Category: Army

Military Discourse Community Essay

Elevated by unsurpassed boxing skills and athletic prowess, Muhammad Ali’s iconic status is decorated with an Olympic gold medal, the title of heavyweight champion, and global stardom. However, although his exploits in the boxing ring are praiseworthy, his legacy transcends sports through his civil disobedience. Ali, using his domineering persona and allure to openly criticize racism and militarism speaks to the subversive power of his discourse – it invites us to make a connection between the mass culture of boxing ring violence and civil disobedience to work against the ideological state apparatus and the inconspicuous oppression it entails. Thus, Ali played a pivotal role in radicalizing the civil rights movement in both the black freedom struggle & the antiwar movement through the boxing ring. His fights were more than simply bouts against his adversaries in the ring – with each hook and jab he gave and received, he showcased his ability to evoke a form of public counter-discourse that challenged & resisted the American government.

Quintana states that the 60s raised a sociopolitical climate that was underscored by the civil rights movement and rampant racism in the United States (Quintana, 177). Ali mobilized a strategic discourse of blackness to bolster his fight against racism & his anti-war stance, thereby exemplifying the sociopolitical fight inherent in the shift from nonviolent civil disobedience to militant actions that were present at the time (Harrison, 2). This transformed Ali into what both Harrison and Quintana refer to as a “lightning rod”, a symbol whose discourse as a boxer enables us to tussle with the irony of violence in nonviolent civil disobedience (Harrison, 8). This contradiction is borne out of Ali’s nonviolent activism, which is a strategic use of violence to spur nonviolent social justice. Boxing was the symbolism that spurred nonviolent social change through the implication of violence outside of the ring, providing a counter-discourse against the cultural ideological state apparatus, and subsequently creating political conditions to foster social justice.

According to Foucault, discourse neither acts against nor upholds power. Though it can mobilize acts of power, it can also be a “point of resistance” for rhetoric that is contrary to certain institutionalized norms through counter-discourse (Foucault, 352). Ali illustrates this as a symbol of black power & anti-Vietnam war sentiment, and his subsequent counter-discourse elucidates America’s racism & militarism. Ali’s mode of thinking challenged & resisted a longstanding institutionalized discourse through the medium of boxing where historically, boxing has been a sport for marginalized groups – the first being American slaves. Boxing became the first sport to be desegregated so that boxing promoters who were predominantly white could continue to exploit black people and make money from the deep-seated racism in America (Zirin, 54). This speaks to the hierarchical nature of mass culture, where boxing was promoted and distributed for profit to white people. The boxing ring is akin to what Hall refers to as the arena of consent & resistance, wherein popular (mass) culture is the battlefield in which the “struggle for and against a culture of the powerful is engaged” (Hall, 487).

Ironically, however, these fight promoters created a space where black boxers like Ali could destroy white supremacist ideas of society & hierarchy. The sport of boxing became the conduit for expressing anger directed at a society that was deeply racist – a discourse Ali used by going beyond resistance, mobilizing the boxing ring as a vehicle for social justice and change (Zirin, 57). Ali’s rejection of oppression was influential, whether its form was legal in fighting his military draft, significant in his acceptance of Islam as his religion, or symbolic through his name change from Cassius Clay to Muhammad Ali (Zirin, 63). Even though his behavior was nonviolent, it gave the impression of the threat of violence because it challenged norms, changed expectations, and engendered fear. As Malcolm X stated, “You might see these negroes who believe in nonviolence and mistake us for one of them and put your hands on us thinking that we are going to turn the other cheek – and we’ll put you to death just like that” (Zirin, 60). However, Ali’s belief in nonviolence was at odds with ideologies like the one Malcolm X purported; when he suggested African Americans form rifle clubs, Ali was staunchly against it, citing his belief in nonviolence as a key tenet to social change (Harrison, 2).

Because Ali reminded Americans of the implications of war and the violence the ideological state apparatus allowed for in America’s racist & class based political system, it is necessary to outline the role of the ideological state apparatus in showcasing the ways racism and militarism operated in the 1960s, and how this disciplined Ali. The ideological state apparatus, according to Althusser, functions primarily through ideology, particularly one perpetuated by a ruling class, and involves private institutions, including but not limited to churches, parties, families, and culture (Althusser, 337). The ISA consists of social institutions that are dispersed (they do not work together) and enforce the ideology of the ruling class through informal methods. These utilize social and cultural power rather than legal power and work to influence the people within a society in different ways. Yet Ali’s domineering identity as a boxer in American culture and politics distinctively enabled him to manifest signs that showcased the contradictions of the ISA and the necessity of civil disobedience in not only revealing the ways it influences & persuades people, for the means of attaining justice.

In this sense, Ali was disciplined in his fight against the United States’ attempt to conscript him into the war efforts against Vietnam (Quintana, 180). His decision to resist the draft came down to the fact that the draft during the Vietnam War was a racist endeavor, citing it as a “white man’s war” and stating, “no Vietcong ever called me a nigger” (Harrison, 6). Ali understood that the United States government was ultimately trying to co-opt his influential image as by enlisting him, the government could further rally support for the war. Although the military could be considered as part of the repressive state apparatus, Althusser states that the military functions by ideology to perpetuate the power & control that is used by the RSA, and that the ISA and RSA are thus intertwined. Often, this is the way the ideological state apparatus operates – it masks the ideology of the ruling class, and thus the ruling class’s agenda is discreet (Althusser, 337). Because the ISA functions predominantly through ideology, the government needed to discipline Ali by silencing him and forcing him to submit to their desires – his significance led the United States Congress to extend the draft four more years and incriminated the desecration of the flag. His insubordination cost the United States government $2 billion a month and the death of 100 soldiers daily due to the draft extension, making his fight against racism & militarism “visible, audible, attractive, and fearless” (Zirin, 67).

