The United States Army As A State Of Decline

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.

I feel the biggest challenge facing our Army today is the systemic lack of discipline amongst many ranks and organizations throughout the Army. Imagine an Army where we have leaders who decide to impose their own brand of justice, who create their own standards and have little regard for Soldiers wellbeing. What about being a part of an organization that because of their background creates new social norms for what is acceptable behavior. Is this an Army that you want to be a part of? Unfortunately we know all too well what that Army looks like, yet many choose not to act. My goal as Sergeant Major of the Army would be to find the root cause of these issues and attack them head on. By gathering facts, statistics and trends amongst the Army

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.

Balancing the role of the Professional Leader has been an ongoing issue for the Army since the latter decades of the 19th century when the U.S. Army was professionalized. The Army has struggled with the matter of balancing a force as massive as the Army. When out of balance the Army does not have the capability to send Soldiers where they are needed. During the Second War in Iraq it was obvious that the Army was not upholding this balance, junior leaders in the Army were fighting against a counterinsurgency campaign that they were ill prepared to handle due to a lack of necessary experience and equipment.

We all have seen many poor decisions being made by some of our senior’s leaders. I am not sure whether or not they fully understood the impact of their decisions. Poorly thought decisions impact more than just the Leader it impacts the organization, family and the American public. To be a leader, one will have to hold themselves to a higher standard to ethical behavior. Unethical behavior is very counter-productive and leads to distractions that are not beneficial to the Army.

Poor leadership, or the more widely known phrase “toxic leadership”, has been a topic of concern throughout the history of the Army. The Army’s recently published leadership doctrine says that, “Army leaders motivate people both inside and outside the chain of command to pursue actions, focus thinking, and shape decisions for the greater good of the organization.” (ADP 6-22, 2012) There are many examples of leaders in recent years that have been relieved due to negative effects on their organizations. Poor leadership is commonly portrayed by telltale characteristics of those in leadership positions, revealed by detrimental effects on subordinates and mission accomplishment, and must be addressed through consistent education and

As the bus entered the heavily guarded military instillation, I gazed upon the sign that read, "Be All that You Can Be." When the bus stopped, several angry Drill Instructors boarded and began introducing us to a very colorful vocabulary, usually reserved for drunken Sailors. They instructed us to gather our belongings, get off the bus and assemble in a circular formation. As I searched for the strength to get up, I found myself moving, while several Drill Instructors yelled at us for our clumsy attempt to dismount the bus and fall into formation. I wondered if I had made the right choice. However, I have come to realize that my military experiences have tremendously enhanced my self-worth. From those first eight

During this last half of the twentieth century the US military was under siege from all sides, internal and external. The root cause of this situation can be traced back to Vietnam and the governments lack of true commitment. What resulted was the near destruction of the US military. The military managed to come out in the end to become perhaps the best military in the world by completely reevaluating itself and reorganizing almost every aspect . The primary focus will be on the reorganization of the Army and Air force, and how they were affected by the disaster of Vietnam. The US military managed to come out one top through completely reorganizing the way the military works and thinks. Focusing

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

Millions of Americans support the Armed Forces, however, they do not know about the struggles that service members and their families must undergo. PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder), deployment, sexual preference, and a fragmented education are some of the innumerable problems that they must take up. However, there are several organizations that subsidize service members, their families, and veterans. These organizations are the light in the dark; they can offer anything from health care to a college education.

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

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

I enlisted in the Marine Corps at the age of 17 the summer before my senior year in high school. I left for basic training three weeks after my high school graduation. It was during this time I hit my lowest point in my life and lost focus on the reason I wanted to be there. I ended up failing out of basic training because I refused to train and went home thinking I had escaped. But in reality it was the start of literally the biggest regret of my life that still haunts me to this day.

After high school I decided to go and serve my country in the United States Army. I signed up January of 2002, my senior year of high school to be a medic. My official first day in the Army was August 22nd 2002. I