Introduction
In the study of leadership, films provide a valuable lens through which to examine real-world applications of theoretical concepts. This essay analyses the 2019 film Ford v Ferrari (Mangold, 2019), directed by James Mangold, which depicts the true story of American car designer Carroll Shelby and British driver Ken Miles as they collaborate with the Ford Motor Company to build a race car capable of defeating Ferrari at the 1966 24 Hours of Le Mans. Drawing from my perspective as a student of leadership studies, I will connect the film’s narrative to key theories and concepts from the course, including those from Northouse’s foundational text on leadership and an entry from The SAGE Encyclopedia of Leadership Studies. The purpose is to demonstrate how leadership manifests in high-stakes environments, such as corporate competition and team dynamics. Specifically, I will explore transformational leadership, situational leadership, and team leadership, highlighting their relevance, limitations, and interplay in the film. By doing so, this analysis not only reflects my learning but also underscores the practical implications of these theories in motivating teams and achieving innovation under pressure. The essay argues that effective leadership in Ford v Ferrari blends inspirational vision with adaptive strategies, though it is not without challenges posed by organisational hierarchies.
Transformational Leadership: Inspiring Change and Vision in Carroll Shelby
One of the most prominent leadership theories illustrated in Ford v Ferrari is transformational leadership, which emphasises inspiring followers to transcend their self-interests for the sake of the group or organisation (Northouse, 2022). In the film, Carroll Shelby, played by Matt Damon, embodies this approach as he takes on the daunting task of designing and building the Ford GT40 to challenge Ferrari’s dominance. Shelby’s leadership is transformational in that he articulates a compelling vision—defeating the seemingly invincible Ferrari at Le Mans—which motivates his team despite overwhelming odds. For instance, when Henry Ford II initially dismisses the project as impractical, Shelby uses charisma and intellectual stimulation to reframe the challenge, arguing that innovation requires bold risks. This aligns with Northouse’s (2022) description of transformational leaders as those who foster creativity and challenge the status quo, often by idealising influence and providing individualised consideration.
From my perspective, Shelby’s interactions with Ken Miles, portrayed by Christian Bale, further exemplify this theory. Miles is depicted as a talented but temperamental driver, resistant to corporate bureaucracy. Shelby recognises Miles’ potential and tailors his approach, offering personalised encouragement and autonomy, which Northouse (2022) identifies as key to building follower commitment. Indeed, Shelby’s pep talks, such as when he convinces Miles to join the project by appealing to his passion for racing, demonstrate inspirational motivation—a core component of transformational leadership. However, the theory’s limitations become apparent in the film; Northouse (2022) notes that transformational leadership can sometimes overlook practical constraints, and this is evident when Shelby’s visionary zeal clashes with Ford’s executive interference, leading to conflicts that nearly derail the project.
Supporting this analysis, an entry from The SAGE Encyclopedia of Leadership Studies on transformational leadership elaborates that such leaders often emerge in crises, using their vision to unite diverse stakeholders (Goethals et al., 2023). In Ford v Ferrari, the crisis is Ford’s damaged prestige after a failed buyout of Ferrari, and Shelby’s role fits this mould by rallying engineers, drivers, and executives around a shared goal. Arguably, this approach enhances team morale, but it also risks burnout, as seen in Miles’ physical and emotional exhaustion during testing. Overall, Shelby’s transformational style drives the narrative’s success, illustrating how leadership can transform organisational culture from rigid to innovative, though it requires balancing inspiration with realism.
Situational Leadership: Adapting Styles to Team Needs and Challenges
Situational leadership theory, as outlined by Northouse (2022), posits that effective leaders must adapt their style based on the followers’ competence and commitment levels, ranging from directing to delegating. In Ford v Ferrari, this is vividly demonstrated through the contrasting leadership approaches of Shelby and the Ford executives, particularly Lee Iacocca and Henry Ford II. Shelby employs a situational approach when managing his team; for example, with novice engineers new to high-performance racing, he adopts a coaching style, providing clear guidance and support to build their skills. This is evident in scenes where Shelby oversees the GT40’s development, offering hands-on feedback during prototypes’ failures, which Northouse (2022) would classify as a supporting behaviour for moderately competent but committed followers.
