers?
Her knowledge of the area would have been
portrayed much the same way as it appeared in the
journals if she was Hidatsa rather than Shoshone.
Hidatsa tribes had been in regular diplomatic
relations with various bands across the northern
plains and well into central and western Montana
for years.187 It is very difficult to make a claim
against Sakakawea’s tribal background, since the
only documentation, other than oral traditions
appear exclusively in journals of Lewis and Clark.
What is generally accepted as fact, regarding
Sakakawea, may in fact be incorrect. Both the
journal entries of Lewis and Clark only refer to the
situation in a single sentence each, that Sakakawea
appeared to be the sister of chief Cameahwait.188
The story of Sakakawea breaking into tears and
hugging Cameahwait appears only in the overly
generalized narrative published by Nicolas Biddle in
1814 and may not be an accurate depiction. 189
Another possible journal entry that supports this
claim can be seen in Lewis’s entry in his initial search
for the Shoshone near Three Forks, where he took
the “two interpreters Drewyer and Sharbono.”190
Even Lewis did not see Sakakawea as an interpreter.
Why take her husband who didn’t speak Shoshone
185 Hawke, 207.
186 James Fenelon and Mary Louise Defender-Wilson, “Voyage of
Domination, “Purchase” as Conquest, Sakakawea for Savagery:
Distorted Icons from Misrepresentations of the Lewis and Clark
Expedition.” Wicazo Sa Review 19, no. 1 (2004): 92.
and Drewyer who could only sign? Whichever
standpoint one takes on Sakakawea, the captains
either failed to implement one of the best resources
they had at their disposal, or were lucky that the
great suspicions growing amongst the Shoshones
didn’t lead to their demise. Sakakawea’s
contributions to the expedition are immeasurable,
but the story becomes even more unbelievable if
she was in fact not Shoshone.
Themes: Resource Allocation, Biases
HORSES
The expedition needed horses to cross the
mountains, if they did not obtain any, it is safe to
assume that the expedition would have been killed
in the mountains or forced to take other drastic and
possibly fatal measures.
The entire success of the new territory,
control of the continent and the country hinged
on these men finding horses at the end of the
Missouri.
Conceptualize this scenario for a minute. A
tribe that no white person had ever encountered
and was somewhere at the base of the Rocky
Mountains, would be willing trade horses to white
strangers. That was the plan. The entire plan. It is
not like there were other alternatives to consider for
Lewis and Clark, but this is an incredibly risky plan.
If it had failed, they may have had to return East,
finding themselves in the barren wasteland of
Eastern Montana and winter sets in. But luckily for
the fate of this country, they were able to trade for
horses. All in all 29 horses were obtained by the
Corps from the Shoshone and 11 more from the
Flatheads to replace some of the worn out or sick.191
One could say that Lewis over planned on
the supply and trade goods, but they were used to
barter much needed support from the various
native tribes, most importantly horses. Without
horses, they would not have been able to cross the
187 James Fenelon and Mary Louise Defender-Wilson, 92.
188 See Lewis’ entry in Moulton, “Journals”, 109 and Clarks’, 114
189 See DeVoto, “Journals”, 202.
191 Collins, 32.
8-10

P a g e | 54
mountains or carry enough supplies. These supplies
allowed them to survive the mountains, just barely,
but also were needed to barter for critical support
from the Nez Perce when they arrived on the other
side of the Continental Divide. Upon leaving the Nez
Perce, the expedition had 66 horses, two for each
member.192
On the return trip, Lewis broke off from Clark
to explore the upper Missouri and make contact
with the Blackfoot tribe as Clark would explore the
Yellowstone and reconvene near the North Dakota,
Montana border. Lewis, Drouillard and the Field
brothers found themselves in a deadly skirmish with
three Blackfoot teenagers who attempted to steal
their guns and horses. Two were killed by the
expedition, and the men fled as fast as they could on
horseback. Covering nearly 120 miles in 24 hours to
meet up with the others at the mouth of the Marias
River.193 It is safe to assume that if they had not had
horses, or they were stolen, Lewis’ group would
have been killed by a Blackfoot raiding party. This
would have left Clark alone, waiting for Lewis at the
Mouth of the Yellowstone River. It is difficult to
assume what decisions he would have made then as
Clark would be acting on pure emotion rather than
logic. It could be argued that Clark may have turned
the expedition around and searched for Lewis,
suffering the same fate at the hands of the
Blackfeet.
