The Similarities And Differences Between Military And Military Leadership

The intention of this paper is to introduce my leadership philosophy. I will start off defining leadership as well as explaining my leadership philosophy. I will then share a summary of an interview with a Squadron Commander about a difficult situation that he needed to use his philosophy to work through and analyze how my philosophy applies to the same situation followed by a brief summary.

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.

In today’s Army, there are three levels of Leadership. We are going to talk about Direct and Organizational levels of the Army leadership. Direct leadership starts at the lowest level with the team leader of which has the most direct influence with Soldiers. Organizational Leaders have a staff to help them make decisions on a daily basis and provide the resources for the direct leaders to accomplish their mission. After 13 years of conflict, Mission Command could not have not even been more important than it is now. Both Direct and Organizational leaders must provide their subordinates intent and purpose in order for them to operate with in Mission Command.

Over the years, the relationships between army leadership and a business management have been throughout to be compatible in the organization framework. Yet, it is not always that these two style of command control is not similar in some aspect, but an army leader with an organization district manager are two different leaders. In other words, leadership and management might have subordinates under them, but they will have different meaning. In this paper, my purpose is to do an assessment of leadership and management, as well as demonstrate the similarities and differences in the application it is used. To begin the similarly of leadership and management is important to know the definition of the two. There are many principles of leadership and management, but three of the most important principles are the trait method, the skills method, and the situation awareness method principles. This paper will compare these methods, from the basic, and to what is required to fully understand them and know the contrasting of each method. Looking at the three method, the two that could be comparable are the traits and skills method. However, they are different and some aspect that can be significant.

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.

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

Leaders are look upon as role models as they guide us with their motivating, influence to accomplish tasks. There are a lot of leadership styles; when leading, it is based on the situation. When I was in the military, I encountered with many different styles of leadership. A leadership that I considered meaningful is a Transformational Leader. The transformational Leader in the military with their inspiring charisma of motivating, influence creates a visualized path that produces energetic characteristics that inhere to new changes, developments, and possibilities.; by demonstrating authority, the Transformational Leader in the military utilizes their power to inspire and motivate people into trusting and following their example; this as

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.

“Military leadership qualities are formed in a progressive and sequential series of carefully planned training, educational, and experiential events—far more time-consuming and expensive than similar training in industry or government. Secondly, military leaders tend to hold high levels of responsibility and authority at low levels of our organizations. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, military leadership is based on a concept of duty,

Leadership is the ultimate form of service; it requires leaders to devote much of themselves to deal with the responsibilities that come with the title. They not only serve as normal members, but they must make important decisions with their followers’ interests

“You can do what I cannot do. I can do what you cannot do. Together we can do

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 the art of influencing others to achieve a mission by offering motivation, purpose, and direction. In the military, there is a concept called chain of command, which is the authority some individuals lawfully exercise over subordinates by virtue of their positions, assignment, or rank (Spyglass Hill, n.d.). Equally, the chain of command is the most important and fundamental organizational technique used in the military. It is the commanders’ responsibility to achieve the assigned unit objectives while caring for property and personnel in their command. Thus, the basic duties of a military leader include accomplishing a specific mission and safeguarding soldiers’ welfare. In essence, a leader in the military has three kinds of duties: implied, directed, and specified roles. Every leader must exercise professional ethics, which encompass being loyal to the unit, the military, and this nation. Thus, military leaders should offer selfless service when on duty by putting the goals and needs of the unit, the nation, and the military ahead of their personal interests.

If one has no leadership ability, one cannot be a leader. If one does not make what his or her followers consider the correct decisions to achieve their goals, no one will have faith in the leader's abilities and, consequently, no one will follow and without followers, there can be no leader. Another important criterion which one must have in order to be a leader is a person who leads a crowd in the direction where the goal can be accomplish as well as someone who acknowledges a problem and finds solutions to it.