When Ali refused to accept his draft orders as a conscientious objector in April 1967, he was indicted by a Federal District Court, sentenced to five years in prison, had his passport revoked, and was fined $10,000 (Harrison, 5). His claims of being a conscientious objector stemmed from the fact that he was a minister in the Nation of Islam who spent most of his time conducting ministerial activities, and secondly, his Islamic faith would have made his war efforts a “holy war”, which could only be conducted by an Islamic country (Harrison, 4). This was contested by the Kentucky Selective Service appeal board and continuously denied (Quintana, 181), and though an appeal kept him out of prison, his heavyweight title was rescinded, and he was banned from boxing (Harrison, 5). Despite the consequences, Ali did not falter – he willingly gave away his title, fame, and wealth to defy the submissiveness expected in the American political system, which sought to oppress marginalized groups that Ali simultaneously symbolized and mobilized (Quintana, 186). In so doing, Ali bolstered opposition to the war by informing Americans and showcased the government’s attempts to hamper the black power organization, thus bringing to light the inconspicuous agenda of the ideological state apparatus (Harrison, 4).

Ali, after appealing his 5-year sentence to the Supreme Court, ultimately won his fight against the government in Clay v. United States, thereby abrogating his sentence (Zirin, 69). He aided in setting the standards that a draft registrant must uphold to meet the requirements as a conscientious objector, establishing that objections must be rooted in religious, moral, or ethical beliefs, must be consciously opposed to all wars, and that the objection must be earnest (Quintana, 193). In highlighting racism and its connection to the war efforts, Ali stated ‘‘If I thought goin’ to war would bring freedom, justice, and equality to 22 million Negroes, they wouldn’t have to draft me, I’d join tomorrow” (Zirin, 66). In this sense, Ali utilized the power of discourse in analyzing the race-based oppression the ISA peddled, whilst using the power of counter-discourse to intercede against it. He mobilized his “lightning rod” symbol to harness the power that boxing gave him, outside of the ring. In Ali’s avoidance of conscription to the war efforts, he readily conscripted into the black freedom struggle.

Ali’s success as a legal-political activist was encumbered by his religious beliefs, the color of his skin, and the persuasive nature of the ideological state apparatus. However, his discourse shed light on the ways the ISA operates inconspicuously, informing fellow Americans about the racialized nature of the war, and ultimately leading to legal revisions in what constitutes a conscientious objector. Though his legal case was riddled with hindrances from various actors such as the Kentucky Appeal Board, the United States Congress, and the Federal District Court, his struggle signifies the ability of civil disobedience as a radicalized mode of social justice, and the human body as a medium of social argumentation in a public, televised, and marketed setting – the boxing ring. This is significant because it showcases the power of the boxing ring as one that speaks to morality and social reform, empowered by both the mass culture that sport commands and justice found in legal courts.

References

1. Andres F. Quintana, “Muhammad Ali: The Greatest in Court,” Marquette Sports Law Review 18:1 (2007): 171-204
2. Benjamin T. Harrison, “The Muhammad Ali Draft Case and Public Debate on the Vietnam War,” Peace Research 33:2 (2001): 69-86
3. Dave Zirin, “Rumble, Young Man, Rumble: Muhammad Ali and the 1960s,” What’s My Name Fool: Sports and Resistance in the United States (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2005): 53-72

What Does a Veteran Mean to Me? Essay

“This nation will remain the land of the free only so long as it is the home of the brave”, — Elmer Davis

Imagine if the Founding Fathers of the United States of America hadn’t taken up arms against the crown. These men were sacrificing everything they have worked for all their lives in support of independence. They were regarded as heroes and were viewed as a symbol of hope. Today’s veterans are not that different, as they too are sacrificing everything to keep the spirit of those Founding Fathers alive for generations to come. These sacrifices are what makes a veteran a veteran.

What is a Veteran for me?

A veteran, to me, is someone who selflessly volunteers to protect our country. They come from all walks of life to answer the call of duty. They all join for different reasons or motivations, but all wear the uniform with pride. They charge into every battle, knowing it may be their last, yet do not hesitate to do so. They vow to serve our country in times of need, so that we can continue to live our ordinary lives. It does not matter their race, ethnicity or religion, for once they enlist in the military, they all share the same goal – to protect our country.

And for that goal, they sacrifice countless things. They live a life of discipline, so that we can live one of play. They go through torture so we can get up every day. Some may lose an arm or a leg, so we are able to keep ours. They give up their dreams, so we can chase ours. They take the lives of others, so that we don’t have to go through the shock of doing so. And the ultimate sacrifice, many have died in the line of duty, just so that we can live to see another day.

What these soldiers experience is nothing, but serious. The injuries they obtain, the trauma they go through, and the deaths of their brothers in arms are constant reminders of what they sacrifice. But they do it all for this country. They believe that this country is worth fighting for, and that it is a duty as an American citizen to do so. They pledge to protect the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, whether it be an outside force, or a terrorist next door.

And so, we salute you. We salute the men and women who are fighting on the battlefield right now to ensure our safety. We salute the men and women who have gotten an injury, and those who have stepped in when no one else would. We salute the courageous soldiers who have lived and died on the battlefield or given up their lives to save another. So, be grateful for the many luxuries that we have thanks to the struggle and sacrifices that these brave souls have made. These patriots are the foundation of our lives and will be here time and time again to uphold our country’s liberty, freedom, and justice.

