Leadership in the US Military

Abstract

As US news and media reports continue to expose unethical behavior within the American profession of arms, it is important to explore how Army leaders—and their organizations—have lapsed into questionable ethical conduct. This research paper addresses the strain between ability and character at intervals the Army’s culture, offers lessons from the business world on ethical behavior and leadership, and critiques the current Department of Defense (DoD) and armed forces approach to assessing moral climates.

As a cornerstone of organizational success, few would dispute that the vision of leadership is an incredibly important factor. A leader’s vision drives his or her actions and provides a framework of decision making on practically any dilemma. In the author’s current organization, the United States Army, the concept of leadership evolution is recognized as extremely important; the hierarchical nature of military organizational structure ensures that leaders have an incredible weight on their shoulders. A leader’s vision drives his or her actions and provides a framework for decision making on virtually any dilemma. Over the past century, it is clear that the military has undergone some major changes, including evolution of what effective vision is for leaders. This leadership review will analyze the evolution of the concept of vision in military leadership.

Military Leadership

The term military leadership is obscure and receptive varied definitions. The term has usually been employed by writers once discussing the commanders’ employment of military strategy or ways, entailing the synchronization of complex battlefield systems to generate combat power. These roles of military leaders, however, square measure a lot of admiring strategic management than to leadership.  Military leadership is the process of influencing others to accomplish the mission by providing purpose, direction, and motivation.  Leadership within the military context is concerning the human component, of guiding the social interactions of individuals fighting wars to realize success. It is not concerning the management of ways or strategy or nice generalship or the utilization of accumulation (Department of the military, 2006; Jans, 2002; Stouffer, et al., 1965). Instead, I will be able to specialize in the influence of the distinctive context of the profession of arms on the socially created construct of structure leadership.

Get Help With Your Assignment

If you need assistance with writing your assignment, our professional assignment writing service is here to help!
Find out more about our Assignment Writing Service

What then, if something, needs America to qualify leadership as military leadership? Is there a selected vogue or model of leadership that's simplest in military contexts and may so be educated to military leaders? Hannah, Uhl-Bien, Avolio, and Cavarretta (2009) have argued that military and alternative extreme contexts square measure too advanced and varied to incorporate any restricted set of leadership behaviors. Indeed, I will be able to show that military belief normally doesn't specify specific leadership designs to be employed by their leaders, and that definitions of leadership, such as those used by the U. S. Army and Air Force, are quite general and mirror generic definitions of leadership normally found in the general leadership literature.

What is distinctive isn't leadership itself, but the military context that leadership is operating within. Specifically, I propose that military contexts impose unique contingencies, constraints, and causations on leadership processes. Osborn, Hunt, and Jauch (2002) note that leadership is embedded and ― socially made in and from a context (p.798), and so, ― leadership and its effectiveness, in large part, are dependent upon the context. Change the context and leadership changes (p. 797).

The 11 Principles of Armed Forces Leadership

1. Know yourself and seek self-improvement.
2. Be technically and tactically proficient.
3. Develop a sense of responsibility among your subordinates.
4. Make sound and timely decisions.
5. Set an example.
6. Know your people and look out for their welfare.
7. Keep your people informed.
8. Seek responsibility and take responsibility for your actions.
9. Ensure assigned tasked are understood, supervised, and accomplished.
10. Train your people as a team.
11. Employ your team in accordance with its capabilities.

Characteristics of Military Leadership

1. Courage. Military pioneers regularly need mental fortitude to defeat dread...
2. Selflessness. Military pioneers need to demonstrate a commendable feeling of magnanimity.
3. Good Planner. Arranging is required in each field of work.
4. Quick Thinker. Military pioneers face circumstances that might involve life and demise.

Official Photo of Gen. Stephen J. Townsend, commanding general, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command

"There is a lot of agreement that Mission Command is the right leadership and command doctrine for our Army; however, there is an alarming number of folks in uniform who don't believe that we, as an Army, are constantly practicing the principles of Mission Command," – General Stephen J. Townsend

Two Types of Leadership Approaches

Transactional leadership

Transactional leadership is designed to focus directly on leadership in general.  This leadership style only motivates or punishes team members on a temporary basis.  Key officials or leaders act to make changes for the present time being vs long term or for the future.  Ultimately, their leadership rewards and/or punishments tactics remain the same and hardly ever change.  Two factors associated with this style of leadership is the punishment and rewards given in effort of corrective actions or recognizing good behavior. 

