Second Place Winner of the MacArthur Military Leadership Writing Competition for the CGSC Class 2008-01. The United States Army should reassess its leadership philosophy, in much the same way that it reconsidered its view of Army Operations with FM 3-0, in order to account for evolutions in our society as well as an increasingly complex and uncertain operating environment for the Army in the 21st century. While the Army's doctrine has certainly matured regarding the subjects of leadership and leader development, with pertinent regulations and field manuals updated within the last two years, the Army has yet to fully account for modern demands on Army leaders, changes in society, and potential improvements in the Army's leadership climate. Despite efforts by Army leaders like General Shinseki to evaluate our leader development programs and subsequently examine Army culture as it effects leadership and leader development1, our doctrine and practices remain deeply rooted in historical traditions - heavily biased by relatively sophomoric assumptions about what leadership is and how it is best practiced. We lack critical reflection on the subject - an appreciation of other ways to look at leadership and leader development and an understanding of why our doctrine is rather than simply what it is. This paper is an attempt to critically examine several aspects of the Army's view on leadership in the 21st century and posit recommendations for change to better prepare our Army's leaders for current and future circumstances.
To effectively develop the Army for the 21st century, the Army must address the tension between developing mission command capable leaders and protecting the Army as an institution from the actions of small populations who commit acts inconsistent with the organizational and national culture. The numerous mandatory tasks outlined in Army Regulation 350-1 and other training directives exist as tools to reduce individual behaviors that put the Army at risk. These mandatory tasks signal leaders across the organization that senior Army leadership has low risk tolerance. Ironically, the centralized, online manner in which soldiers train many of these tasks actually creates more risk. In order to effectively develop leaders for effective mission command, the Army should reevaluate the topics for online, mandatory training to reduce redundancy. Instead of focusing solely on whether a soldier executes the required training, which is an input into the training system, Army leaders should focus on whether a soldier understands the training, learns the intended lessons and can apply them in real situations. The output of soldiers and leaders who truly understand the material and how to lead is the key to resolving this tension.
The United States Army is one of the most complex, best run organizations in the world, and central to the Army's success are strong leadership and exceptional leadership development. Army leaders must be able to act decisively and effectively in challenging situations. But the Army, despite its organizational structure, does not train leaders in a hierarchical manner. Dispersed leadership is the key to the success of the Army leadership model. Now, for the first time, you can have access to the Army's successful leadership philosophy and the principles that are outlined in Be Know Do the official Army Leadership Manual. Be Know Do makes this critical information available to civilian leaders in all sectors--business, government, and nonprofit--and gives them the guidelines they need to create an organization where leadership thrives.
What does it take to lead an army in battle? What does it take to win? Competent leaders of character are essential for the Army to meet the challenges in the dangerous and complex security environment we face today. The U.S. Army Leadership Handbook (FM 6-22) is the Army’s flagship field manual on leadership. It establishes leadership doctrine and fundamental principles for all officers, noncommissioned officers, and Army civilians across all components using the “BE-KNOW-DO” concept. It is critical that Army leaders be agile, multiskilled athletes who have strong moral character, broad knowledge, and keen intellect. Leaders—military and civilian alike—must set the example, teach, and mentor, and this manual provides the principles, concepts, and training to accomplish this important task. Filled with leadership principles crucial to the U.S. military and equally applicable to leaders in any walk of life, this up-to-date manual from the Army will teach all leaders everything they need to know.
This monograph analyzes the history of United States Army leadership doctrine from 1983 through 2011 to identify the evolution of strategic leadership theory and practice in Army doctrine. Using leadership doctrine, the focus is on the analysis of the articles, reports, opinions, studies, and research papers surrounding each doctrinal publication. This research uses an analytical approach across the timeline of leadership doctrine by understanding each approved doctrine, reviewing the intellectual debate within the Army institution and across other leadership disciplines, examining the doctrinal changes in the published documents, and exploring the future of proposed strategic leadership doctrine. Beginning with the renewed emphasis on tactical, direct leadership attributes published in 1983, the omission of operational and strategic leadership in the doctrine identified a gap in addressing leadership at all levels within the Army. Following executive level leadership discourse in the 1980s, the publication of FM 22-103, Leadership and Command at Senior Levels in 1987 established the first doctrinal framework for command and leadership above the direct, tactical level for the Army. Coupled with the 1993 AR 600-100, Army Leadership, Army leadership policies became a better codified part of training and leader development, specifically in recognition of different levels of leadership including: direct, senior and executive. The consolidation and reorganization of Army leadership doctrine in 1999 placed the three levels of leadership together in one doctrinal reference; however, differences still existed between definitions of the levels. FM 22-100, Army Leadership: Be, Know, Do used direct, organizational and strategic, while the 1993 regulation used direct, senior and strategic. By 2007, the newly published documents finally agreed, providing clarity of purpose and better understanding for all Army leaders as they progressed through the different leadership levels. Strategic leadership thought and its importance to Army leaders continued to evolve and remained a much discussed, researched, and published topic into the twenty-first century. National military and government leaders addressed the need to improve strategic leaders' ability to understand and prepare for future conflicts while presenting the ways strategic leadership fits into overall leadership doctrine. The planned forthcoming updates to the 2006 Army Leadership: Competent, Confident and Agile manual continues those linkages for strategic leaders. The monograph concludes that strategic leaders must understand the strategy of the organization, where the organization fits in the complex environment, and what the organization must do to be successful. Through inclusion of strategic leadership references in consolidated Army doctrine, the academic theories and methods surrounding strategic leadership became more widely spread across the force, further improving the understanding necessary for a successful organization. The leadership traditions of the United States Army, better known for the direct leadership examples executed in every conflict, continues to have a codified description of the strategic leadership attributes necessary for continued success, accessible to all leaders, from the newest to the most senior.