Essay on Army Sharp

The purpose of this essay is to further educate soldiers on the importance of SHARP (Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention). Sexual harassment can come in many forms two, for example, ‘quid pro quo’ also known as ‘this for that’ and ‘hostile environment.’ Two of these are very serious, A soldier has many options when it comes to what he/she should do if sexual assault or harassment occurs and what prevention measures to take. This is why SHARP is so important to the Army.

To go more in-depth about ‘quid and pro’, which is a form of sexual harassment where one threatens the risk of another’s career if a sexual favor or action is not returned. For example, a soldier, of higher rank could tell a soldier, of lower rank, they will be promoted if a sexual favor is done for them and if not, the soldier could threaten them with discipline. Another type of sexual harassment is called a ‘hostile environment.’ This is when a soldier or civilian is getting unwanted and unsolicited comments towards them. This can include explicit comments on one’s body parts and suggested inappropriate pictures. There can be many different types of sexual harassment and assault, yet all of them should be taken very seriously. Any form can cause long-term mental and physical problems for the victim.

Many actions can be taken if you have had to deal with sexual assault or harassment, SHARP gives you a list of actions that can be taken to help you deal with this trauma. One route that could be taken is to talk with the harasser, one on one. Tell them it is not acceptable, and try to resolve it that way. If you feel too scared or embarrassed to talk to your harasser, you can always send them a letter, email, or any form of a non-direct message. If the harassment or assault is getting out of hand or you are too uncomfortable with handling the situation on your own, you can always report the assault or harassment to your supervisor or anyone in your chain of command to help get out of this uncomfortable situation. Someone is always there to help you and will be willing to help you.

In conclusion, There are many ways to prevent sexual assault and harassment, but the first step comes with educating soldiers and civilians on the subject. This is where SHARP comes into play, and why SHARP is so important. Many know about sexual assault and harassment before joining the Army, but not everyone is educated on the many forms it comes in, or how you can handle the situation if you are ever subjected to it. Whether it is verbal, non-verbal, or physical. SHARP helps by preventing with education, helping to understand when you are being sexually assaulted or harassed, and ways to help deal with it.

Army Leadership Styles Essay

Servant leadership has been a big concept in leadership development. The way individuals lead is dependent on what they have developed into or how they believe they should lead. Many have the feeling to lead from the front and inspire but many others have the feeling to serve an overall greater idea or purpose. Servant leadership, and the differences between it and other styles of leadership, can be applied to many aspects of the U.S. Army to effectively change and perhaps even improve leadership.

Servant leadership is a leadership style that is very effective on certain occasions and has a broad range of characteristics. What is servant leadership? Servant leadership “is a servant first…and begins with the feeling of wanting to serve” (Greenleaf 6). A servant leader obtains a feeling or desire to serve those around him or her. The power within a group is distributed and all serve a greater purpose and a bigger goal collectively shared. An individual who wants to be a servant leader dedicates his or her time to perfecting the ways to satisfy the needs of others before their own (Greenleaf 6). One must ask themselves what one can do to satisfy those around them and complete the mission. A leader must have the initiative to accept the fact that they are taking a risk and may fail or succeed. They must realize that they need to remain selfless and achieve the goal at the potential loss of their own goals. Although one may strive to serve, one also needs to follow in order to grasp a better idea of how to lead. Servant leader has a unique characteristic in that they distribute power among followers to potentially grow themselves as people and become better followers. One must be able to follow if one leads. If you are a follower, you must be able to hone your skills under the leadership of another so when you take on a leadership role you can overall perform better knowing their mistakes and how to bring new solutions to these issues. Although servant leadership is a leadership style that can be useful in certain situations, it differs from other leadership styles.

Servant leadership is a style of leadership in which leaders serve on behalf of the followers, which is very different from other styles. Servant leadership is completely different from an individual who leads first since the needs of others are held at the highest priority. Compared to leadership styles such as transformational, in which one looks to inspire and motivate to accomplish the mission, servant leadership seems to be more effective because followers are more involved with the leader as their needs are cared about and placed first. During projects or missions, conflict may arise within the group, among an individual, or during a task. As a servant leader, there should be an automatic response to listen to the conflict and try to solve the issue to help benefit the individual or group rather than themself (Greenleaf). If the same issue occurred with a transactional leader, the individual would correct the action to the way they are either trained or knowledgeable about and then move on (Scandura). Many times, they task other individuals to solve these issues and grant a reward to those who solve the issue. This is an ineffective way of leading because motivation is steered towards reward instead of individual progression and the overall goal of the group or team. Also, with transactional leadership, many issues are dealt with using a generic solution that has been developed out of habit or protocol. Servant leadership allows for creativity to arise in a solution. Since you are serving the people in a leadership position, you can collectively include them in the problem-solving process and come up with a potentially more effective solution than protocol. Not only is servant leadership different from other leadership styles, but it can be applied to the U.S. Army.

The servant leadership style can be applied to leaders in the U.S. Army. As soldiers in the U.S. Army, you swear to support and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. When you take this oath, you are sworn to serve and protect the people of the United States selflessly. Soldiers are servants to the people of the United States because they are protectors of freedom and perform duties that serve the people of the United States and others within the U.S. Army. As officers in the Army, one must serve the people of the United States but also serve the soldiers underneath them. Officers must complete the mission, but also need to take into account the needs of their soldiers. If soldiers’ needs are not satisfied, they are going to be unmotivated and less likely to participate fully in mission tasks. Officers need to generate an environment for soldiers in which strengths rather than weaknesses are recognized, results are generated and recognized, and leadership listens rather than orders. Within this environment, fellow soldiers are more involved with their tasks and they feel more motivated to complete the task at hand correctly and more efficiently. This environment generates a more satisfying work environment but an overall satisfied soldier. Satisfied soldiers are more willing to continue their careers within the Army. If a solider is tasked with an assignment that reflects one of his or her weaknesses, the task will not be completed effectively and it may cause further issues, but if it is one of his or her strengths the task can be completed effectively. In terms of a team, if each member is tasked with an assignment that they are strong and confident in doing, then the team cohesion is going to be strong and effective. Cohesion is key to the success of a team. Without cohesion, it is hard to accomplish goals under one mindset and complete tasks appropriate to the mission. The Army must be a cohesive team in order to accomplish missions to serve and protect the citizens of the United States. Without servant leadership, the Army would not be able to generate work environments for soldiers to generate success. The success of individual soldiers, teams and units must be guided by leadership that is more involved and more effective such as servant leadership. Servant leadership is a very interesting leadership style and can be applied to leadership within the U.S. Army.