I feel that Ken Miles serves as a prime example of situational leadership’s applicability. Initially, Miles displays high competence but low commitment due to his disdain for corporate politics, prompting Shelby to use a participating style—sharing decision-making to boost engagement. As Miles’ commitment grows, Shelby shifts to delegating, trusting him to handle critical races independently. This adaptability contrasts sharply with the Ford executives’ more rigid, directive style, which Northouse (2022) critiques as less effective in dynamic environments. For instance, when Ford II imposes last-minute changes during Le Mans, it disrupts the team’s rhythm, highlighting situational leadership’s limitation: it assumes leaders have the flexibility to adapt, which may not always be feasible in hierarchical organisations.
Furthermore, the SAGE Encyclopedia entry on adaptive leadership complements this by emphasising the need for leaders to navigate complex, changing contexts (Goethals et al., 2023). In the film, Shelby adapts not only to team dynamics but also to external pressures like corporate deadlines and rival strategies from Ferrari. Typically, this involves diagnosing situations and mobilising people accordingly, as Shelby does by mediating between Miles’ individualism and Ford’s collectivist demands. However, the theory’s broad applicability can sometimes make it vague; Northouse (2022) acknowledges that it lacks empirical precision, which resonates with the film’s portrayal where situational misjudgements, such as underestimating executive interference, lead to near-disasters. Therefore, situational leadership in Ford v Ferrari underscores the importance of flexibility, yet it also reveals how external constraints can limit a leader’s options, prompting a more nuanced application in practice.
Team Leadership: Fostering Collaboration and Overcoming Obstacles
Team leadership, another key concept from Northouse (2022), focuses on how leaders facilitate group processes to achieve shared goals, often through monitoring internal dynamics and external environments. In Ford v Ferrari, Shelby’s role as team leader is central, as he assembles and guides a diverse group including engineers, mechanics, and drivers to overcome technical and interpersonal challenges. Northouse (2022) describes effective team leadership as involving clear communication, conflict resolution, and performance monitoring, all of which Shelby demonstrates. For example, during the grueling car development phase, Shelby addresses team conflicts—such as Miles’ clashes with Ford representatives—by fostering a sense of unity and purpose, ensuring the group’s focus remains on innovation.
From my learning in the course, this connects to the relational aspects of leadership, where building trust is paramount. Shelby’s ability to mediate between Miles’ expertise and the team’s needs exemplifies Northouse’s (2022) emphasis on internal actions like sense-giving and facilitation. Moreover, the film highlights external actions, such as Shelby negotiating resources from Ford executives, which Northouse (2022) identifies as crucial for team sustainability. I believe this portrayal is particularly insightful, as it shows team leadership’s role in high-pressure settings; however, limitations arise when individual egos, like Miles’ stubbornness, threaten cohesion, requiring Shelby to intervene decisively.
Drawing from The SAGE Encyclopedia of Leadership Studies, the entry on team leadership stresses the importance of shared leadership in complex projects, where no single leader holds all authority (Goethals et al., 2023). In Ford v Ferrari, this is seen in the collaborative efforts between Shelby and Miles, where leadership is distributed based on expertise—Shelby handles strategy, while Miles provides on-track insights. Generally, this enhances problem-solving, as evidenced by their iterative improvements to the GT40. Yet, the encyclopedia notes potential pitfalls, such as role ambiguity, which manifests in the film through Ford’s interference, diluting the team’s autonomy. By evaluating these elements, the film illustrates team leadership’s strengths in promoting collective efficacy, but also its vulnerabilities in bureaucratic contexts, encouraging leaders to prioritise clear boundaries and empowerment.
Conclusion
In summary, Ford v Ferrari (Mangold, 2019) serves as a compelling case study for leadership theories, with Carroll Shelby’s transformational vision inspiring innovation, his situational adaptability addressing team needs, and his team leadership fostering collaboration amidst challenges. These concepts, drawn from Northouse (2022) and Goethals et al. (2023), highlight how effective leadership drives success in competitive environments, though limitations such as organisational hierarchies underscore the need for balance. From my perspective, this analysis reinforces the course material’s relevance, showing that leadership is not static but evolves with context. The implications extend beyond the film, suggesting that in real-world settings—like business or sports—leaders must integrate multiple approaches to navigate complexity and achieve breakthroughs. Ultimately, Ford v Ferrari reminds us that while theories provide frameworks, their true value lies in thoughtful application, adapting to human dynamics and unforeseen obstacles.
References
- Goethals, G.R., Sorenson, G.J. and Burns, J.M. (eds.) (2023) The SAGE Encyclopedia of Leadership Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
- Mangold, J. (dir.) (2019) Ford v Ferrari [Film]. Los Angeles, CA: 20th Century Fox.
- Northouse, P.G. (2022) Leadership: Theory and Practice. 10th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
(Words: 1,612 including references)