The official British Army book on what makes its leadership so successful, and how to become a better leader yourself - whatever your field. ___________________ 'If you want to become a better leader, read this book' Eddie Jones 'An extraordinary read for any leader. Truly brilliant' General Stanley McChrystal, author of Team of Teams 'Excellent. Offers proven tools and strategies' Matthew Syed ___________________ The Habit of Excellence is a unique insight into British Army leadership, explaining what makes it unique, what makes it so effective and what civilians can take from it to become better leaders themselves. Drawing on the latest research in military history, business, sociology, psychology and behavioural science, and with compelling illustration from British Army operations across the centuries, Lt Col Langley Sharp MBE goes beyond the latest leadership fads to distil into one peerlessly authoritative work the essence of leading and leadership from one of the world's most revered institutions. ___________________ 'Excellent. It's hard to see how any leader, whatever their field, wouldn't benefit from reading and rereading it' New Statesman 'Offers lessons for all managers' Financial Times 'Valuable in any walk of life' General Sir Mike Jackson, former Chief of the General Staff 'Very readable. I could not recommend this exceptional book more' General The Lord David Richards, former Chief of the Defence Staff 'Comprehensive and clearly written' Karin von Hippel, Director-General of RUSI 'Terrific. Full of insights and lessons' General David Petraeus, former Director of the CIA
ADP 6-22 describes enduring concepts of leadership through the core competencies and attributes required of leaders of all cohorts and all organizations, regardless of mission or setting. These principles reflect decades of experience and validated scientific knowledge.An ideal Army leader serves as a role model through strong intellect, physical presence, professional competence, and moral character. An Army leader is able and willing to act decisively, within superior leaders' intent and purpose, and in the organization's best interests. Army leaders recognize that organizations, built on mutual trust and confidence, accomplish missions. Every member of the Army, military or civilian, is part of a team and functions in the role of leader and subordinate. Being a good subordinate is part of being an effective leader. Leaders do not just lead subordinates-they also lead other leaders. Leaders are not limited to just those designated by position, rank, or authority.
As the nature of warfare evolves, the Army must produce leaders who comfortably interact with diverse populations and embrace complexity. This emerging truth dictates a need for change in how Army officers are trained and selected to lead at the highest levels in order to regain the initiative in managing today's fluid operational environment. The concept of strategic leadership, therefore, must be examined closely in Army doctrine. Social, cultural, and complex problem-solving skills are becoming a priority and must be developed in young officers to provide enough knowledge for senior leaders to leverage later in their careers. Rarely does the typical Army career prepare someone to succeed in the strategic arena where the non-military elements of national power carry greater effects than large numbers of troops and equipment. The basic question addressed in this study is “how effective is the U.S. Army at developing strategic thinkers capable of leading decisively in complex and adaptive environments?” To answer this question, three distinct areas are analyzed: (1) the ability of the Officer Education System (OES) to distinguish critical abilities deemed necessary to succeed in the modern security environment, (2) the ability of the Officer Evaluation Reporting System (OERS) to measure an individual's dedication to self study and lifelong education, and (3) the ability of the same OERS to measure individual skills acquired through operational experience. The Army's current OES pushes the most complex topics to the final stages of an officer's educational career. As a result, few officers get a chance to expand their intellectual boundaries through critical and creative thinking prior to their field grade experience. Doing business this way denies the opportunity for junior level officers to develop the requisite skills needed to excel in the strategic arena. The Army must promote advanced educational opportunities as healthy and necessary to a young officer's career. As the key process for reporting a leader's abilities and potential for advancement, the OERS focuses primarily on current performance and provides little incentive to highlight an officer's dedication to career-long professional development. The over-valuing of short-term success negates the potential benefits of continuous learning, a long-term endeavor. The result of such short-sightedness stifles innovation while entrenching a “business as usual” approach to leadership development ignoring the changing operational environment. The personnel management system continues to emphasize combat deployments, regardless of skills acquired, over an officer's need for professional development. The current version of the OER fails to utilize the leader development aspects it was designed to accomplish. The Army must look into traits and attributes particular to leaders at the senior levels in order to develop context-based evaluation systems. Junior and senior level leaders should not be evaluated on the same scale. A way to accomplish this is to establish qualitative standards for branch qualification based on operational experiences, not just on the number of months assigned. To force a change in the culture and career progression of leaders prepared for 21st century warfare, the officer education and evaluation methodologies must adapt to reflect the complexities of the contemporary operating environment. To accomplish this, the Army must adjust its leader development systems to recognize and promote strategic thinking much earlier than in past generations.