Transformational leadership

Transformational leadership is designed to motivate and strategically encourage others to make the necessary sacrifices to better their current organization.  In the military, this style of leadership is known as shaping the forces.  The leaders are responsible for setting the ultimate goals or examples of how their Soldiers should be.  The type of leadership or authority that makes a positive change in the adherents whereby they deal with one another's interests and act in light of a legitimate concern for the gathering of the team or group overall. In this authority style, the leader focuses on the improvement of morality, inspiration, good and execution of his team.

The Contrast between Transactional and Transformational Leadership

Figure 1. Synoptic scheme of hypotheses.

Situational Leadership

Non-commissioned officers will continue to encounter or face challenges to their direct organization.  Often at times, the daily challenges will become very frustrating and difficult to deal with.  As leaders, we will have to be able to obstruct and overcome any actions that may lead to a negative outcome which will affect the mission.  During my stressful encounters while serving as part of the Army Reserve Engagement Cell at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, I had to learn how to make the necessary adjustments to various situations and adapt to last minute notifications in order to meet the last-minute suspense and to also accomplish the mission. 

When assigned to the Deputy Chief of Staff (DCOS) Directorate, working for a Brigadier General directly can be more stressful than normal.  Despite the adversary, I continued to lead by example, maintain an open line of communication and notify all team leaders and subordinates of the various changes in the rear detachment.  Resiliency was one of the overall key factors which kept me motivated and well organized during my 11-month tenure.  Pick an incredible U.S. military pioneer of World War II. I'm running with Real Broad Jim Gavin, one of the most youthful U.S. Armed force officers, and the leader of the popular 82nd Airborne Division.

"Jumpin' Jim" Gavin to his contenders — because of his four-fight bounces and in light of the fact that he, for the most part, jumped with pack, rifle, and shots, much equivalent to whatever is left of his military unit.  Jim Gavin was amazingly fruitful, yet he was unassuming, legit, and nice to his charges. He showed others how it’s done in every way. Indeed, even in struggle, Maj. General Jim Gavin showed that awesome Soldiers are minding, humble, and aware military leaders. 

These models show that amid testing times, genuine pioneers rapidly perceive and respond to unforeseen occasions, permit transparent correspondence, center around individuals, make solid designs that empower activity, and look after quietude, respectability, and liberality to other people. Regardless of the kind of progress we experience, we can and should pick such qualities of military authority that grasp accomplishment amid confusion.

Role of Vision in Military Leadership

There is no question that vision plays a major role in leadership within the United States Army as well as other military organizations. For example, during the Officers Candidate School, candidates are taught that leaders cannot be effective against their maximum potential for a vision framework to apply, in order to generate a more consistent decision-making process. Ulmer (1998) notes that a leader’s vision is especially crucial to a military sett because it will be passed down to non-commissioned officers and enlisted men.

When the leadership vision is based on sound leadership principles, such as obeying higher up orders, communicating clearly and openly, and leading from the front, this leadership vision will lead to a stronger and more agile fighting force. If the leadership vision is non-existent or counters to sound leadership principles, this will infect the lower ranking soldiers and can create unit dysfunction. However, "The price of your recommendations, whether or not sensible or unhealthy, depends on the leaders you advise and your ability to influence them", said Command Sergeant Major Jamie K. Price, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault).

Military Culture

The military culture is ingrained in military personnel from the start of their careers. Everyone begins life in the military, whether active or reserve component, with some type of initial training.  The majority begins by enlisting and attending their service’s basic or initial entry training or, for the Coast Guard, Navy, and the Marines—boot camp. Basic training lasts anywhere from 8 to 13 weeks depending on the service. Others enter the service through officer commissioning sources, including ROTC, one of the service academies (West Point, the Naval Academy, or the Air Force Academy), Officer Candidate School (OCS) (Army), Officer Training School (OTS) (Air Force), or by direct appointment (common in the medical professions).  Regardless of how someone enters the service, service members spend their time at initial training immersed in the military lifestyle and culture. They learn about the history of their service, military customs, and courtesies, proper wear of the uniform, military bearing, military values and ethics, and other information that is critical to their success in the service, including how to listen to and follow orders and how to function within the military chain of command.