Themes: Luck, Resource Allocation, Biases, Knowledge
BITTERROOTS
Cameahwait eventually offered a guide to the
expedition and traded horses in response to Lewis’s
promise of future trade goods. The expedition set
out with their guide Old Toby, north towards an old
Indian trail over the Bitterroots Mountains
commonly used by the Nez Perce. Once again the
expedition had luck on their side when they
encountered the Flathead village on September 4th.
The flatheads maintained very close ties with the
Lemhi Shoshones. They would shortly join
Cameahwait’s tribe on the eastern plains near Three
192 Collins, 33.
193 Collins, 33.
Forks for their
buffalo hunt. But
the Flatheads were
also under constant
raids and attacks
from the north as
well, and on high
alert. Having Old
Toby with them
alleviated much of
the worries that the
Flathead had
against the strange
white men.194 But
no one spoke Salish, the official language of the
Flatheads, neither Sakakawea nor Old Toby.
As luck would have it, again, among the
flatheads was a Shoshone boy who had been
rescued from a northern raiding party that could
speak both Salish and Shoshone.195 Through the
boy, the party was able to explain their intentions,
gather more geographic information and trade for
healthy horses. The Shoshone’s sensed the
desperation of Lewis and Clark and were able to
pawn off their unhealthy and old horses on the
expeditions for premium trade prices. If not for the
Shoshone boy, the expedition may have been met
with strong resistance or not have been able to
obtain any horses, forcing them to enter the
treacherous Bitterroot pass with weak and sick
Shoshone horses.
After leaving the Flathead village, the
expedition was about to enter the hardest and most
extreme challenge of their whole journey, the Loho
trail through the Bitterroots and onto the Columbia
River Basin (picture 13). “From the beginning the
Loho trail proved to be a cruel and unforgiving
passage”.196 The party left the Shoshone camp on
the Salmon River on September 1st with their guide
Old Toby, north to a trail used by the Nez Perce to
cross the mountains which was the safest and most
logical route. The expedition spent more than a
9-10
13

P a g e | 55
month in the Bitterroots. The issue of luck in this
segment of the expedition was simple, surviving the
elements. The party was short on rations, this
undermined “the strength and to some extent the
moral of the main party”197 and were forced to
survive off of horse meat and crows.198 The party
had just gone through hell trudging up the Jefferson,
now they were stuck in the mountains struggling to
survive. They were bombarded by cold, snow and
ice. Horses fell off cliffs, the men were “nearing the
limits of physical endurance”.199 Toby had led the
expedition off the main track, and had to make a
treacherous trek back up a dangerously steep
mountain pass where many members almost fell to
their deaths on the slippery cliffs. When the group
emerged from the Bitterroots onto the Columbia
plain and into a Nez Perce camp on October 6th, the
pride amongst the party members must have been
amazing.
Themes: Luck, Knowledge
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION:
To live for mankind, as I have
heretofore lived for myself
-Meriwether Lewis August 18, 1806
CONCLUDING REMARKS
The story of the Corps of Discovery defines
an era and a country. The events, expansion and
interactions that followed the expedition were
forever shaped by the safe return of Lewis and Clark
to the east. It is irresponsible to view the expedition
within the generalized terms that it is commonly
portrayed. The story is much deeper, full of biases,
complexities and abnormal events. Hopefully this
work has produced a better understanding of the
complexity that the Corps faced within themselves
and Western Montana. Montana directly
challenged the party mentally and physically,
culminating in one epic struggle against leadership
deficiencies, the elements and the odds.
Lewis and Clark were heroic and innovative
leaders, but one must look beyond the historical
sphere and critique their leadership skills with in the
managerial science discipline in order to properly
understand their faults. Cultural background,
personality, leadership skills, judgment biases,
perceived knowledge vs. actual knowledge,
groupthink and escalations of commitment did not
lead to any major accidents, conflicts or deaths, but
they certainly, and in all probability should have.
