The Soldier Of The Army

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

The book Black Hearts opened my eyes to how leadership from a single Officer can have a grappling effect on such a wide range of soldiers from the lowest of ranks. One of the best takeaways from Black Hearts is to never do anything: illegal, unethical, or immoral. Although this is a easy statement to repeat, Black Hearts demonstrates the difficulties that lie behind these words. It has also painted a picture of how leadership can topple extremely quickly from a top down view. The Army is portrayed in a bad light throughout the book relentlessly. This is due to the concentration of poor leadership of the 1-502nd Regiment (Referred to as “First Strike”), a battalion of the 101st Airborne Division.

Army leaders must balance the link between the Army’s culture and it’s climate and institutional practices. When there is a proper balance it has a huge impact on the mindset of the Army’s Soldiers. Their actions or inactions impacts the five key attributes of the profession, and the four fields of expertise, and have long term effects on the Army’s culture and climate. These actions influence Soldiers’ perceptions that they are serving professional who have answered the call of service to the republic, it is important that Soldiers understand that their role is a calling and not just a job.

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

Officers are taught to lead by example which means learning from the officers who came before them. As a leader in the army, a solider is constantly watched and must uphold the army core values at all times. Setting a good example for the young, non commissioned officers (NCOs) in the battalion is vital to the battalions cohesion and morale. In order to lead by example an officer is taught different leadership styles to incorporate in the field For instance, participating leadership style is especially appropriate when there is time receive input, information, and recommendations of your subordinates. The primary goal of the army is to develop the leaders of tomorrow. Leadership can always be improved on throughout life.

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.

The military system is, as one would expect, very pragmatic. Differences among soldiers and their abilities are viewed as strengths (or weaknesses) to be put to optimal use to get the job done. While certainly not impervious to racism and sexism, this very practical, almost scientific approach to managing human efforts supports a true meritocracy. But, like other hierarchically structured systems, a lot depends on the leadership.

“The United States Army is structured on several values and principles that it upholds, among these are military bearing, discipline and respect. These principles represents what the organization strongly believes in and governs the most basic customs and courtesies that all its members should abide by, otherwise legal repercussion and punishment is enforced that could ultimately result in separation from the organization.” The standards must be met by Soldiers or they can face a number of repercussions such as, barring from re-enlistment or even separation. Non commissioned officers should always uphold the standards so that all Soldiers know what they are and what can happen to them if they do not meet the standard. “One is to observe a sense of calmness even in the most stressful situations, leaders of the United States Army should maintain their military bearing even in situations where it seems chaotic, out of control or a civilian would respond in panic.” The reasoning behind this goes back to situations where non commissioned officers would have to make fast decisions in a war zone that may impact the lives of their Soldiers. In a battlefield situation their Soldiers are relying on their non commissioned officer to make a quick decision and trusting that decisions made are the best out of all situations given. Non commissioned officers should be able to make big decisions with all his confidence projecting with his military bearing. “A leader should look like a

As a United States Soldier, one of the first things learned is the Soldiers’ Creed. The focus of the creed is loyalty, duty, and respect. The Warriors’ Creed is also found within this creed (in italics). The memorization of this statement of beliefs is mandatory and is learned during basic combat training. A soldier is expected to know and be ready to recite it during drills, formation, ceremonies, and upon request, but most importantly, a soldier is expected to live it.

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

Every uniformed Army professional knows the Soldier’s Creed. The tenth line of the Soldier’s Creed - “I am an expert and I am a professional,” is a powerful statement recited during significant occasions including enlistments, graduations, first formations, promotion boards, change of command ceremonies, and deployment ceremonies. The NCO Creed even includes the bold statement, “No one is more professional than I,” in the opening line. For these words to ring true, the Army must deliver training sufficient to certify professional Soldiers and leaders at all levels. The Army’s ability to recognize this need and adapt its methods speaks volumes for the Profession of Arms. The three components of the Army’s leadership model -

The path to democratization within nations which were formerly autocratic is seldom without pitfalls. This path is what Zoltan Barany discusses extensively in his book The Soldier and the Changing State, which provides a comprehensive look at various nations which have endeavored to attempt the transition in the wake of a myriad of national events- war, regime change, and state transformation. One of the nations he focuses on in his section on war is Bosnia, which was subjected to a violent ethnic conflict following the breakup of Yugoslavia in 1991. There has been a lot of literature dealing with the democratization of the Bosnian military over the past twenty years, and taken in chronological order they reveal the gradual success

The act of killing another person is one that stays in the mind of the person who carries out the act. It remains imprinted in the psyche of the one who takes the life of another human being, regardless of the method used. This is especially true in the case of warfare as the soldiers are primarily tasked with killing enemy combatants whenever required. It is considered that those who kill during times of war are less weighed down by the moral dilemma that comes with killing. This is largely because people regard killing during war as an unavoidable aspect of it, therefore meaning that soldiers should not be haunted or traumatized by memories of the atrocities that go on in times of war. But then, why should this be the case? It should not