Summary Of Operation Iraqi Freedom

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

For the next 10-15 years, leadership development is critical within the military. Training to develop agile leaders will yield a competitive advantage within both private and public organizations. Importantly, leadership training should mirror as if one would fight in the new Era International Security Environment. Such tenacity will confront limited engagements in the next 10 years, plus a great deal of offensive operations in the 15 years. Therefore, trained leaders are flexible to their changing missions, roles, and responsibilities, thus are more adaptive to compelling new conflicts.

This paper on Leadership will compare the primary differences and characteristics between the tactical leader and the organizational leader. I will provide you with the basics for development, characteristics, and the fundamentals that help guide and influence each leader’s style and how they influence Soldiers to follow them. Leaders at all levels demonstrate their values, knowledge, skills, and abilities in many different means and methods in

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.

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

Transitioning to command from any other leadership challenge in the military requires that an officer experiences a mental shift in his/her approach to exercising the newly granted authority, responsibility and accountability for the unit. Army doctrine suggests that authority, responsibility, and accountability are inherent attributes of command. These attributes of command coupled with the expectations of the commander, demand a new and holistic approach to commandership, which is defined as exercising the art of command through leadership, management, and command.

When I was a lieutenant, one of my mentors told me that the officers ‘job is first and foremost about leadership. For senior officers, then, one must say everything is about leading strategically. In order to be an effective strategic leader, my self-assessment has led me to focus on the following goals during this academic year at the Air War College (AWC): to improve my understanding of the strategic environment; to learn to be strategically relevant, to shape my ability to communicate effectively at the strategical level.

One of those significant problems that the Army faces is grappling with Talent Management - how to systematically plan for and implement a modernized integration of personnel accessions, development, employment, and retention to get the right Soldiers and leaders ready for the right jobs at the right times to meet the Army’s requirements.1 John McHugh served as Secretary of the Army from 2009-2015, and along with Chief of Staff of the Army (CSA) General Ray Odierno, focused no small part of their efforts during their terms to reinvigorating the Army as a Profession, highlighting “The upcoming challenge is not just attracting and selecting the best available candidates to be Army professionals but developing them to be as good as or better than our current professionals.”2 As Ashton Carter assumed the duties as the Secretary of Defense down the hall in the Pentagon in 2015, the Army’s approach was a natural fit into Carter’s “Force of the Future.” In order for the

General Powell displays transformation leadership through individualized consideration. “IC involves dealing with others as individuals and considering their needs, abilities, and aspirations as you work together to further their development.” General Powell’s Army background influences the idea of taking raw iron and fashioning it into a sword; as noted in his quote “leaders are made, not born” implies leadership is a shaping process. Transformational leaders who display individual consideration tend to coach and mentor, excel in two-way communications, listens effectively, and personalize interactions with subordinates. Part of General Powell’s principle of empowerment is an investment in the leadership potential of team members. This investment is necessary in sustaining productive organizations.

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.

As history has taught us an Army at war is stretched and stressed in some cases similarly to a rubber band ready to break. In today’s Army we have a large number of Officers and Non-Commissioned Officers who have learned or have been taught to be comfortable with ambiguity, complexity, and change. While we do not appear much different than our predecessors we carry our wisdom and savvy that can only be gained from our obstacles experienced through multiple deployments fighting an enemy hidden within the cities, intermixed with innocent civilians, and no distinctive means of recognition. We have faced variables that constantly change noted throughout our military history such as; weather, terrain, civilian population, ever evolving enemy, and different dynamics. To continuously improve the leaders today in adaptability we need to be constantly tested, and pushed to our limits in order to overcome our impasse. Through my research on developing adaptive leaders I have found a statement from a former Chief of Staff of the Army General Eric Shinseki and he set the stage for change by chartering the Army Training and Leader Development Panel (ATLDP) in his anticipation

Managing a group is simply a matter of holding a position of authority and executing inherent duties of that role; however, being a true leader requires a special blend of personal knowledge and traits used to shape those under your charge for the better. Great leaders not only strive to shape their element into a better version of itself, but also attempt to improve the larger organizational structure at every level. The purpose of this paper is to review an influential military leader to identify key traits and achievements of the individual, and how they coalesce to create a true legacy leader. The intent behind this examination is to articulate how this leader impacted the United State (US) military as well as my own personal growth

As you look at the Army and think of it as a profession of Arms, you have to look at the balancing roles of professional leaders. First, is the role of the strategic leaders, they balance the relationship between the Army’s four fields of expertise and its current and potential future operating environment. The second area of balance is the relationship between the Army’s culture and climate and its institutional practices.

Adaptive leadership is becoming widespread in the United States Army amongst junior officers in leadership positions that require quick thinking and innovation. Leonard Wong discusses how the versatile and unpredictable enemy and situations in Iraq produces adaptable junior officers. These officers are learning to make decisions under chaotic conditions and are becoming more mentally agile. The Army is changing. The Army is transforming its capabilities in the war in Iraq to be effective and successful. General Schoomaker states that we will not accomplish our goals as a nation in the 21st century unless our Army becomes much more agile but with the capacity for long term, sustained level of conflict. The Army is in the process of

The United States Army has implemented models called the Troop Leading Procedures (TLPs) and the Operations Process in order to facilitate a commander 's capacity to effectively and efficiently organize a task. When these models are executed together, they create a framework for leaders at various levels to excel in any situations they might encounter. Understanding the significance of the relationship between these models requires an in-depth understanding of each of them specifically. Each step of the Troop Leading Procedures contains numerous factors which reflect upon the other steps as well as the entire Operations Process. Likewise, each aspect of the Operations Process profoundly influences the decisions made throughout the TLPs. When applied together correctly, the Operations Process and Troop Leading Procedures provide a structure for strong and adaptable operational leadership.