The topography, biology and climate of
Western Montana were extreme challenges. The
complexity of changing landscapes, wildlife and
weather is an integral part of understanding what
the expedition actually experienced, it was more
than just the Rockies. The entire story is one that
defies the odds, no more prevalent than what was
experienced in the Rockies of Montana and Idaho.
The interactions with Western Montana,
especially with the Shoshone are incredibly
intriguing. It is difficult to understand why current
and past scholarship places little emphasis on this
region and the native interactions. As displayed
throughout this work, Montana and Idaho were
massive obstacle for the expedition where many
things could have gone array, forever losing
Meriwether Lewis, William Clark and their party into
the annuals of a forgotten American past.

P a g e | 56
BIBLIOGRAPHY
PRIMARY SOURCES:
Clauswitz, Carl Von. “On War.” 1832.
DeVoto, Bernard. 1997. The Journals of Lewis and Clark. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co..
Holmberg, James. 2002. Dear Brother: Letters of William Clark to Jonathan Clark.
New Haven: Yale University Press.
Moulton, Gary. 2003. The Lewis and Clark Journals: An American Epic of Discovery.
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
SECONDARY SOURCES (BOOKS):
Allen, John. 1975. Passage Through the Garden: Lewis and Clark and the Image of the
American Northwest. Urbana, University of Illinois Press.
Ambrose, Stephen. 1996. Undaunted Courage: Meriwether Lewis, Thomas Jefferson
and the Opening of the American West. New York : Simon & Schuster
Barth, Gunther. 1998. The Lewis and Clark Expedition: Selections from the Journals
Arranged by Topic. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins.
Bruckner, Martin. 2006. The Geographic Revolution in Early America: Maps,
Literacy, and National Identity. Chapel Hill : Published for the Omohundro Institute of Early American
History and Culture by University of North Carolina Press.
Charles, Collins Jr. “The Corps of Discover: Staff Ride Handbook for the Lewis and Clark Expedition.” Combat
Studies Institute (2003).
Crum, Steven J. 1994. The Road on Which We Came: A History of the Western Shoshone. Salt
Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Cutright, Paul Russell. 1969. Lewis and Clark: Pioneering Naturalists. Chicago: University
of Illinois Press.
Hawke, David Freeman. 1980. Those Tremendous Mountains: The story of the Lewis
and Clark Expedition. New York: Norton.
Ronda, James. 2001. Finding the West: Explorations with Lewis and Clark.
Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press .
Ronda, James. 1984. Lewis and Clark among the Indians. Lincoln : University of
Nebraska Press.
Uldrich, Jack. 2004. Into the Unknown: Leadership lessons from Lewis and
Clark’s Daring Westward Adventure. New York : AMACOM.
Vecchio, Robert P. 2006. Organizational Behavior: Core Concepts. Mason: Thomson
South-Western.
SECONDARY SOURCES (ARTICLES):
Alkahtani, Ali, Abu-Harad, Ismael, Sulaiman, Mohamed, and Nukbin, Davoud. “The Impact of personality and
Leadership Styles on Leading Change Capability of Malaysian Managers.” Australian Journal of Business
Management and Research 1, no. 2 (May 2011): 70-102
Allen, John. 1972. “An Analysis of the Exploratory Process: The Lewis and Clark
Expedition of 1804-1806.” Geographical Review 62: 13-39.
Allen, John. 1971. “Geographic Knowledge & American Images of the Louisiana
Territory.” The Western Historical Quarterly 2, No. 2: 151-170.

P a g e | 57
Allen, John. 2003. “The Lewis and Clark Journals: An American Epic of Discovery by Gary E.
Moulton.” Journal of the Early Republic 21, No. 3: 477-479.
Armour, Phillip. “The Business of Software: How we Build Things.” Communications of the ACM 56, Vol. 1 (Jan
2013): 32-33
Borchardt, John. “An Examination of Cognitive Biases that Cause us to Make Poor Decisions.” Contract
Management (June 2010):54-61
Brockner, Joel. “The Escalation of Commitment to a Failing Course of Action: Toward Theoretical Progress.”
