By the end of the siege, increasing Soviet resources were shifted towards the Stalingrad region (Hill, 2016) and further wings groups were created to convoy protection for the Stalingrad airlift (Hayward, 1998). Furthermore, the commander’s quick response to improvements established grounds for a lift in spirits across the battlefield and proposed fiercer fightback. Effective adjustments to logistics plans and fresh supplies were providing the opportunities to support troops with the necessities, which later would prove to be crucial to the Soviet victory.
Stalingrad sprawled for 30 kilometres along the western bank of the Volga with ferry crossings connecting the city to the eastern bank of the river (Brady, 2011). The problematic access possessed an impossible task for any commander to established consistent logistics. While many years later, academics are suggesting that leading firms use logistical competence strategically to realise competitive advantage (Bowersox and Daugherty, 1992). Ultimately it is evident that improvisational style of The Soviet commanders provided this logistical competence by assessing the situation daily and used their ‘’no way out’’ strategy to adopt every possible outcome. On the other hand, Germans which were led by Hitler, who was far from the actual battle location and had no trust in his commanders had to face defeat and thousands of casualties. Consequences of mismanaged logistics can be seen in history books as this battle is considered to be momentum shifter in the second World War to which ultimately led to German capitulation.
…
