Strategic Leader Development for a 21st Century Army

Elihu Root, several Supreme Court justices, and a host of foreign dignitaries. As Roosevelt entered the historic parade grounds, the flag was run up to the top of the flagstaff, and members of the Fourth Battery Light Artillery fired the traditional 21-gun salute. Simultaneously, more than 1,000 troops marched onto the field and saluted the commander in chief. The New York Times reporter covering the ceremonies captured the scene with one word: "momentous." Roosevelt, known for his "progressive" and at times bellicose positions, stated that the War College should be a matter of pride for every American, as the United States was on its path to becoming a first-rate world power. "It is not open to decide whether or not we shall play [a major role in the world]," he thundered. "All we have to decide is whether we play it well or xxii Strategic Leadership: The General's Art ill." 1 It is the War College, he continued, that would carry out the reforms and training to make the Army effective, efficient, and second to none. It is the mission of the War College, but especially the Department of Command, Leadership, and Management, to help military leaders (typically lieutenant colonels and colonels) and their civilian equivalents transition from mid-level (operational) leaders and managers into the strategic realms of senior leadership. These officers are at the crossroads of their careers-a place, General George C. Marshall said in 1938, where they would "no longer rap out orders and make snap decisions, [but rather become]. .. experts in a whole new set of skills." 2 Graduates of the War College include some of the most esteemed names in 20th century military history, including

International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering, 2019

Education of a cadet as a leader is integral to training of officers at many military educational institutions worldwide. A number of them appreciate the necessity of purposeful formation of psychological skills of a leader in future officers. However, psychological training of cadets is limited, since military specialty courses take the lead in the general officers training system. It is possible to create effective conditions for formation and development of psychological skills of a leader in future officers over a fairly short period of time using a role-playing game in the form of psychological hands-on classes. The research objectives were identifying the characteristics of the activities of army officers as leaders and a set of relevant psychological skills; making an overview of the need for leadership (psychological) training of cadets in various countries of the world based on study of official sites of military academies; outlining traditional approaches to education of a...

Journal of Military and Strategic Studies, 2019

The United States Army’s leader development program offers new opportunities to examine how leaders are developed within the traditional workforce. Leader development is at the forefront of Army training and is coordinated through an institutional, operational, and self-development domain. Each domain contributes toward a holistic leader development program which prepares soldiers to be lifelong leaders. Veterans transitioning out of the military are often credited as possessing the leadership skills employers seek, though exploration of the process used to develop leadership attributes in soldiers has been minimal. Upon comparing the Army’s leader development program with other private sector leadership development training, similar goals were identified though the Army’s approach is distinguishable. This paper is an analysis of the U.S. Army’s leader development process and makes comparisons with leadership development in the traditional workplace. Three propositions are presented...

2002

2003

2016

The U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) conducted research to support the identification and understanding of strategic thinking requirements and development in the Army. Army leaders are given immensely complex and dynamic missions that have serious implications. The research revealed clear indications that Army leaders felt underprepared for the challenges they faced. The recognition that tactical and operational environments are converging with strategic environments points to the need to identify and develop strategic thinkers. The Army culture is not fully supportive of strategic thinking development. Creating a climate in which important aspects of strategic thinking (e.g., reflection, learning, questioning) are valued and promoted is crucial. Developing a shared lexicon for strategic thinking and adopting a common set of strategic thinking KSAs would aid in developing strategic thinking. Furthermore, the Army needs to ensure strategic thinking is developed earlier. Talent management practices could also be utilized to ensure selection boards value important strategic thinking developmental experiences. Further, strategic thinking assessments could be developed for promotion, selection decisions, and selfdevelopment. Finally, strategic thinkers must be placed and utilized in assignments that leverage strategic thinking. 15. SUBJECT TERMS Strategic thinking, Leader development SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF 19. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT 20. NUMBER OF PAGES

Land Forces Academy Review

This article states that for an innovative organizational culture, it is important to combine social intelligence, emotional intelligence with advanced technologies, information and artificial intelligence. The military leader focuses on new understandings of modern conflict, new resources, and new ways to extend war beyond the battlefield based on his or her ability to effectively coordinate high-tech and human resources. How can he create and build the right military approach? Within the military, artificial intelligence can be used for security, defence, attack strategies, but the involvement of human intelligence could add a competitive advantage precisely if it is intelligently managed and directed. The main hypothesis is that for a revolutionary implementation of new technologies in the contemporary world, a maximum pragmatic harnessing of emotional and social intelligences is required. With the alert evolution of man, with his self-awareness and organic maturation, even leade...

The complexity in today's operational military environment and the responsibility of leadership in this environment has exponentially increased over the past century. This trend will continue as global economies, political structures, and technologies continue to evolve. Learner autonomy is recognized as a paramount concern in leadership programs, including military programs. The purpose of this article is to increase awareness of the need for learner autonomy among military leaders; however, the implications may be generalizable to any organization responsible for developing leaders who operate in ambiguous and complex environments.