Servant leadership is a very interesting leadership style that generates a different environment for followers, distributes power, and places the needs of others before the self. This is different from other styles because other styles tend to either motivate through reward or try to motivate to complete a task for the benefit of self or the leader. In the Army, this leadership style can be applied to benefit the longevity of soldiers and can also benefit leaders in their success in completing missions. Overall, servant leadership is a very beneficial leadership style and should be used widely to create a better environment and benefit leadership in motivating followers to accomplish the mission.

Reference Page

1. Greenleaf, Robert K. The Servant as Leader. Robert K. Greenleaf Center, 2008.
2. Scandura, Terri A. Essentials of Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach. 2018.

Servant leadership has been a big concept in leadership development. The way individuals lead is dependent on what they have developed into or how they believe they should lead. Many have the feeling to lead from the front and inspire but many others have the feeling to serve an overall greater idea or purpose. Servant leadership, and the differences between it and other styles of leadership, can be applied to many aspects of the U.S. Army to effectively change and perhaps even improve leadership.

Servant leadership is a leadership style that is very effective on certain occasions and has a broad range of characteristics. What is servant leadership? Servant leadership “is a servant first…and begins with the feeling of wanting to serve” (Greenleaf 6). A servant leader obtains a feeling or desire to serve those around him or her. The power within a group is distributed and all serve a greater purpose and a bigger goal collectively shared. An individual who wants to be a servant leader dedicates his or her time to perfecting the ways to satisfy the needs of others before their own (Greenleaf 6). One must ask themselves what one can do to satisfy those around them and complete the mission. A leader must have the initiative to accept the fact that they are taking a risk and may fail or succeed. They must realize that they need to remain selfless and achieve the goal at the potential loss of their own goals. Although one may strive to serve, one also needs to follow in order to grasp a better idea of how to lead. Servant leader has a unique characteristic in that they distribute power among followers to potentially grow themselves as people and become better followers. One must be able to follow if one leads. If you are a follower, you must be able to hone your skills under the leadership of another so when you take on a leadership role you can overall perform better knowing their mistakes and how to bring new solutions to these issues. Although servant leadership is a leadership style that can be useful in certain situations, it differs from other leadership styles.

Servant leadership is a style of leadership in which leaders serve on behalf of the followers, which is very different from other styles. Servant leadership is completely different from an individual who leads first since the needs of others are held at the highest priority. Compared to leadership styles such as transformational, in which one looks to inspire and motivate to accomplish the mission, servant leadership seems to be more effective because followers are more involved with the leader as their needs are cared about and placed first. During projects or missions, conflict may arise within the group, among an individual, or during a task. As a servant leader, there should be an automatic response to listen to the conflict and try to solve the issue to help benefit the individual or group rather than themself (Greenleaf). If the same issue occurred with a transactional leader, the individual would correct the action to the way they are either trained or knowledgeable about and then move on (Scandura). Many times, they task other individuals to solve these issues and grant a reward to those who solve the issue. This is an ineffective way of leading because motivation is steered towards reward instead of individual progression and the overall goal of the group or team. Also, with transactional leadership, many issues are dealt with using a generic solution that has been developed out of habit or protocol. Servant leadership allows for creativity to arise in a solution. Since you are serving the people in a leadership position, you can collectively include them in the problem-solving process and come up with a potentially more effective solution than protocol. Not only is servant leadership different from other leadership styles, but it can be applied to the U.S. Army.

The servant leadership style can be applied to leaders in the U.S. Army. As soldiers in the U.S. Army, you swear to support and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. When you take this oath, you are sworn to serve and protect the people of the United States selflessly. Soldiers are servants to the people of the United States because they are protectors of freedom and perform duties that serve the people of the United States and others within the U.S. Army. As officers in the Army, one must serve the people of the United States but also serve the soldiers underneath them. Officers must complete the mission, but also need to take into account the needs of their soldiers. If soldiers’ needs are not satisfied, they are going to be unmotivated and less likely to participate fully in mission tasks. Officers need to generate an environment for soldiers in which strengths rather than weaknesses are recognized, results are generated and recognized, and leadership listens rather than orders. Within this environment, fellow soldiers are more involved with their tasks and they feel more motivated to complete the task at hand correctly and more efficiently. This environment generates a more satisfying work environment but an overall satisfied soldier. Satisfied soldiers are more willing to continue their careers within the Army. If a solider is tasked with an assignment that reflects one of his or her weaknesses, the task will not be completed effectively and it may cause further issues, but if it is one of his or her strengths the task can be completed effectively. In terms of a team, if each member is tasked with an assignment that they are strong and confident in doing, then the team cohesion is going to be strong and effective. Cohesion is key to the success of a team. Without cohesion, it is hard to accomplish goals under one mindset and complete tasks appropriate to the mission. The Army must be a cohesive team in order to accomplish missions to serve and protect the citizens of the United States. Without servant leadership, the Army would not be able to generate work environments for soldiers to generate success. The success of individual soldiers, teams and units must be guided by leadership that is more involved and more effective such as servant leadership. Servant leadership is a very interesting leadership style and can be applied to leadership within the U.S. Army.

