Example Of Mission Command Philosophy

Mission Command is the framework used by the U.S. Army to ensure key leaders receive clear direction from commanders. Clear commander’s guidance allows subordinates to make disciplined and informed decisions to best accomplish assigned tasks. Ideally, application of mission command principles ensures all elements integrate and sync actions, thus creating a shared understanding and purpose. Analysis of Major General (MG) William Garrison’s decision making during the Battle of Mogadishu demonstrates how mission command principles must be applied to gain and maintain a position of advantage during military ground operations. As commander of Task Force Ranger (TFR), MG Garrison demonstrated both successful and failed application of mission command principles. Four principles will be discussed in the

Six principles comprise the philosophy of mission command: (a) build cohesive teams through mutual trust; (b) create share understanding; (c) provide clear commander’s intent; (d) exercise disciplined initiative; (e) use mission orders; and (f) accept prudent risk. When combined together, these six principles assist the commander in balancing the aforementioned art of command and science of control. To understand how General Robert E. Lee’s performance at Gettysburg lacked the marks of a great mission commander necessitates a deeper understanding of the individual principles of mission command.

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).

The principles of Mission Command are build cohesive teams through mutual trust, provide a clear commander’s intent, exercise disciplined initiative, use mission orders and accept prudent risk. Toxic leaders who micromanage subordinates disregard these principles. Their micromanagement hampers subordinate’s ability to conduct operations defined by mission statements. The move to make Mission Command a doctrinal part of the Army education system should go a long way to minimizing the effects of toxic leadership on operations and

Successful leadership on a battlefield can be measured in different ways. It is possible for a good, successful leader to lose a battle. Conversely, it is possible for an ineffective leader to win a battle, given the right circumstances. What distinguishes a successful leader from an unsuccessful one is his/her ability to oversee an operation using effective mission command. In ADP 6-0, mission command as a philosophy is defined as “as the exercise of authority and direction by the commander using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations” (ADP, 1).

According to Army ADP 6-0, mission command is the exercise of authority and direction by the commander, using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent, to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations (CAPE, 2012). Effective mission command can generally be analyzed according to the six principles outlined in ADRP 6-0. The six principles of mission command are to: build cohesive teams through mutual trust, create shared understanding, provide a clear commander’s intent, exercise disciplined initiative, use mission orders, and accept prudent risk (CAPE, 2012). This paper provides a brief overview of the

Trust is the foundational attribute that every professional Soldier should possess. Despite sustained military conflicts throughout the world over the past thirteen years, we have still been able to maintain firm belief in our reliability as an Army. When it comes to confidence from the public other organizations such as the police, the government, the media, and various other organizations do not have the same level of trust that the American people have in us. Trust is the most important of the five characteristics of the Army profession. Without trust we would lose the support of the American public, trust is the embodiment of our profession, and trust drives the four other characteristics of the Army profession.

It has since become “one of the most examined battles of the Civil War, and possibly of

During 2003, General Petraeus and his soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division had no clue of the astounding role they were about to embark on. General Petraeus found the city of Mosul in complete destruction, and knew it would take a cohesive effort through mutual trust and teamwork to restore the city. The city of Mosul did not only need a complete make over, but also a regime that shared a mutual understanding as Petraeus. Lastly, with the city rebuilding changes would bring hostility and risk to the soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division. General David Petraeus was successful in Mosul, because he applied the mission command control principles of building cohesive teams, creating shared understanding, and accepting prudent risk.

The constant presence with his troops was the most significant act of building cohesive teams through mutual trust. In Fact, “how he found the time and energy to be constantly with his frontline troops and still direct the overall activities of the division was a mystery.” 1 Interacting with your subordinates shows that you care. A leader that trains with his subordinates also earns credibility. How Soldiers trust, weights leader’s sound judgment for leading troops and accomplishing missions, regardless complexity.

Trust would be the first component of my leadership philosophy, if subordinates do not trust you they will not follow you. This commodity is earned not given, as a leader you must first prove that you are trustworthy before subordinates will follow.

Moreover, all of the 6 principles (build cohesive teams, create shared understanding, provide a clear commanders intent, exercise disciplined initiative, use mission orders, and except prudent risk) are essential in effectively leading and developing an organization for current and future success. However, leaders that simply lead solely off the principles of Mission Command have the perception of being robotic if followed in order. Leaders must be able to make adjustments to any of the six principles as well as express focus on the principles that portray week points within your command style. Most importantly, the Mission Command Philosophy is a

The next attribute of mission command for consideration is trust. Once commanders communicate their intent, they must trust their subordinates at every echelon to carry out that intent with “responsible initiative” under all conditions (Mission Command White Paper, 3 April 2012, 6). Building trust among all echelons and partners is one of the most important actions a commander can perform (Ibid.). The lack of trust was a constant and pervasive issue for the Allies during Operation HUSKEY. General Alexander’s mistrust of the Americans, fueled partly by the antagonistic actions of Montgomery and Patton, started a grudge between that Americans and the British for the remainder of the War (Prescott 1994, 10).

The first principle of mission command is to build cohesive teams through mutual trust. Mutual trust is the foundational principle and at the center of building effective and cohesive teams. Trust extends both ways; it is what builds the confidence between commanders and subordinates. It is paramount to establish mutual trust among the command team, staff, and Soldiers. By leading in an ethical and moral manner as well as living and upholding the Army values, I will earn the trust of my commander, staff, and subordinates. Therefore improving my ability to facilitate mission command within the organization. Once mutual trust is established, it will aid in building cohesive teams. As a SGM, my knowledge and experience will help in developing efficient teams working towards a command goal who possess a shared understanding.

According to Army ADP 6-0, Mission command is the exercise of authority and direction by the commander using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations. Effective mission command can generally be analyzed according to the six principles outlined in ADRP 6-0. The six principles of mission command are: build cohesive teams through mutual trust, create shared understanding, provide a clear commander’s intent, exercise disciplined initiative, use mission orders, and accept prudent risk. This paper provides a brief overview of the Battle of Chickamauga and examines the performance of Confederate General Braxton Bragg during the