2009

I n the first decade of the 21st century, the U.S. military observed the firings or resignations of the chief of staff of the Air Force, the secretaries of the Army and the Air Force, plus several general officers, including the commander of U.S. Central Command and most recently the senior American commander in Afghanistan. Why did these smart and otherwise extremely successful senior leaders lose their jobs? Is there something we can learn from their experiences to improve ourselves as leaders and better serve the nation? Assuming that we can learn more from our mistakes than our successes, we may be able to learn by studying senior leaders who have failed in this new era. We define "failed" by their outright firing, or the more euphemistic "asked to resign." The military traditionally places great emphasis on the roles of senior commanders, holding them accountable for all actions, success or failure, within their commands. While a failure can be caused by an error of a junior officer or a systemic issue that cannot be controlled by one individual, military culture holds the commander ultimately responsible. A military commander is given the power to influence events and lives of service members. It is legal authority reinforced by a professional culture. Commanding large organizations with modern weapons, contemporary generals have more military power immediately available than the great captains of history. As commanders rise in rank and responsibility, they are no longer directors of the intricate dynamics of the battle. As Eliot Cohen and John Gooch wrote in "Military Misfortunes: The Anatomy of Failure in War": "... the modern commander is much more akin to the managing director of a large conglomerate enterprise than ever he is to the warrior chief of old. He has become the head of a complex LT. COL. DONALD DRECHSLER is an Air Force pilot currently serving as the chief of Air Force's Future Concepts Division. He is a recent student at the Army War College. COL. CHARLES D. ALLEN (RET.) is a professor of cultural science and former director of leader development in the Department of Command, Leadership, and Management at the Army War College. The views expressed here are the authors' own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Army, Air Force, Defense Department or U.S. government.

The world within which the military must function is becoming increasingly complex and uncertain. Society is constantly changing in ways which can often adversely affect defence interests. Social change and technological developments have a significant effect on military structures, management and leadership 1. The defence force is a part of society, but it does not operate in a civilian environment or according to civilian norms 2. A defence force requires its own stable and unique military culture to function effectively. It must foster and maintain its own culture as a " protective blanket " to insulate its members, enabling them to function effectively in their unique roles. It must allow its personnel to be protected from the distracting effects of change and instability in the civilian sector. The military culture also provides stability to the state 3. The major issues for the officer corps are quality versus quantity; management versus leadership; and careerism versus professionalism.

The focus of the Chiefs project is the top-level leadership within the ADF. Its objective is to improve understanding of the leadership processes that are applied at this most senior level and the strategic and cultural milieu in which this happens. It is based on a series of in-depth interviews with currently and recently serving senior ADF officers and senior public servants during the last decade. It discusses the attributes needed by those at the very top. It suggests how the Australian military profession’s strengths in tactical and operational leadership can be appropriately nurtured to become equivalent strengths in strategic leadership. As such, the study not only illuminates the what goes on the pinnacle of the Australian military profession but also provides important material to guide a reshaping of professional military education and thinking about career development in Australia and, potentially, elsewhere.

2015

: CASAL is the Armys annual survey to assess the quality of leadership and leader development. 2014 findings are based on responses from 23,264 Army leaders, consisting of 16,795 sergeants through colonels in the Regular Army, US Army Reserve, and Army National Guard and 6,469 Army civilians. This tenth year of the survey has additional coverage on methods of influence and self-development. Among uniformed leaders, assessments of leader attributes and leadership competencies surpass a benchmark of 67% favorable by an additional 6-21% of the assessed leaders, except for developing others on which 62% of the uniformed leaders are rated effective or very effective. Operational experience has the largest percentage of active duty leaders rating it as an effective domain of leader development at 79%, followed by self-development at 73%, and institutional education at 62%. Favorable attitudes toward self-development increased by 10% since 2013 for active duty NCOs and 7% for reserve NCOs....

2021

The Industrial Revolution of the 19 th century had a profound effect on the way the wars were fought. Historians often refer to the American Civil War (1861-65) as the first genuine modern war. History has shown that the effects of technological advances in industry are processes which follow the revolution in the history of war. Napoleon's military campaigns formed the basis of formal military education and lidership in the Western world. Wars as a social phenomenon were more effective through the use of the first modern railways, roads, and warships, which in most military operations changed the doctrine and tactics of warfare and the deployment of military forces on the battlefield. The first and second generation of modern warfare was dominated by the massive use of military force, and numerous armies. This generation of warfare culminates in the Renaissance with the wars of the french emperor and one of the famoust strategic military leaders in that time, Napoleon Bonaparte. The third generation of warfare was a product of the First World War and was generally developed by the German army and was better known as "Blitzkrieg" or maneuver warfare. The strategic military leader in this generation of warfare was Adolf Hitler. The fourth generation of warfare is an evolved form of rebellion that uses all available networks: political, economic, social, and military, in order to create an imaginary image of the adversary. Also, the fifth generation of warfare is defined as contactless warfare, which states and destroys a specific goal without the physical presence of a human. This generation of warfare begins with long-range artillery and naval firearms and longrange missile systems and has been studied since the US terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Strategic leadership in the fourth and fifth generation of warfare have been most developed by US military strategic leaders especially after the US terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. World-class warriors are strategic leaders which have moved beyond tactical and operational competence in the employment of the future force. They understand and implement a full spectrum of operations at the strategic level to include theater and campaign strategy, joint force, interagency in multinational operations. At the end, the military strategic leaders are using all spectrum of military elements of national political

Land Forces Academy Review, 2019

Enormously studied by specialists, the leadership of organizations is a primordial issue because the leader’s style conditions the efficiency of any social organization. This is one of the reasons why the current scientific concerns focus on studying the ways of improving leadership and the choice of leaders who have the skills and capabilities to successfully perform such functions. This paper deals with the characteristics of the military organization and the complex environment in which it operates, imposing major demands on the military leaders, who must develop certain skills and abilities in order to cope with the wide range of challenges they are confronted with on the modern battlefield. It also points to the features of charismatic leaders, drawing the attention to the relationship between subordinates and leaders, a relationship that is based on an emotional, spiritual, even non-rational bond between leaders and followers.