Servant leadership is a very interesting leadership style that generates a different environment for followers, distributes power, and places the needs of others before the self. This is different from other styles because other styles tend to either motivate through reward or try to motivate to complete a task for the benefit of self or the leader. In the Army, this leadership style can be applied to benefit the longevity of soldiers and can also benefit leaders in their success in completing missions. Overall, servant leadership is a very beneficial leadership style and should be used widely to create a better environment and benefit leadership in motivating followers to accomplish the mission.

Reference Page

1. Greenleaf, Robert K. The Servant as Leader. Robert K. Greenleaf Center, 2008.
2. Scandura, Terri A. Essentials of Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach. 2018.

Why I Want to Be an Army Officer Essay

The issue facing today’s Army with future leaders is its need to produce great leaders in its Non-commissioned Officer corps, which comes from a framework of building talent through positive influences with mentoring, training, experience, and communication skills.

The Army has been known for creating great fighting forces and great leaders through the education and training provided by its centers of excellence and training institutions. For over 200 years, the Non-commissioned Officer has played a significant role as a leader of soldiers (2017, February 06), which is why they are known today as the “Backbone of the Army.” Before the Non-commissioned Officers were known as the backbone of the Army they were called file-closers; it was during the American Revolution that the first NCOs were known by this name. In 1778 the first Inspector General titled the Non-commissioned Officer the backbone of the Army (2015, December 22).

On June 14, 1775, when the 2nd Continental Congress created the Colonial Army using existing troops and formations from the militia of the 13 colonies the NCO was established (2018, January 17). The Non-commissioned Officer organization emerged over the years and in 1973 the Army became an all-volunteer force. The Army all-volunteer force was built upon the principles of leadership, talent management, purpose, goals, and training. In 1973, the Army developed the Basic Non-commissioned Officers course (BNCOC), the Advanced Non-commissioned Officers Course (ANCOC), and the Sergeants Major Academy Course to grow its Non-commissioned Officers.

What is the role of the Non-commissioned Officer? “A role is defined as your job, your profession, responsibilities, and your position” (2015, December 22). A Non-commissioned Officer is a professional providing leadership to their soldiers through commitment, development, and practice of the Army values. They train each soldier in every step of their career- guiding and helping them to become future professionals who are knowledgeable and caring Non-commissioned Officers. Non-commissioned Officers spend time teaching soldiers how to properly wear the dress uniform and duty uniform. They provide mentorship and direction through counseling and communications, ensuring soldiers understand their responsibility, so they can accomplish their tasks. These are just a few points where NCOs supervise and develop soldiers to become future leaders.

“It goes without saying that we as leaders have many duties and responsibilities within our Army and we must ‘invest’ in our Army, that investment is the development of the next generation of great leaders that will guide the future of our Army”(Mentorship: Understanding a Leader’s Investment). Taking care of soldiers and developing them is what we do as Non-commissioned officers. This is why the mentorship program is one of those keys to building our next generation of great leaders, NCOs.

So the question is what is Mentorship? The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines a mentor as someone who teaches or gives help and advice to a less experienced and often younger person; or to teaches or gives advice or guidance to someone, such as a less experienced person or a child (Mentorship: Understanding a Leader’s Investment). Army Regulation 600-100, Army Profession and Leadership Policy defines mentorship as a person who has a vast amount of professional experience and who volunteers his/her time to teach and guide a less experienced person. “The focus of mentorship is voluntary mentoring that extends beyond the scope of a chain of command relationships and occurs when a mentor provides the mentee advice and counsel over a period of time. Effective mentorship will positively impact personal and professional development” (Mentorship: Understanding a Leader’s Investment).

Through personal experience of having a mentor, I didn’t realize early in my career how my senior leader was trying to help me grow. He would always provide advice and recommendations, to guide me through different situations. The relationship and trust that was built from my challenges with the help of my mentor reaffirmed what I knew, that my mentor had the best intentions for me and supported me. He helped me to grow as a leader and to have the ability to provide the same mentorship to young soldiers. “Mentoring is the vital ingredient that strengthens the foundation—and, as an ongoing practice, keeps it strong” (2018, January 18).

In order to grow strong Non-commissioned Officers both personally and professionally, we must provide and maintain their training and open communications. “As the Army’s mission evolves in response to continuing challenges, so too must the methods employed to train and promote the current and future generations of Soldiers. The driving force to meet this essential need is the Non-commissioned Officer Professional Development System” (Marching Forward With NCOPDS). The Non-commissioned Officer Professional Development System is what helps promote advancements in your career field by providing development of NCOs, managing their training & education, and fostering professionalism.

A road map for Non-commissioned officers to promote up the ranks is called Select, Train, Educate, Promote (STEP). In order for a soldier to promote from sergeant to sergeant major, they must complete a series of professional education both online and at a military school. STEP when into effect on January 1, 2016, and is now the requirement for promotions through the ranks. By way of connecting SSD courses and the NCO Education System to advancement, the Army will prepare NCOs for the complexities of today’s operational environment while reinforcing the benefits of a deliberate, continuous, sequential, and progressive professional development strategy” (STAND-TO).

“Though the content and course material has changed considerably over the 45 years since NCOES was conceived, its framework has stayed constant. As a line of effort from the recently approved NCO 2020 Strategy, NCOES established the NCO Professional Development System to absorb and expand NCOES across three focus areas: development, talent management, and stewardship” (2018, March 21).

