Robert Lee Mission Command Analysis

Mission command belongs to the Army’s list of seven war fighting functions. While the other six of the Army’s war fighting functions specifically align to the application of combat power, mission command applies to leadership and its application. Mission command redefines the old construct of C2, command and control, by morphing the ideology into two distinct thoughts, the art of command and the science of control. Although mission command is a relatively new concept, it’s principles and application transcend time. This paper examines General Robert E. Lee’s application of the mission command principles at the Battle of Gettysburg.

Operational leaders down to the platoon and squad level have recently faced increasingly complex missions in uncertain operational environments. Accordingly, Army doctrine has shifted to officially recognize mission command, which enables leaders at the lowest level feasible to “exercise disciplined initiative” in the accomplishment of a larger mission. The operational process consists of six tenants: understand, visualize, describe, direct, lead, and assess. During the battle of Fallujah, LtGen Natonski understood the intent two levels up, visualizing courses of action for both allies and the enemy, and leading his organization into combat while directing his officers and soldiers to meet his intent. He visualized that Marines alone could not accomplish the mission. He understood that without the support of Iraqi police and a task force from the Army with

Army Doctrine Publication (ADP) 6-0 defines mission command 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” (U.S Army, Training and Doctrine Command, Combined Arms Center, Center for the Army Profession and Ethic, 2015, p. 1). The six principles of mission command direct leaders 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. These principles enable subordinates that

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

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

Civil War historians view the Battle of Chancellorsville as General Robert E. Lee’s “greatest and most remarkable” victory (Sears 1). Lee, facing an army twice his size, defies all military doctrine and divides his army multiple times in order to out-maneuver and surprise the Union forces. The daring maneuver succeeds and ultimately forces the Union’s Army of the Potomac to retreat. The victory was another major blow to Union troops, but it came at a huge cost to the Confederacy: the loss of General Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson. By evaluating the battle through the lens of the mission command activities, one can see how Lee’s daring maneuver was actually very calculated and his only option for victory. Throughout the rest of this paper, I will describe the timeline of the battle and how General Lee used the mission command activities of understand, visualize, assess, and lead to ultimately achieve victory at Chancellorsville.

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.

A bad brush with field command in western Virginia-in a campaign marked by military rivalries, lack of supplies, wretched weather, and overly ambitious strategy on Lee's part-tarnished the new general's reputation. Davis still regarded him highly and sent him to organize southern Atlantic coastal defenses. Lee pursued this task efficiently until recalled to the Confederate capital, Richmond. In his role as presidential adviser, he tried to smooth the abrasive personalities of Davis and General Joseph E. Johnston and to utilize the daring of General Stonewall Jackson to frustrate Federal plans for sending aid to General George B. McClellan's army, which was approaching Richmond.

The Chancellorsville Campaign is known as “Lee’s perfect battle,” Lee, being General Robert E. Lee. This battle is remembered as Lee’s most significant battle because Lee was able to lead the Confederate army, at less than half the size of the Union army, to victory. When General Robert E. Lee defeated an enemy with an army twice the size of his, the battle was not won by brute force nor luck, it was won by Lee’s risky decision to split his army in half to fight on two different fronts.

The Battle of Gettysburg was fought for three days from July 1 to 3. The Army of the Potomac, led by General George Meade, repelled the attack of the Confederate’s Army, led by General Robert E. Lee. The purpose of this paper is to examine General Lee’s effectiveness by analyzing his utilization of the mission command, and its principles.

The Battle of Antietam could have been a devastating and fatal blow to the Confederate Army if Gen. McClellan acted decisively, took calculated risks, and veered away from his cautious approach to war. There are many instances leading up to the battle and during the battle in which he lacks the necessary offensive initiative to effectively cripple and ultimately win the war. This paper is intended to articulate the failure of Mission Command by GEN McClellan by pointing out how he failed to understand, visualize, describe and direct the battlefield to his benefit.

This paper will analyze the events of the 1865 Carolinas Campaign, which ended with U.S. forces defeating the Confederate forces. The purpose of this analysis is to determine if Maj Gen William T. Sherman effectively exercised a form of mission command by gaining shared understanding of the problem, clearly communicating his intent, and establishing mutual trust with his subordinate joint commanders. Maj Gen William T. Sherman understood doctrine applying it intelligently and flexibly allowing subordinate commanders ----------- to flawlessly execute his orders through an efficient and effective decentralized style. Grant fought his command in a way that demanded confidence and responsible freedom of action in a way that inspired success.

The Battle of Chancellorsville had many distinguishing aspects, as did many of the other battles during the Civil War. Three main points came from this battle. It is best known as “Lee’s Masterpiece” or “Lee’s Greatest Victory.” That description pretty much gives away the end result of the battle, but I plan on giving a more detailed description about how it came to be known as Lee’s “masterpiece” of a plan. Stonewall Jackson also was accidentally shot and killed by his own men at Chancellorsville.

In May 1863, after winning the Battle of Chancellorsville, the Confederate Robert E. Lee felt confident to move Army, to second invasion of the North, Pennsylvania, which his intention was to take supplies from abundant farms, intimidate the Northern cities. Also, if he wins a major war on the Northern cities, they would create a political and militar crises for the Federal government. On the hand, the successor of Gen. Hooker, Gen. George G. Meade, move his Union Army, toward Pennsylvania. Knowing that the Union army were in Pennsylvania, Gen. Lee concentrated his army around Gettysburg, “The Battle of Gettysburg would pit perhaps 70,000 to 75,000 Confederates against 85,000 to 90,000 Union troops.” (Melton); which led three days of bloody battle between two armies.