Toxic Leadership At The Military Research Proposal

A toxic leader can be defined as leader motivated by egocentrism, self-interest and show no concern for those below him, and his actions negatively affect the organizational climate. They exalt themselves in turf protection, fighting and controlling their followers instead of uplifting them. Toxic leaders are very destructive and they only focus on short term accomplishments and they destroy their followers to achieve those objectives. Their decisions are made hasty and they change their decisions without any justified rationale. Mostly, they lazy around only to make hasty decisions when it is too late and the crisis is already in place. Such decisions have no time to be thought over and therefore, they are continuously changed throughout implementation so as to work effectively and may even be altered completely thereby making the whole process messy (Seeger, 2005).

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.

The critical leadership problem affecting the ABCT climate derives from toxic leadership of the BCT command team. Careful assessment and thorough

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

Being a leader is always a challenge, and assuming a new command is challenging. There are a lot of expectations to me as a leader. The organization has selected me to a new position, and they believe I fulfill their standards for their leaders. The organization trust and expect me to lead, develop and achieve. My superiors and subordinates have a lot of expectations. They expect me to lead them in the best way to solve our assigned missions. In my new assignment as commander of 4th Armor Brigade Combat Team (ABCT), the main critical leadership problems are the lack of cohesive teams, ethical and work standards and the level of stress. I will through analyze explain and defend my selection of critical leadership problems and apply a model for solving them, including implementing and measuring my vision as the new brigade commander.

Toxic leadership and climate defines the critical leadership problem within 4th ABCT. In conjunction, a lack of care for Soldiers and their families, favoritism, SHARP issues, and hazing have caused a unit to lose all trust in the previous Command Team. To correct these issues I will develop and implement my vision and a way ahead for the BCT using the 7 Step Model. Furthermore, I will place a great deal of emphasis on a specific portions of the Rocket Model, Organizational Culture “Iceberg”, and correcting the Five Dysfunctions of a Team

The principles of Mission Command are build cohesive teams through mutual trust, provide a clear commander’s intent, exercise disciplined initiative, use mission orders and accept prudent risk. Toxic leaders who micromanage subordinates disregard these principles. Their micromanagement hampers subordinate’s ability to conduct operations defined by mission statements. The move to make Mission Command a doctrinal part of the Army education system should go a long way to minimizing the effects of toxic leadership on operations and

Robert E. Lee once said of leadership, “I cannot trust a man to control others who cannot control himself” (Jones, 1875). This is an instance where I believe that even though this idea or thought was mentioned many years ago, it still has relevance today. I do not have an exact date of that quote, but with General Lee fighting in the Civil War, I would imagine it came somewhere in the mid-1800’s (The book it is found in was published after his death). Our current military leaders need to listen to advice like this quote, get out and know the people they put in charge so they are better able to make decisions on who should and should not actually be leading.

Toxic leadership and climate defines the critical leadership problem within 4th ABCT. In conjunction, a lack of care for Soldiers and their families, favoritism, SHARP issues, and hazing have caused a unit to lose all trust in the previous Command Team. To combat these issues I will develop and implement my vision and a way ahead for the BCT using the 7 Step Model. Furthermore, I will focus on specific portions of the Rocket Model, Organizational Culture “Iceberg”, and correcting the Five Dysfunctions of a Team to solve the problem.

Leadership is critical and it refers to the process of influencing followers towards achieving the groups’ goals. Toxic leadership refers to the leadership offered by leaders who abuse power and leave the group they lead in a poorer condition after they are left. Toxic leadership is associated with incompetence, insularity, evil, intemperance (lack of self control), callousness, rigidity and corruption among other bad leadership characters. The leaders involved in toxic leadership are not concerned about uplifting the people they lead (followers). Instead, they make sure they satisfy their self interests. They fight and control instead of caring for their followers. In most cases, the leaders with this leadership style are leaders who bully, abuse, and discriminate the subordinates. In addition, they create a hostile climate, self serving and arrogant, threaten and even yell at their followers among other fierce characters. They do not lead based on their qualifications. However, they apply force to be in leadership positions thus making the lives of their followers a misery . They are selfish in that they work to promote themselves without regard to the welfare of their followers. In most cases, do this by not minding about the future of their group and its members. This paper explores the effects of toxic leadership in the United States.

Pigging backing slightly is the issue of speaking poor of your organization. There is always joking about “hating the Army” typically because of the contradictory and slow decision making, the hurry up and waiting, the stickler NCO that is always on your case or the 1st and 2nd Lt who either act confused or act like they don't care;however for the most part these are light hearted sidebar comments. Where this becomes toxic is when true contempt for the organization is allowed to fester. As a Platoon leader you need to be aware of your men and women and how their opinions are being affected by the leadership climate. The difficulty comes in being part of the problem and not part of the solution.

battlefield. Being a part of an elite unit, such as Special Forces, one would contemplate

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

This thesis will cover the Support of the Commander’s Leadership Philosophy, command climate, strategies, and the role of the gunnery sergeant’s importance in the execution of the Commander’s leadership philosophy for Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 214, Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia. We feel that the command climate at this unit is good. The three strategies that we will use to discuss this will be communication, training and leadership and how important they are in order to establish an effective and productive environment. We will also discuss how the gunnery sergeant’s important role is the key to ensuring that these strategies are