The Non-commissioned Officer Education System (NCOES) is comprised of three areas to develop the NCO and that is development, talent management, and stewardship. In addition to the NCOES and the development of NCOs, the Army added a career map called the Army career Tracker to show and help NCOs manage and progress through the ranks.

The Army Career Tracker shows the NCOs what they need to promote and advance within their career field/military occupation skill (MOS) and recommendations for key success such as training, assignments, education both military and civilian, and certifications. “The Army Career Tracker is leveling the playing field by giving every Soldier the same information and the same opportunities at their fingertips so they don’t have to base their career on good, or not so good, leadership” (Crozier, D.).

“The goal for the NCO Professional Development System is to prepare the next generation of competent and committed NCOs of character, trusted Army professionals, capable of thriving in chaos, adapting and winning in a complex world”(2018, March 21). Developing a great leader and Non-commissioned Officer takes time, training, education, and experience. These are the essential elements and framework for building our future leaders, NCOs.

Living the NCO creed is important and the first line starts it off by stating who is accountable to set the standards for all others to follow and that is, “No one is more professional than I”. NCOs are charged with the welfare and leading soldiers mentoring them through positive communications and a genuine interest for them and their families. Every soldier is entitled to exceptional leadership and as a leader of soldiers, the NCO will provide that direction and guidance.

In the end, the building blocks for great leaders are not just in what education we receive, the mentorship we are provided, the training we obtain, or the experience that develops through maturity. It’s the inter desire to be better than you are, and the passion to help others succeed. We’re all professionals, non-commissioned officers, and leaders (ARMY.MIL Features).

Reference

1. ARMY.MIL Features. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.army.mil/values/nco.html
2. Crozier, D. (n.d.). Army Career Tracker helps leaders monitor SSD and mentor Soldiers. Retrieved from https://ncolcoe.armylive.dodlive.mil/army-career-tracker-helps-leaders-monitor-ssd-mentor-soldiers/
3. Step By Step: NCO Training Has Evolved Since Army’s Creation. (2018, March 21). Retrieved from https://www.ausa.org/articles/step-step-nco-training-has-evolved-army’s-creation
4. Elder, D. (2018, January 17). When was the US Army NCO Corps formed? Retrieved from http://ncoguide.net/when-was-the-us-army-nco-corps-formed/
5. STAND-TO! (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.army.mil/standto/archive_2015-08-24/
6. Marching Forward With NCOPDS. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/NCO-Journal/Archives/2018/January/NCOPDS/
7. The Army Doesn’t Effectively Mentor Noncommissioned Officers. It Needs to Start. (2018, January 18). Retrieved from https://mwi.usma.edu/army-doesnt-effectively-mentor-noncommissioned-officers-needs-start/
8. Mentorship: Understanding a Leader’s Investment. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/NCO-Journal/Archives/2017/December/Mentorship/

Foundation Of Army Leadership

The foundations of the Army leadership are rooted in history, loyalty to the nation and the Constitution, accountability to authority, and the Army doctrine; according with ADRP 6-22. This paper will examine the three cores of a leader’s competencies (leads, develops, and achieves), how the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution establishes common values, goals and beliefs, and how the Army doctrine affects the foundations of Army leadership.

Influence, accomplishment, and improvement represent the roles and functions of a leader. Leaders must lead by example with good communication skills to build trust that extends beyond the chain of command. Trust, through correlative effort, binds a group in order to achieve common goals. An incorrect form of influence will degrade a soldier’s value for the Army and the team, creating a negatively impacted soldier. As a leader, the higher the amount of positive influence on a soldier, the higher the chance the leader has to make a great soldier, better. A positive influenced soldier will achieve greater accomplishments in his/her career and personal life, than a negatively influenced soldier would. Accomplishments drive a soldier’s positive attitude forward whilst improving the morale and environment of everyone around them, and ultimately, the organization. Success come ‘through education, training and experience’ and develops soldiers into competent and discipline leaders and professionals.

Furthermore, to achieve greatness, a soldier must accept and act on constructive criticism from his/her peers and chain of command. Improving is an act of stewardship, striving to create effective, efficient organizations. Counseling is imperative for subordinates to improve performance and prepare leaders for eventual responsibilities, and should address strong areas as well as weak ones.

The Declaration of Independence establishes the belief that “all men are created equal”, which play a big role in the Army and leadership. A statement such as these is what makes serving the country a priority for many and an honor for all. As many higher-ranking leaders tell their subordinates: “I am the same as you. The rank changes, but we wear the same uniform”. This goes a long way to show soldiers in the military that they are equal to their superiors as men, which sets a standard for uniform, professionalism, duty, and behavior. In addition, the Declaration of Independence states that the people of the United States are entitled to “unalienable rights” among those being the life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These rights are powerful enough to make any man fight for his/her family’s liberty in order to pursuit happiness in the presence of life.

The United States Constitution establishes the framework for the creation of our national defense to include the fundamentals of funding, formation, and command of the Army. National defense is the priority of the national government, such that in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, 6 of the 17 powers, which are granted to Congress, deals exclusively with the national defense. Congress has the authority to “declare war, raise and support armies, provide for a navy, establish the rules for the operation of American military forces…”. The First Amendment establishes freedom of religion, of speech, the press, assembly, and the right to petition the Government for a “redress of grievances”. These rights are of such paramount importance in an Army of many that are so culturally different, it demands the respect from every single person who joins. The Second Amendment gives citizens the right to bear arms and thus protect their homes and loved ones. The right to bear arms ties into foundation of leadership by allowing soldiers to protect their homes and loved ones in the service of their country.

