“Glory” is a film that clearly exemplifies how leadership works in the rigid and challenging environment

of the army in the context of a war, in this case shortly before the end of the American Civil War, a time
when rigid structures of command existed (as they still do today in military contexts) but where officers
nonetheless had to maintain a degree of “coherence” between their behavior and the cause they were
fighting for in the first place. Although Colonel Shaw is portrayed as a rather unexperienced and
sometimes doubtful leader, his decisions and actions are mostly successful, even against immense
obstacles like the lack of confidence from his men, the corruption of other officials and the usual
prejudices against black people.

An early scene in the film depicts Captain Shaw being framed as a "survivor" of Antietam, which is
presented as the argument for being an ideal candidate for the rank of Colonel. And though this decision
could end up well (and it mostly did), this is clearly a framing trap.

Of course, Colonel Shaw’s commitment towards his troop’s success is not shared by most of the other
high-ranking officials around him. When Major Forbes confronts Shaw on his commitment in training his
men for combat, even when they probably wouldn’t be involved in battle, he simply stands his ground
and upholds his previous orders, an example of advocacy, which is presumably the most common
method to make decisions in the military.

Combat training is, of course, a brutal activity, continually building strength through physical torture,
humiliation, yelling, cursing and insulting. When Shaw asks Sgt. Mulcahy on the fairness of his harsh
training methods, he is testing his assumptions on the necessity and goals of Mulcahy’s actions.

Being a “white” authority among “free black men”, Colonel Shaw is aware of some level of distrust that
his men have for him, a situation that he knows he must face and resolve, or else face disloyalty and
disbandment of his regiment. When Shaw asks Rawlins for help in confiding in him what his men think
and their concerns, he is using the inquiry

Although the story doesn’t develop in the context of the coexistence of slaves and masters on, say, a
plantation, slavery creates a social environment conductive to status quo traps, even well beyond the
Deep South, that is, in the “proper” manners of high-ranking officers of the Union. For example, when
54th soldiers are denied proper footwear, this clearly stems from a status quo trap because it is
intended to "maintain a state of affairs" even when they have no importance to training or combat.

A crucial scene is the payday performance, because it is the first time when we clearly see Colonel Shaw
earning the loyalty of his men with a bold move. When Federal government decrees paying black
soldiers less, this is perceived as unfair and the soldiers of the 54th tear their paychecks. When Colonel
Shaw decides to back his soldiers’ protests (by tearing his own paycheck), they perceive this as a sign of
support from their commander, and they show him their respect and loyalty. This is an example of
perceived fairness.

Shaw is faced with another dimension of how complicated decisions can be for a commander when
Montgomery, a higher-ranking officer, orders his men to raid and pillage Darien. As Montgomery
observes how eagerly his troop follow his instructions, he sees this as evidence confirming his views on
the behavior of "black people". When Montgomery orders Shaw on commanding his men on plundering
and looting Darien in the same way, Shaw confronts him by exposing his dissent based on ethical
grounds and discusses his legal obligation to comply with such a requirement. This exemplifies dissent
and debate.

Despite the obstacles along the way, the 54th finally finds itself in combat at the Battle of the Woods.
Their show of bravery and their success in the field gives them the opportunity to engage in a major
battle. When the final attack on Battery Wagner is planned, there are implicitly multiple alternatives as
to which regiment should lead the charge, so Colonel Shaw decides to take the initiative despite the dire
odds against him and his men, knowing they are highly motivated to accept the mission

War is a situation that favors the use of sunk costs as an argument for decisions, often exposing reasons
like 'they must not have been died in vain'. For example, in the final assault to Battery Wagner, despite
being clearly outnumbered and having seen their Colonel killed, the 54th decided to launch the attack
anyway, and though in the chaos of combat their reasons are not expressed in the script (it is mostly
screams and groans) they are evidently following the sunk costs trap.