Academy of Management Review 17, Vol. 1 (1992) 39-61
Brownie, Douglas and Spender, Jason. “Managerial Judgment in Strategic Marketing: Some Preliminary
Thoughts.” Management Decision 33, Vol. 6 (1995): 39-50
Chapman, Judith. “Anxiety and Defective Decision Making: An Elaboration of the Groupthink Model.”
Management Decisions 44, Vol. 10 (2006): 1391-1404.
Chulkov, Dmitriy. “Rational Escalation: The Real Option Perspective.” Journal of Business & Economic Research
5, Vol. 12 (Dec 2007): 47-60
Cook-Lynn, Elizabeth. 2004. “The Lewis and Clark Story: The captive Narrative and the
Pitfalls of Indian History.” Wicazo Sa Review 19, No. 1:21-33.
DeVoto, Bernard. 1955. “An Inference regarding the Expedition of Lewis and Clark.”
Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 99: 185-194.
Fenelon, James and Mary louise Defender-Wilson. 2004. “Voyage of Domination, “Purchase” as Conquest,
Sakakawea for Savagery: Distorted Icons from Misrepresentations of the Lewis and Clark Expedition.”
Wicazo Sa Review, 19, No. 1: 85-104.
Ford, David and Sterman, John. “Overcoming the 90% Syndrome: Iteration Management in Concurrent
Development Projects.”
Gerosa, Sergio. “Earned Value Management: How to Avoid the 90 Percent Complete Syndrome.” (2001)
Glover, Steven and Prawitt, Douglas. “Enhancing Board Oversight: Avoiding Judgment Traps and Biases.”
Committee of Sponsoring Organization of the Tread way Commission (March 2012): 1-20
Guinness, Ralph. 1933. “The Purpose of the Lewis and Clark Expedition.” The
Mississippi Valley Historical Review 20: 90-100.
House, Robert. “Path-Goal Theory of Leadership: Lessons, Legacy and A Reformulated Theory.” Leadership
Quarterly 7, Vol. 3 (1996): 323-352
Hajkowicz, Stefan. “For the Greater Good? A Test for Strategic Bias in Group Environment Decisions.” Group
Decis Negot 21 (2012): 331-344
Huning, Tobias, and Thomson, Neal. “Escalation of Commitment: An Attribution Theory Perspective.”
Proceeding of the Academy of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict 16, Vol. 1 (2011):
13-18
Hunning, Tobias and Thomson, Neal. ”The Impact of performance Attributions on Escalation of Commitment.”
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict. 17, Vol. 2 (2013):151-158
Jackson, Donald. 1980. “Jefferson, Meriwether Lewis, and the Reduction of the
United States Army.” Proceeding of the American Philosophical Society 124: 91-96.
Keil, Mark, Dpledge, Gordon and Rai Arun. “Escalation: The Role of Problem Recognition and Cognitive Bias.”
Decision Sciences 38, Vol. 3 (Aug. 2007): 391-421.
Keil, Mark, Tan, Bernard, Wei, Kwok-Kee, Saarinen, Timo, Tunnainen, Virpi, and Wassenaar, Arjen. “A Cross-
Cultural Study on Escalation of Commitment Behavior in Software Projects.” MIS Quarterly 24, Vol. 2
(June 2000): 299-325
Knight Andre, Steynberg, Gary and Hanges, Paul. “Path Goal Anaysis” Encyclopedia of Leadership (Feb 2011).
1164-1169

P a g e | 58
Ku, Gillian. “Learning to De-escalate: The Effects of Regret in Escalation of Commitment.” Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes 105 (2008): 221-232
Martin, Robin. “PathGoal Theory of Leadership.” Encyclopedia of Group Processes and Intergroup Relations
(Jan 2012): 636-637
Neck, Christopher. “Letterman or Leno: A Groupthink Analysis of Successive Decision Made by the National
Broadcasting Company.” Journal of Managerial Psychology 11, Vol. 8 (1993)
Neck, Christopher and Moorhead, Gregory. “Groupthink Remolded: The Importance of Leadership, Time
Pressure and Methodical Decision-Making Procedures.” Human Relations 48, Vol. 5 (May 1995): 537-
557
Oliver, John and Srivastava, Sanjay. “The Big-Five Trait Taxonomy: History, Measurement, and Theoretical
Perspectives.” (March 2009): 1-71
Pan, Shan, Pan, Gary, Newman, Michael, and Flynn, Donal. “Escalation and De-Escalation of Commitment to
Information Systems Projects: Insights from a Project Evaluation Model.” European Journal of
Operational Research 173 (2006): 1139-1160
Rizzi, J.V. “Behavioral Bias: The Hidden Risk in Risk Management.” Commercial Lending Review 18, Vol. 6 (Nov
2003): 2-8
Ronda, James. 2002. “Counting Cats in Zanzibar, or, Lewis and Clark Reconsidered.”