The Army and its leadership requirements are based on the nation’s democratic foundations, defined values, and standards of excellence. Leadership doctrine understands that adaptation is vital to change in society, progression of security threats, and progression in technology. Leadership doctrine establishes commonality in the structure of language and expectations, with a fundamental set of attributes and competencies common to all cohorts and leadership levels. These fundamental attributes and competencies are mostly known as leadership requirements model (LRM) and include character, presence, intellect, leads, develops and achieves. The LRM is globally implemented model that crosses all levels of authority and responsibility within the Army. LRM is an eternal concept due to its transmissibility across generations regardless of resources, command, application, priorities, or strategies. The inclusion of military and civilian leaders within the army to the LRM increases the reach in which the model influences. Individual and organizational performance derives from leadership development commitment with a well-structured system.

In conclusion, the three cores of a leader’s competencies (leads, develops, and achieves) influences the leadership role by setting the example of how a leader should build trust, communicate, and create a positive environment for their soldiers. Education, training and experience develops soldiers into competent and discipline leaders and successful professionals. The Declaration of Independence establishes common values, goals and beliefs such as “all men are created equal” and life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The United States Constitution establishes the framework for the creation of our national defense to include the fundamentals of funding, formation, and command of the Army. Alongside the First and Second Amendments protecting citizens’ and soldiers’ right to speech and bear arms, among others. Leadership doctrine establishes commonality in the structure of language and expectations, with a set of attributes and competencies common to military and civilian leaders across the army.

Philosophy of Leadership in the Army by Personal Example

Leader is a definition in itself, the one who through the ages and in any discipline has managed to lead a group towards victory. The leader’s philosophy, without a doubt must know and share all the ways to achieve success. Leaders always know deep down that victory is the value that makes those who follow them spiritually grow, and through it the individuals have overcome their initial limitations. Leader is the most valuable figure of the deck because with their energy and advice they will know how to get the best attitudes and skills from anyone around them. We as army leaders must have and apply those special skills that separate us and make us different from the rest.

Setting goals and expectations is essential for teams to work together with a common goal. We as leaders need to move towards a clear and fixed goal in order to apply with greater determination, in this way we know what to expect of ourselves and our team. Therefore, it becomes essential that a leader transmits to the team what the mission, vision and strategy are. We can start by setting an ambitious long-term goal and giving smaller tasks with specific results that will motivate our team and will not divert the gaze from the objective (Wolf, 2015).

Investing in people human talent is the most important and valuable variable of any organization. Therefore, if we want prepared people, we must invest in their training. First, we must select those profiles that we think have potential in those areas and divisions that will help us reach our goal. Once they are part of our team, we must to invest in them so they can continue to evolve and grow professionally and make the organization grow towards the goal. Soldiers with leadership qualities are able to recognize special skills and know how to use them for the benefit of the organization.

Strengthening talent is important to create career plans for each of the soldiers who work with us. Conduct performance counseling in order to give honest feedback about their strengths and areas for improvement. On the other hand, talented soldiers tend to be ambitious at the same time, so it is not always easy to retain them. For that reason, it is essential to take care of them and motivate our talented soldier to do new tasks and go new places. Another fundamental ingredient is commitment, and this is only achieved with good communication between leaders and soldiers. This will make them feel motivated and satisfied.

Communication is key to lead effectively, is essential to communicate with all soldiers to transmit all information and expectations to the team. The key is to communicate with transparency, in a clear and concise manner. However, this flow of communication and information cannot be unilateral. Good leaders always have an open ear towards the concerns of their soldiers. Communication and leadership go hand in hand when we talk about the leaders of today and those of tomorrow (Wolf, 2015).

Active listening involves observing and asking, flexibility and trust, openness and firmness. Actively listening to soldiers is gathering all their ideas and contributions and putting them into practice. When there is active listening in the team all members of the team have a better understanding the reason for their work. Expand their vision and direction according to our strategies and goals (Wolf, 2015).

Motivation is essential in any leader who seeks to be a reference person within their teams. This requires that we create a healthy, optimistic, and fun environment at the same time, but also ambitious and challenging work group. Motivating and inspiring our soldiers and encouraging our enthusiasm for projects is one of the most important skills and the key to success. Motivated soldiers are good soldiers, the more aware we are of our own abilities and the more open we are to them, the more successful we will be as leaders.

Leading by example, we must be the first to work hard, and take the responsibilities that protect our position and do it with honesty, ethics and authenticity. Do not pretend to be what we are not. Leadership ability can also be seen as the ability to deliver responsibility and delegate tasks. Those who transfer responsibility to their soldiers motivate them and guarantee their loyalty.

After all it is important to understand that we all have different leadership styles, and ways delegate tasks to our soldiers but we must be agreed that our main goal as leaders in to inspire and motivate our team to accomplish any mission or task in an effective matter. We must be the example to follow and the inspiration for our soldiers to success in the mission and life. This is exactly what our army leadership philosophy is all about.

Philosophy of Leadership in the Army by Personal Example

Leader is a definition in itself, the one who through the ages and in any discipline has managed to lead a group towards victory. The leader’s philosophy, without a doubt must know and share all the ways to achieve success. Leaders always know deep down that victory is the value that makes those who follow them spiritually grow, and through it the individuals have overcome their initial limitations. Leader is the most valuable figure of the deck because with their energy and advice they will know how to get the best attitudes and skills from anyone around them. We as army leaders must have and apply those special skills that separate us and make us different from the rest.

Setting goals and expectations is essential for teams to work together with a common goal. We as leaders need to move towards a clear and fixed goal in order to apply with greater determination, in this way we know what to expect of ourselves and our team. Therefore, it becomes essential that a leader transmits to the team what the mission, vision and strategy are. We can start by setting an ambitious long-term goal and giving smaller tasks with specific results that will motivate our team and will not divert the gaze from the objective (Wolf, 2015).

