SSD2 Module 3 Notes

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.

The United States Army is a complex organization made up of several commands and managed by different command levels. The U.S. Army is an organization different from that of a business in many unique ways. Specific examples of these differences include: financial reporting, disciplinary review procedures, and tactical operations. Although different in many ways, the Army shares many similar characteristics of a normal profit business. Army personnel are managed by supervisors arranged in a command structure similar to that of a business hierarchy. The Army will also encounter internal and external factors that could impede or enhance operations. As such, planning, organizing, leading, and controlling must be used by managers appropriately

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).

The Army's definition of leadership is “the process of influencing people by providing purpose, direction and motivation while operating to accomplish the mission and improving the organization.” An army leader is anyone who inspires and influences people to accomplish their goals. Leaders motivate people both inside and outside the army to help them pursue their goals, focus thinking, and shape decisions for the better of the army. Leadership can be acquired by anyone as long as they have the self-determination to do so. The main principles of leadership in the army are broken down in to the acronym LDRSHIP (loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, personal courage), characteristics the army aims to instilled in each

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).

In 2012, General Dempsey states “Mission Command is fundamentally a learned behavior to be imprinted into the DNA of a profession of arms.” The way Mission Command has evolved through the past years is indicative to the US Military adjusting to a new threat. The concept of Mission Command is not new, what is important is how General Dempsey states “Education in the fundamental principles of mission command must begin at the start of service and be progressively more challenging..” The General emphasizes the need for education at the start of the individual’s service. Additionally, this highlights the United States Army’s doctrinal adjustment to the new threat. During the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US faced an enemy whose creativity and adaptability are two of its greatest assets. The fast-paced situation changes in both of those AOs required tactical level leadership maintain the autonomy to “exercise disciplined initiative.” This type of initiative historically leads to mission success, specifically in fast-paced situations where a key to success is forcing the enemy to react.

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.

From my eleven years of experience as staff in the operating environment, I have come to believe that the Army could operate near flawlessly when we utilize the warfighting functions and mission command processes, regulations, and guidance. The Army’s frameworks to accomplishing our missions are built on practices that evoke everyone to contribute as a team. As a successful organization of many years, we evolve our army everyday with these processes as we learn from the army of yesterday and make the necessary adjustments to better plan, prepare, and execute our nation’s missions in our operating environment. The operations process is the framework for exercising mission command in which planning starts the iteration of the operations process. (

The road of performing all the drills and exercises will not be so easy for you. So, as to make you feel comfortable and perform all your drills easily various military trainers and sergeants are available during the whole process to guide you through. The transformation of leading a disciplinary military

Working in a joint military environment means understanding what is and is not acceptable behavior. Our Nation’s challenge forces the military to interact and work with different foreign military is to understand the cultural or social system from the country they are operating. To achieve this, today’s soldiers must have and develop an understanding of cross-cultural competency and over time, master the skills to become more successful in these environments. According to the United States Army FM 3-24.2, Tactics in Counterinsurgency (extract), cross-cultural competences are “the set of systems of shared belief, values, customs, behaviors, and artifacts that members of a society use to cope with their world and one another” . One of the tools

As stewards of our profession, commanders ensure that military expertise continues to develop and be passed on to aspiring professionals through operational development. It is during this developmental phase that Professional Soldiers put their knowledge and skills to the test. Operational Army units certify and recertify their Professional Soldiers through repetitive and realistic training events including the Combat Life Saver Course, platoon live fires, and exercises at the National Training Center. In the course of these challenging and realistic experiences, the Army’s operational units develop Soldiers and leaders prepared to maintain high standards, discipline, and operational readiness. Operational development and adaptability will continue to drive changes in Army doctrine, organization, leadership, and education as we enter the post-war era. Without this kind of development, the Army could not maintain a well-disciplined professional fighting force.

Given the proliferation of missions that often have multiple objectives aligned to counterterrorism, humanitarian aid, and national defense, the alacrity at which the armed forces are expected to integrate and quickly deliver results in a foreign nation is increasing. The cross-cultural competency (3C) model is designed as a foundation for streamlining the cultural assimilation process, providing leaders and subordinates with a more efficient approach to quickly understanding and become effective in a culture different than one's own (Abbe, Gulick, Herman, 2007). As the alacrity and intensity of cultural assimilation is increasing across all branches of the military, combined with greater levels of mission complexity and required collaboration of foreign governments and agencies, developing a effective 3C model is essential for mission success. The intent of this analysis is to provide insights into how leaders can manage diversity more effectively in the military, especially those called upon to serve in cultures significantly different than one's own. Training in cross-cultural competency often includes references to the Hofstede Model of Cultural Dimensions and the specific attributes of collectivism versus individuality, two potentially polarizing aspects of military leadership in foreign regions (Goodman, 2012). The Hofstede Model of Cultural Dimensions is complimentary ot the 3C Model in that is

Imagine being a military leader deployed to the same location twice with the last stint being for two years. The advantages of knowing the environment, culture, and people allow one to be equipped with invaluable tools. Pair experience with established relationships and the recipe for success dramatically increases.