The Western Historical Quarterly 33: 4-18.
Rutledge, Robert. “Escalation of Commitment in Groups and the Moderating Effects of Information Framing.”
Journal of Applied Business Research 11, Vol. 2 (Spring 1995): 17-23
Sims, Ronald. “Linking Groupthink to Unethical Behavior in Organizations.” Journal of Business Ethics 11, Vol. 9
(Sept. 1992) 651-662
Sagie, Abraham and Koslowsky, Meni. “Organizational Attitudes and Behaviors as a Functional Participation in
Strategic and Tactical Change Decisions: An Application of Path-goal Theory.” Journal of Organizational
Behavior 15, Vol. 1 (Jan, 1994): 37-47
Steward, Julian H. “Changes in Shoshonean Indian Culture.” Scientific Monthly 49, No. 6 (Dec.,
1939: 524-537.
Thomas, P. D.. 1996. “Thomas Jefferson, Meriwether Lewis, the Corps of Discovery
and the Investigation of Western Fauna.” Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science 99: 69-85.
Tuff, Dianne and Johnson, Murdoch. “Lessons in Management from Lewis and Clark.” The News UpFront.
Warrick, D. D. “Leadership Styles and their Consequences.” Journal of Experiential Learning and Simulation 3,
no. 4 (1981) 155-172
White, Randall and Shullman, Sandra. “Ambiguity Leadership: It’s OK to be Uncertain.” Chief Learning Officer
(April 2010): 18-22
PRESENTATION:
Anderson, Marian. “Path-Goal Theory Approach.” University of Arkansas (Presented 2013)
WEBSITES:
PBS. “Meriwether Lewis, New Perspectives on the West”. Accessed April, 2014.
http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/people/i_r/lewis.htm
University of Virginia. “Meriwether Lewis.” Accessed April, 2014.
http://www2.vcdh.virginia.edu/lewisandclark/biddle/biographies_html/lewis.html
University of Virginia. “William Clark.” Accessed April, 2014.
http://www2.vcdh.virginia.edu/lewisandclark/biddle/biographies_html/lewis.html

P a g e | 59
Library of Congress. “Jefferson’s Letter to Meriwether Lewis.” Accessed April, 2014.
http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/journey/jefferson-transcript.html.
PBS. “William Clark, New Perspectives on the West”. Accessed April, 2014.
http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/people/i_r/lewis.htm
Gack, Gary. “Avoiding the 90 Percentage Syndrome: Why Software Project Status Reports are Often Wrong
(and What you Can Do About it).” Accessed April, 2014.
http://www.complianceonline.com/ecommerce/control/trainingFocus/~product_id=702107/~Avoidin
g__90_Percentage_Syndrome:_Why_Stware
National Geographic. “Reliving Lewis and Clark: At A Fork in the Missouri River.” Accessed April, 2014.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/07/0713_050713_lewisclark11_2.html
Tronshaw, Oubria. “How to minimize Groupthink.” Accessed April, 2014.
http://www.ehow.com/how_12038603_minimize-groupthink.html
MAPS AND IMAGES:
Page 2. Lewis and Clark Portraits. PBS
http://www.pbs.org/lewisandclark/ (Accessed Apri, 2014).
Page 4. Wells, Matthew. “Onward to the Pacific” (Map). Created 2014.
Page 12. Lewis Portrait. PBS
Page 13. Clark Portrait. PBS
Page 13. Big 5 Personality Chart. Created by Matthew Wells, Adopted from Vecchio 67. Created 2014.
Page 14. Personality Rating. Created by Matthew Wells, 2014.
