Army Leadership Styles

Leadership comes in all types of styles. No two Army leaders will have the same style. There is a saying that goes around our ranks today, “Your leadership traits strongly reflect your past leadership.” Meaning that you will develop traits and habits that you have seen in your past leadership. Whether they are good or bad, you will not notice them yourself until you think about what you are doing or saying. It takes time to develop as a leader, and you will know when you find your style that works for you and you’re Soldiers.

"Leadership is the process of influencing people by providing purpose, direction, and motivation to accomplish the mission and improve the organization" (Mills, 2013). The Army measures its leaders by their attributes and their core leader competencies. Also, a leader must be able to train, coach and mentor their subordinates. Additionally, the Army has three levels of leadership: Direct, Organizational, and Strategic. An effective leader understands and practices these qualities at an operational level.

At the end of the day, a true leader “in the army will do these three things live by the army core values, know the warrior ethos, and lead by example”-MSI textbook. Leaders both in and out of the army are held to a higher standard holding themselves in a professional manner at all times. The success of the group is attributed to the leadership styles and core values instilled in the solider to do his job effectively. General Eisenhower once

My leadership philosophy revolves entirely around the Army Values. In every action I take as a leader, I assess whether or not it lines up with the Army Values and the potential impacts. I have had a variety of leadership assignments during my career, all requiring a different leadership approach, spanning from team leader through platoon sergeant. My conflict resolution skills have greatly evolved through my twelve years in the Army, from rudimentary conversations to in depth problem solving. My professional development has had a profound effect on my leadership abilities, from NCOPD’s to mentorship from senior non-commissioned officers (NCO’s).

Leaders are look upon as role models as they guide us with their motivating, influence to accomplish tasks. There are a lot of leadership styles; when leading, it is based on the situation. When I was in the military, I encountered with many different styles of leadership. A leadership that I considered meaningful is a Transformational Leader. The transformational Leader in the military with their inspiring charisma of motivating, influence creates a visualized path that produces energetic characteristics that inhere to new changes, developments, and possibilities.; by demonstrating authority, the Transformational Leader in the military utilizes their power to inspire and motivate people into trusting and following their example; this as

Management styles differ dependent on an Army leader. But when it comes to projects and tasks there are two styles that reign supreme: macro management and micromanagement. Generally speaking, macro management is the best way to go when grooming future leaders. With macro management, a good leader allows their subordinates to take on tasks that leaders want their subordinates to grow from that will aid them to become more technically and tactically proficient. Subordinates demonstrate their abilities and exhibits to their leaders the results of their work or tasking, leaders will continue to give their subordinates guidance, and they revise the product to Army standards while maintaining a feeling of accomplishment.

Every leader in the U.S. Army have a different leadership style. During my thirteen years in the Army I have seen several leaders placed in positions where it was obvious that they were born for that position, performing admirably and making very real contributions. In other situations leaders were placed in positions of leadership appearing unprepared for the role. These leaders over time were soon surrounded by other leaders that ensured their success. Several leaders in my career have left a lifelong mark on my leadership style. Every one of them left me with knowledge that have built a foundation for my leadership beliefs and style. There is also what we call in the Army, “toxic leadership” which produce harm to the organization, leaders

Leadership is defined by Peter G. Northouse as “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal”. One’s leadership style can shape a subordinate’s approach and place emphasis to the task or mission at hand as well as accomplishing long term objectives. The role of any leader is to provide direction and guidance to those who may fall under his/her command. The manner in which leadership is applied, especially in today’s society and ever-changing geopolitical situations can vary significantly and be markedly effective or undermine the leader’s ability to lead. In the readings from the Canadian Military Journal (CMJ) several examples are provided to support each author’s viewpoint of leadership style and I will use these along with my own opinions and experiences to substantiate the importance of differing leadership styles as they pertain to the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and the Profession of Arms in the 21st century.

“I can do things you cannot, you can do things I cannot; together we can do great

There are four types of leadership styles that describe the amount of interaction a leader has to its members. The leadership styles include autocratic, consultative and participative and free-rein leaders (Lamberton & Minor, 2014). Autocratic is a leadership style that has the leader as the “dictator” giving direction to members to follow. The group members are expected to follow the orders without inquiry and focus on task completion. This style leaves little room for individual development among its members however, can be effective in situations that demands strong leadership such as in crisis situations. Consultative leadership style involves having the leader spend a decent amount of time conferring with other members on ways to tackle the situation. Under this leadership, tasks are delegated to the proper individuals with the right skill set fit for job. The focus is on

Throughout my life and my military career I have experienced various leadership styles, from civilian employers to military Officers and Non-Commissioned officers alike. Each had their own approach to leadership, some I found to be effective and others I did not. I have attempted to create a leadership philosophy based on a fusion of the leaders I have encountered and my own personal experiences.

Summary: In this article the authors are addressing future leaders, and they immediately inform the reader that because there is more complexity considerably more complex issues and technologies than a century ago in the operational military environment, there is a great need for military leaders to achieve autonomy in terms of adapting to and learning about the evolving environment. In short, leaders must be smarter and better prepared for a changing world.

Leadership, according to the Army doctrine, represents individuals’ ability to influence people by providing purpose, direction, and motivation while operating to accomplish the mission and improving the organization (“Leadership” FM 6-22). However, the varying characteristics of individuals that the Army attracts may instill this doctrine in many different ways, leading to different representations of leadership. Some individuals choose to lead their subordinate in a stern matter, only displaying matured emotions and a “tough-loving” attitude to guide them in the right direction. Others

“Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done, because he wants to do it”. -34th President of the United States Dwight D. Eisenhower.

“Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me--put it into practice.