The Training Fundamental Doctrine Of Developing Leaders

The most important imperative of four in the Army Campaign Plan is “develop leaders to meet the challenges of the 21st century” because in the future leaders will deal a “tough realistic environment” and must be willing to adapt to the mission, threat or operational environment. We must “train soldiers and leaders to ensure they are prepared to accomplish the mission across the range of military operations while operating in complex environments against determined, adaptive enemy organizations . This is the eighth of twenty Army Warfighting Challenges enduring first order problems, the solutions to which will improve current and future force combat effectiveness. These challenges are reviewed and updated as needed to remain applicable for the future force.

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.

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

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

The quick evolving military environment, needs the US Army redouble its efforts to reduce the uncertainty associated with the downsizing. There are some predominant principles that can guide the Army’s efforts in minimizing the impact of uncertainty during the force reduction. Even with major political and legislative challenges, keeping balance among the different proportions of readiness is a goal of US defense policy. During the budgetary preparation, downsizing of the armed forces often becomes one of the first victims of fiscal reduction. This was true of the years between World War I and World War II, when the Great Depression made military preparedness a very low national priority. The Army’s downsizing effect put its readiness

The most critical issue that we face when it comes to downsizing the army is the readiness and security of our nation. Politicians say that downsizing the military brings back the nation’s financial stability. Army leaders do not see it that way, but weakens our nation 's defense capability and our commitment to the rest of the world. General Odierno, the Army Chief of Staff (2013), states that “In his professional military judgment, that the projected end strength and force structure levels would not enable the Army to fully execute 2012 Defense Strategic Guidance requirements to defeat an adversary in one major combat operation while simultaneously denying the objectives of an adversary in a second theater. Additionally, it is unlikely that the Army would be able to defeat an adversary quickly and decisively should they be called upon to engage in a single, sustained major combat operation” (Chief, Congress and DoD hammer out Army 's future manning levels, par.18). The military is not just weakened by the numbers, but by experience and

The situation in today 's Army is clearly much different from what existed years ago. Many changes have occurred, moving the Army 's EO program from a strictly educational and training initiative to a multifaceted management program with clear goals and objectives. These goals and objectives are also an integral part of human relations and are nurtured and developed through a professional military education system.

f. Will additional emphasis be place on joint training events such as Exercise JADE HELM to expand ARSOF capabilities? If so, will more opportunities for this type of training be afforded to SF Groups? g. What new professional military education (PME) initiatives or opportunities are being developed for 180As? h.

The main points of this article relate to the changing nature of warfare (think terrorism and advancements in technology) and the adjustments military leaders are obliged to make. Hence, according to the article, leaders must: a) be trained in critical thinking skills; b) be "committed to life-long [and self-directed] learning"; c) be willing to take the initiative to "diagnose" their goals, needs,

Force management, or what is really otherwise known as planned comprehensive change, is in reality a complex and interwoven process. Though it was designed within the confines of a systemic approach referred to as the DOTMLPF (Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership & Education, Personnel and Facilities), in reality it is meant to enable both dutiful and well-thought out change as well as faster, more urgent adjustments in accordance with the evolving nature of war and information gathering tactics. The Army, as one branch involved in this initiative, focuses most of its attention in this regard on the organizational sector because of the way it facilitates an adequate and democratic step-by-step system of review (Student Reader, F102:2). But the fact is that even this initiative remains multi-faceted and appears to be rather bureaucratic in nature (it has five phases, which seems antithetical to an urgent change process), which might not be surprising since implementing the type of changes that are demanded can have major implications of all sorts. Still, it does appear that this concentration is being well received and that it will eventually serve its goal even if it does not appear that way when detailed on a point by point basis.

Too often in business as well as the military, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” (Powell, C #7). Too often the command as well as enlisted soldiers will use this analogy to continue to do what they have always done and fight change. Also this leads to allowing small details to be overlooked because it’s been allowed before, these small details, such as production schedules become larger details. These small little details will cause larger details to be overlooked in the future. This culture will foster reactivity instead of promoting proactivity (Powell, C #7). This type of culture is a struggle for leaders to change in the National Guard because of the hometown mentality, all though we strive to keep the since of community in our units as leaders we have to be the supporters of change. Be able to answer the “why” when it is necessary to move in a different direction, we have to be able to always look beneath the surface and not take situations at face value. When we have questions or concerns as long as they are morally and

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.

This study is very crucial for all coaches and people of leadership. The purpose of this article is so simple but the information is price less. You need to be able to develop leaders in order to be successful as a person in charge. Voight (2015) shines some great insight on how to develop leaders and the process one should take.