Page 14. Personality Rating - Lewis. Created by Matthew Wells, 2014.
Page 14. Personality Rating - Clark. Created by Matthew Wells, 2014.
Page 18. Leadership Styles. Created by Matthew Wells, Adopted from Warrick 160. Created 2014.
Page 20. Organizational Chart of the Expedition. Created by Matthew Wells, 2014.
Page 21. Camp Dubois. PBS
http://www.pbs.org/lewisandclark/ (Accessed April, 2014).
Page 22. Lewis and Clark as Leaders. Mort Kunstler.
https://www.mortkunstler.com/product_images/113_2.jpg (Accessed Apri, 2014).
Page 24. Leadership Skills – Path Goal Theory. Created by Matthew Wells, 2014.
Page 25. Subordinate Maturity Levels. Created by Matthew Wells, Adopted from Vecchio 163. Created 2014.
Page 28. Decision Making Process. Created by Matthew Wells, Adopted from Vecchio 184. Created 2014.
Page 30. Columbia River Basin (Image). COLUMBIA. Available from: Google Images.
http://www.jonesandjones.com/images/regions/columbia_river_gorge/1_ColumbiaRiverGorgeStudy.jpg
(Accessed 28 May 2009).
Page 30. Lemhi Mountains (Image). LEMHI PASS. Available from: Webshots.
http://image02.webshots.com/2/3/74/65/84237465xAzYTI_fs.jpg (Accessed 28 May 2009).
Page 34. Escalation in Vietnam. BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/asia_pac/05/vietnam_war/html/us_withdrawal.stm (Accessed
April 2014).
Page 37. Escalation of Commitment in the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Created by Matthew Wells, 2014.
Page 38. Wells, Matthew. "Mountain Forest" (Image). 2007.
Page 38. Wells, Matthew. “Montana Desert” (Image). 2007.

P a g e | 60
Page 39. Great Falls (Image). Great Falls. Available from: Google Images.
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/10006473.jpg (Accessed 30 May 2009).
Page 40. Zones of Knowledge, Created by Matthew Wells, Adopted from Allen. Created 2014.
Page 42. Clarks First Map of the West, Allen, John. 1972. “An Analysis of the Exploratory Process: The Lewis
and Clark Expedition of 1804-1806.” Geographical Review 62: 20.
Page 43. Missouri River (Image). The Mighty Mo. Available from: Google Images.
http://www.panoramio.com//photo/11072693 (Accessed 30 May 2009).
Page 43. Wells, Matthew. “Big Hole” (Image). 2007.
Page 44. Map 1. “Twin Bridges.” Crated by Matthew Wells, 2014.
Page 44. Lemhi Pass Panorama.
http://bittsandbytes.net/JUNE_2010/06.11.10.html (Accessed April, 2014).
Page 45. Clarks Final Map of the West. William Clark, 1815.
Page 46. Western Montana and Idaho. Created by Matthew Wells, 2014
Page 47. Map 2, Missouri and Marias River. GoogleMaps, Accessed 2014.
Page 47. Bigfoot Territory.
http://predatorhaven.blogspot.com/2010/04/blackfoot-nation.html (Accessed April, 2014).
Page 48. Wells, Matthew. “Arid Montana” (Image). 2007.
Page 48. Cottonwood Axels.
http://franceshunter.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/meriwether-lewiss-iron-boat/ (Accessed April, 2014).
Page 49. Upper Jefferson (Image). Jefferson River. Available from: Wikipedia.
http://wpcontent.answers.com/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/JeffersonRiverNearParrotCastle.jpg/
300px-JeffersonRiverNearParrotCastle.jpg (Accessed 30 May 2009).
Page 49. Lower Jefferson (Image). Beaverhead River. Available from: NPS.
http://www.nps.gov/jeff/planyourvisit/images/L&C20.jpg (Accessed 30 May 2009).
Page 49. Bitterroots (Image). Bitterroots. Available from: Panoramio.
http://www.panoramio.com//photo/3939801 (Accessed 30 May 2009).

Uncharted Leadership 1.0

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Similar to Uncharted Leadership 1.0

Uncharted Leadership 1.0