In this duty as well as in others, Roland somewhat pales in comparison to the unquestionable figure of leadership cut by Charlemagne, who not only emerges victorious and unscathed where Roland and his men are killed, but also establishes a clear system of justice that both makes sense to the participants and fully serves the needs of his men and their shared values and beliefs. In other words, it is necessary for a leader to maintain leadership, both by presenting a continually strong presence at the head of the community, and by ensuring that there will be a common community for this leadership to preside over in coming years and generations. It is impossible to state with any certainty whether or not Roland's men perceived him as a good leader overall or not; this is not something that is directly addressed in The Song of Roland nor are there enough hints to make any overall determination of his fitness for leadership according to the mores of his time -- and the time in which the piece was created -- concrete. With the identification and description of the different qualities and duties that were expected of leaders as evidenced within the text of the epic, however, a determination of how well Roland lives up to these various qualities and duties, especially in comparison with others, can be made. This can lead to at least a preliminary assessment of how Roland and his leadership capabilities were perceived by his men.

Roland is definitely decisive, and he upholds quite...

At the same time, he does not appear to have God on his side in the same way that Charlemagne does, and his pride seems to trump his other qualities, including his valor, in his decision not to blow the horn that could potentially save his life and that of his men (1093). Roland also fails to live up to one of the most essential functions of leadership, namely ensuring that he and his men survive in order to perpetuate his strong leadership. This points out one other salient fact that cannot be avoided, however -- Roland's men do not surrender at any point, though they must certainly realize that he will not be blowing the horn in time to save them. Instead, they face their death through combat, following their leader in his last great throe of valor in the face of insurmountable odds. In the end, then, Roland's good qualities as a leader must outweigh the bad in the eyes of his men, or else they could not possibly be this committed to him.
Conclusion

Concepts of leadership change from era to era, though there are certain qualities that remain largely universal. The Song of Roland exemplifies a certain view of leadership in a specific cultural place and time, but many of these qualities are still applicable today. Leaders as committed to their principles as Roland and Charlemagne, for instance, could certainly come in handy.