Gonzaga Organizational Leadership

Independent of the Army and country you serve, leadership is always an important subject. There are many civilian books and military manuals talking about leadership. The United States Army divides the subject leadership in three levels. These levels are Direct Leadership, Organizational Leadership, and Strategic Leadership. In this paper, the focus will be only about the first two levels. According with you rank, you will work more in one of these levels. Because of that, most part of time there is not much interaction between higher-level leaders and lower level leaders. Despite the limited interaction between higher level leaders like Brigade commanders with the lower level leader like company commander it’s not affect a satisfactory mission accomplishment.

"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.

A good leader in the United States Army is made-up of several different essential characteristics. As soon to become leaders in our profession, is our individual responsibility to know, understand and apply these characteristics in the way we conduct ourselves every day. Because we are the role models for soldiers to follow not only in our job but also in our personal life. Stewardship of the Army profession in one of these mayor characteristics of a good leader in our career. Being a steward of the profession, focuses in three mayor traits: character, competence and commitment.

Leadership development in the military is critical to its mission and objectives. Understanding and embracing leadership will foster an agile culture and facilitate attainment of strategic goals. People desire quality leadership to assist with achieving their goals, albeit personal or professional development. Having a clear vision and the motivation to perform at high-levels influences others to work synergistically together to achieve organizational goals. Insomuch, employees value being treated respectfully, fairly, and ethically. Leaders serve people best when they help them develop their own initiative and good judgment, enable them to grow, and help them become better contributors.

Leadership goals should always contain methods of a continuous process of learning through education, training, and individual experiences that help ensure that the message will be communicated in a confident and competent manner when leading troops. Soldiers tend to follow leaders that demonstrate and live the Army values, while displaying their confidence in every decision that affects change. Leaders are not born as organizational or tactical leaders; but grown by their genetic determinism, which is inside and the characteristics they work toward; that mold is which type leader they will become. Not just anyone can lead; you must have the desire to lead, be willing to make the commitment to being a leader, and prepare yourself properly, then you have the desire to become a leader. (Fulton, 1995).

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

One important expression for army leadership is BE-KNOW-DO. Army leadership begins with what the leader must BE, the values and attributes that shape character. A leader can think of these as internal and defining qualities possessed all the time. As defining qualities, they make up the identity of the leader. Values and attributes are the same for all leaders, regardless of position, although refined through experience and assumption of positions of greater responsibility. For example, a sergeant major with combat experience may have a deeper understanding of selfless service and personal courage than a new soldier.

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).

Leadership can be viewed in many different ways and possess many different qualities. There are courageous leaders, respectful leaders, terrible leaders, and seemingly insignificant leaders but leaders nonetheless. But what is it that differentiates between a strong leader and a weak leader, or a powerful leader and an insignificant one? Is it the qualities in the leader or the decisions they make in key situations that define good leadership qualities? Some would define a good leader by their ability to do the right thing even if it is not the easiest choice. Others might define a good leader as one that possesses great integrity and leads by example. The military possesses many great leaders through a process of development and molding individuals to meet expected leadership qualities like honor, courage, commitment and integrity to accomplish any mission or goal. However, this process doesn’t always create the desired effect. So, let’s examine some good and bad examples of leadership qualities and break down what and how we can emulate them.

As an officer in the United States Army, it has been imperative for me to understand every facet of leadership and why it remains important to be an effective leader. During this course, I have learned some valuable lessons about myself as a leader and how I can improve on my leadership ability in the future. The journal entries along with the understanding of available leadership theories have been an integral part of my learning during this course. For all of the journals and assessments that I completed, I feel it has given me a good understanding of my current leadership status and my future potential as a leader. All of the specific assessments looked at several areas in regards to leadership; these assessments covered several

This is especially true for members of the military. They begin learning leadership skills from their first day of basic training and continues until the day they exit the service. The job of the drill sergeants in basic is to break a civilian down and train them in the mentality and the lifestyle that is necessary to be an effective service member on the battlefield. Transitioning from the service can be a daunting task for many members, especially the ones who started their career at a young age and retire after 20 years of service. This is due to the lack of leadership opportunities for many growing up, so all they know is the way they were trained during their military careers.

Today’s military leadership was defined and cultured through revolutions, civil war, conflicts, and currently a combat era lasting almost ten years. Through recent leadership development changes brought on by former Secretary of the Army, Dr. Francis Harvey, the military has become an entity trying to keep ahead of the incessant derogatory diversions to the honorable way of life impeding military leadership everyday. Disregard for human life, loss of the moral compass, innuendo, and complacency have caused the hierarchy to struggle with the leadership model that has formed the civilian populace and ultimately, the future leaders of the military.

In the Army, leadership and management merge into one concept. As leadership is doctrinally conceptualized in managerial terms, it limits the scope of personal power. It is difficult, if not impossible, to conduct management functions that stretch outside the bounds of a given authority. Management is important and necessary; however, leadership initiates effective and lasting change in our Soldiers.

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 crucial part of today’s army and leaders play a huge role in the accomplishment of the mission. I believe this is true, because leaders are the guys who are in close contact with the younger soldiers. They are the ones who counsel the soldiers and make them better and make a plan for that soldier to improve and become a better soldier. Leaders play a major role in the accomplishment of the mission, because officers and higher leaders cannot be everywhere at once, so they need a person they can trust to lead the charge and tackle the mission the right way