Initial training teaches discipline, focus, and control. Service members are expected to be disciplined in their actions and words and to maintain control of their emotions and their physical selves at all times. Along with discipline and control comes to focus. Focus is important to mission success, and the services teach young recruits how to focus in challenging situations—situations where they are lacking sleep, are physically exhausted or are under unaccustomed and extreme stress. Learning to stay focused, in control, and disciplined in all situations are skills that service members will use throughout their military careers as they are faced with uncertain and often dangerous situations.

Communication

The key to success within any effective organization is the determination to communicate efficiently and effectively. There have been several instances where leadership often fails to communicate directly with their internal as well as external staff members. Communication with/between the chain of command and hierarchy plays a vital role in not only leadership development but administrative control. I can personally attest that many leaders are not willing to sacrifice and set aside time for their non-commissioned officers. For some reason, a lot of senior ranking officers only depend on their Officers versus utilizing all team leaders at hand until they do not possess the necessary skills to obtain satisfaction with/from the daily work taskers.

While assigned to USARCENT G1 Directorate for nine months and the Army Reserve Engagement Cell at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait from 10 JUN 15 to 29 APR 17, I not only witnessed at first hand but also experienced a battle conflict between the non-commissioned officers and the officers in every Directorate. The officers appeared to be the majority of them haven’t even attended the Basic Army Captains Career Course (CCC) or the Intermediate Level Education (ILE) course. Therefore, when issues or challenged occurred on a daily basis, they were incompetent at the development stage of the Military Decision Making Process (MDMP). I have never been assigned to a major command where junior and senior officers were not proficient in written OPORDS, FRAGO’s or OPLANS. Personally, this places the organization at the risk of knowledge as well as a lack of capability functions to make the establishment a structural force.

A psychological approach was utilized as a forcing mechanism on the non-commissioned officers to have those believe it was their responsibility although in terms it was not a fact or actual truth.  Once the OPLANS, OPORDS, etc. be developed strategically as a team, the officers would submit them as if it was their own work.  This leads me to believe personally that any of these officers would not be effective or have total awareness of operations without the senior non-commissioned officers. 

Regardless of the rank structure, shared information is the key to Soldiers fully understanding the purpose of any implied or non-implied task, plan of action and operational battle rhythm.  Senior NCOs conjointly advise their commanders in developing their intent/end state, assist in developing key taskers for the execution phase of the military decision-making process while continuing to train officers, junior NCOs, and other key players members of all aspects of their roles in the organization.  Leaders that value and make stronger open and candid communications, must exhibit respect for subordinate opinions, apprehend others’ viewpoints, and inspire honest input and comments.

Advanced Technology

The Non-commissioned officers and Officers within the United States Army as well as other military affiliates must come to the realization that past tactics and survival tool kits are no longer effective.  In today’s Army, all key leaders must become very familiar with the changes made to IT technology and other electronic devices and enhancements.  Although the majority of the leaders have access to these devices, they are not either computer savvy or willing to learn how to utilize them. 

Honestly, I believe they are absorbed in their old ways and do not want to accept the challenge to become more valuable as leaders for their organizations.  From one perspective, the US Safeguard Division research and acquisition programs have made an enormous market, financed by open assets, for the development of new innovations. It is evaluated that 70 for each penny of all Resistance Division acquisitions of equipment in the course of recent years have been parts of high-innovation frameworks, including rockets, flying machines, space, hardware, and correspondence gear (DeGrasse 1984: 101).

As a business rule, these are changes that, as military officials, need to get familiar with for our own advantage or for reasons beyond that are advocated by our own dreams without setting any boundaries.  By advising others to adapt and make the transformation, “we serve ourselves, frequently egotistically, to propel our own futurist points of view, and regularly without a genuine system of any worry for authoritative prosperity.  Genuinely “change initiative” grasps others in the association as much as it does the change that is happening within today’s world.

Conclusion

In conclusion, vision in military leadership is a concept that has evolved greatly over the past few decades, which is not surprising given how much the military has evolved in general on issues such as gay service and females in combat. Leadership vision is seen as an essential part of an effective leader, and soldiers are evaluated on their leadership vision in a way that did not occur twenty years ago. The result is top to bottom stronger leadership throughout the military, with junior and noncommissioned officers implementing leadership principles like a vision that used to be reserved for upper-level officers.  When the leadership vision is based on sound leadership principles, such as obeying higher up orders, communicating clearly and openly, and leading from the front, this leadership vision will lead to a stronger and more agile fighting force. If the leadership vision is nonexistent or counters to sound leadership principles, this will infect the lower ranking soldiers and can create unit dysfunction.

