Personal Statement: 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.

Operational leaders see how the individual components of an organization fit together and use those individuals work to make a larger outcome. When they focus on a problem, they think of what works best within the process and systems to make an impact on the situation. These types of leaders play a big part in making sure that things get done in an effective and functioning manner. According to the Army Doctrine ADP 6-0, the Army over time has strayed away from operational leaders and adapted Mission Command, which gives leaders the ability at the lowest level the capability to exercise disciplined initiative in an act of carrying out the larger mission . Mission Command is made up of the following six steps: Understanding, Visualize,

With German forces on the run following the Allied success at Normandy and the breakout and pursuit across France, Allied forces were staged to enter Germany in late summer 1944. Both Field Marshal Montgomery and General Bradley clamored to be given the priority of effort. General Eisenhower chose Montgomery’s Operation MARKET GARDEN as the plan for action. It called for airborne forces to open the route for a ground force to move more than sixty miles up a single road, ending up north of the Rhine River near Arnhem, Netherlands. By accomplishing this task, the German Ruhr industrial heartland would be within easy grasp. But the operation failed. The ground force

In order to really delve into the topic of Mission Command, we must first accurately define it. So what is Mission Command? Per doctrine, 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.” Now that’s a mouthful. But, what does it really mean? In simplified terms, mission command is the way a leader develops and leads his subordinates into accomplishing the mission while leaving room for leaders to take ownership and initiative in completing the mission.

The very basis for my leadership philosophy starts and ends with the Army Values. I ensure each and every decision I make aligns with these core values. In 2007, after first pinning on Sergeant, I was in a position of limited leadership experience and charged with the health and welfare of three Soldiers. By utilizing past experiences and understanding the young Soldiers point of view, I developed the foundation of my Leadership Philosophy, the

Mission command consist of the following six principles: build cohesive teams through mutual trust, create sheared understanding, provide clear commander’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

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

The mission command system is expressed as the placement of individuals within a unit conducting operations with a specific set of procedures and principles in place to optimize the use of its equipment. What does it mean to recognize or comprehend the art of Command and the science of Control? There are six key principles of mission command in developing a cohesive team that support all aspects of a mission. The following essay will discuss these principles and examine examples of how the famous Operation Anaconda both endured victories and inadequacies.

Commanders at all levels face increasingly challenging scenarios as the operational environment changes. Some instinctively motivate and empower their subordinates to think and act independently, thereby influencing actions during combat. However, those who understand the commanders' activities of mission command will influence not only subordinates, but the outcome of the battle as well. 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.1 Commanders who understood the importance of mission command was Major General Horatio Gates. General Gates at the Battle of Saratoga successfully

Maj. Gen. “Fighting Joe” Hooker demonstrated an excellent example of failed mission command during the Battle of Chancellorsville in April 1863. He had thought he would defeat General Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia by maneuver beginning in Chancellorsville as he pushed Lee toward Richmond. His commitment toward his own plan for Lee’s response would overshadow his operational planning and ultimately lead to a mission command failure at Chancellorsville despite outnumbering Lee’s troops 128,000 to 60,000. Through decentralized execution, Hooker could have empowered agile and adaptive leadership to operate under uncertainty, exploit opportunities, and achieve unity of effort. Instead, he failed in exercising at least four principles of mission command. He did not provide a clear commander’s intent, create shared understanding, exercise disciplined initiative, or accept prudent risk.

Leading from the front is the best way to implement Commander 's intent. According to The Army Doctrine Reference Publication 6-0, “The Commander drives the operations process through Understanding, Visualizing, Describing, Directing, Leading and Assessing the operational environment” Army Doctrine Reference Publication (ADRP 6-0, pg. 1-4) (2012). The Command Sergeant Major and Sergeant Major both echo the Commanders directives in driving the operational environment. The Command Staff is to provide timely and effective reporting to the Commander providing a more in-depth analysis. As a senior NonCommisioned Officer (NCO) representing the command, the Sergeant Major (SGM) has high regard with Unit command and subordinate unit Soldiers. The SGM has influence in the Command Staff to drive and verifying timeliness of staff reporting. I will support Mission Command using my influence as a Sergeant Major in planning, problem-solving, assessing, motivating, and echoing the commander’s intent throughout the command.

Leaders inadvertently practiced mission command principles since the Civil War. Over time, the naming convention of the fundamentals has changed; however, the concept of the principles was still close in relations as time evolved. The effective application of the six mission command principles is critical to the success of commanders. Most prominent military leaders who exercised the fundamentals of mission achieved victorious results. Most leaders who lack effect in apply mission command principles in their plan habitually ended with little to no success. General Williams Tecumseh Williams and Major General Wade Hampton III are two examples of historical military leaders from the burning of Columbia who implemented and or fail to implement the principles of mission command during the Civil War.

The final attribute of mission command for consideration is understanding. Understanding prepares leaders at all echelons with the vision and far-sightedness that is essential to make operative choices, manage risks, and consider second and third order effects (Mission Command White Paper, 3 April 2012, 5). Leaders who possess understanding have the mental capacity to grasp and appreciate any state of affairs which facilitates their capacity to make autonomous decisions. Conversely, leaders who lack understanding put their troops or others at risk.