The vision within United States Army is an idea that has advanced significantly in the course of recent decades, which is not astonishing given how much the military has developed overall on issues, for example, lack of civilian and military educations for both non-commissioned officers and officers. Administration vision is viewed as a basic piece of a viable pioneer, and officers are assessed on their authority vision in a way that did not happen twenty years back. The outcome is started to finish more grounded initiative all through the military, with junior and senior officers to include the noncommissioned officers with the execution of administration standards like a vision that used to be held for higher standards with the military organizations at all levels. 

References

• Allen, Charles. (2015). Ethics and Army Leadership: Climate Matters. Parameters: Journal of the US Army War College. 45(1). 69-83.
• Banks, D. J. (2001). Leadership, vision, and organizational effectiveness. The nature of organizational leadership: Understanding the performance imperatives confronting today’s leaders, 181-218.

• Blackburn, S. (2001).  Being good:  A short introduction to ethics.  Oxford:  Oxford University Press
• Boyce, L. A., & Herd, A. M. (n.d.). The Relationship between Gender Role Stereotypes and Requisite Military Leadership Characteristics. Retrieved May 26, 2019, from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1025164221364
• Cedillo, M. (2005). Spiritual leadership and army transformation: Theory, measurement, and establishing a baseline. The leadership quarterly, 16(5), 835-862.
• Cox, M. (2019, January 08). US Advise-and-Assist Missions Erode Leadership Skills, Army General Says. Retrieved June 29, 2019, from https://www.military.com/defensetech/2019/01/08/us-advise-and-assist-missions-damage-young-leaders-army-general-says.html
• DeGrasse, R. (1984) Military Expansion, Economic Decline: The Impact of Military Spending on the US Economic Performance. New York: M. E. Sharp.
• DeGrasse, R. and S. Daggett (1984) An Economic Analysis of the President's Strategic Defense Initiative: Costs and Cost Exchange Ratios.New York: Council on Economic Priorities.
• Department of the Army (2006). Field Manual 6-22, Army leadership: Competent, confident, and agile. Washington DC.
• Gibb, C. A. (1947). The principles and traits of leadership. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 42(3), 267-284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0056420
• Gurk, D. (2003). Military leadership: A context-specific review. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(6), 657-692.
• Hannah, S. T., Uhl-Bien, M., Avolio, B. J. & Cavarretta, F. (2009a). A Framework for Examining Leadership in Extreme Contexts. Leadership Quarterly.
• Looney, J., Robinson Kurpius, S. E., & Lucart, L. (2004). Military Leadership Evaluations: Effects of Evaluator Sex, Leader Sex, and Gender Role Attitudes. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 56(2), 104-118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1061-4087.56.2.104
• Murensky, C. L. (2000). The relationships between emotional intelligence, personality, critical thinking ability and organizational leadership performance at upper levels of management. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 61(2-B), 1121.
• Osborn, R. N. & Hunt, J. G. & Jauch, L. R. (2002). Toward a contextual theory of leadership. Leadership Quarterly 13, 797-837.
• Santora, J. C. (2011). Leadership vision, organizational culture, and support for innovation in the not-for-profit and for-profit organizations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(3), 291-309
• Stouffer, S. A., Lumsdaine, A. A., Lumsdaine, M. H., Williams, R. M., Smith, M. B., Janis, I. L., Star, M. A., & Cottrell, L.S. (1965). The American Soldier: Combat and its aftermath (Vol. 2). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• The Principles of Military Leadership [Day 3]. (2017, April 25). Retrieved June 28, 2019, from https://www.themilitaryleader.com/principles-military-leadership-day-3/
• Transformational Leadership Theory - Leadership That Inspires and Motivates http://www.strategies-for-managing-change.com/transformational-leadership-theory.html
• Tritten, J. J. (1997). A charismatic dimension of military leadership?. Journal of political and military sociology, 25(1), 131.
• Ulmer, W. F. (1998). Military leadership into the 21st century: Another" bridge too far?". Parameters, 28, 4-25.
• White, S. K. (2018, February 21). What is transformational leadership? A model for sparking innovation. Retrieved June 29, 2019, from https://www.cio.com/article/3257184/what-is-transformational-leadership-a-model-for-motivating-innovation.html