Investing in people human talent is the most important and valuable variable of any organization. Therefore, if we want prepared people, we must invest in their training. First, we must select those profiles that we think have potential in those areas and divisions that will help us reach our goal. Once they are part of our team, we must to invest in them so they can continue to evolve and grow professionally and make the organization grow towards the goal. Soldiers with leadership qualities are able to recognize special skills and know how to use them for the benefit of the organization.

Strengthening talent is important to create career plans for each of the soldiers who work with us. Conduct performance counseling in order to give honest feedback about their strengths and areas for improvement. On the other hand, talented soldiers tend to be ambitious at the same time, so it is not always easy to retain them. For that reason, it is essential to take care of them and motivate our talented soldier to do new tasks and go new places. Another fundamental ingredient is commitment, and this is only achieved with good communication between leaders and soldiers. This will make them feel motivated and satisfied.

Communication is key to lead effectively, is essential to communicate with all soldiers to transmit all information and expectations to the team. The key is to communicate with transparency, in a clear and concise manner. However, this flow of communication and information cannot be unilateral. Good leaders always have an open ear towards the concerns of their soldiers. Communication and leadership go hand in hand when we talk about the leaders of today and those of tomorrow (Wolf, 2015).

Active listening involves observing and asking, flexibility and trust, openness and firmness. Actively listening to soldiers is gathering all their ideas and contributions and putting them into practice. When there is active listening in the team all members of the team have a better understanding the reason for their work. Expand their vision and direction according to our strategies and goals (Wolf, 2015).

Motivation is essential in any leader who seeks to be a reference person within their teams. This requires that we create a healthy, optimistic, and fun environment at the same time, but also ambitious and challenging work group. Motivating and inspiring our soldiers and encouraging our enthusiasm for projects is one of the most important skills and the key to success. Motivated soldiers are good soldiers, the more aware we are of our own abilities and the more open we are to them, the more successful we will be as leaders.

Leading by example, we must be the first to work hard, and take the responsibilities that protect our position and do it with honesty, ethics and authenticity. Do not pretend to be what we are not. Leadership ability can also be seen as the ability to deliver responsibility and delegate tasks. Those who transfer responsibility to their soldiers motivate them and guarantee their loyalty.

After all it is important to understand that we all have different leadership styles, and ways delegate tasks to our soldiers but we must be agreed that our main goal as leaders in to inspire and motivate our team to accomplish any mission or task in an effective matter. We must be the example to follow and the inspiration for our soldiers to success in the mission and life. This is exactly what our army leadership philosophy is all about.

Levels of Leadership in the Army

What does leadership mean? Leadership is someone of higher ranking who influences people by providing direction, motivation and improving the organization at the same time. The purpose of this essay is to inform you about the three levels of leadership and how each level is as important as the next. Each of these levels are very important because they each play a different role in the Army. It goes from the lowest level to the highest level of the Army. Without leadership in each of these roles, we wouldn’t be able to accomplish most of the stuff we have accomplished today. Leadership is what helps keep the Army together and moving.

The three different levels of leadership are direct, organizational and strategic. Direct is the lowest level going to organizational then strategic being the highest. In direct it all deals with leadership in the battalion levels. With organizational it all deals with brigade level. For strategic, the leadership is from DoD to the government. In this level it can be military personnel to DA civilian leaders. All these levels have the same objective of progression in the Army. But they all also have their own goals to achieve. The way these all can relate to each other is trying to plan and see where we can progress and do better. Push to make our Army better and grow together as a whole unit. The Army is changing every day and without all of these levels, we wouldn’t be able to be where we are today.

Direct level leadership is very important. This level starts from the very beginning. Leaders should be able to motivate, give direction and help soldiers learn what’s right from wrong in the Army. They deal with short-range planning and mission accomplishment. Helping soldiers progress in any area they have trouble with is important for future missions. If the leadership in this level isn’t properly conducted, it could really affect the soldiers’ future performance. They won’t be so sure how things work and maybe even not be able to progress because they weren’t taught the right way. Soldiers in this level should be aware of their role, that way in case they go up to organizational, they know little of what to expect. Without the direct level the mission sent from the higher levels wouldn’t be able to get accomplished.

When a soldier is doing an awesome job, they can go up to organizational. Organizational would include leaders at brigade through corps levels. Here they deal with everyone throughout the brigade. Leaders learn to manage multiple priorities and establish long term vision. They are able to help battalions when they are struggling or if the issue is higher than what the battalion is able to deal with, it would go to them. Organizational plan most of the training that happens throughout the brigade. For this level you have to be good at problem solving and figuring out difficult situations. This level requires a lot of extra skills that are very essential. Having communication skills is also very important because you will be dealing with a lot of people and planning. They are indirectly and focus on medium-range planning. From 1 to 5 years. Without the organizational level, the direct level wouldn’t have any guidance.

Lastly, the strategic level is the highest level. This consist of the highest military personal and DA civilian leaders. It works through the Department of Defenses. It goes as high as division, to the corporate level, all the way through to the national level. They are responsible for large organizations and influence several thousands of people. It involves running the Army. Here they develop plans, policies, guidance and laws. These leaders try focusing on the environments in today’s Army to understand them for future organizational roles. People in this level work closely with higher level leadership. Their decisions can impact a lot which is why you should fully think things through. Anything you say can affect more than you think. They have wide range consequences as well. Leaders here need to have knowledge in a lot of the subjects they deal with which can be legislative, DoD and governmental. The leadership shows full support in Army values, traditions, and ethics. They deal with bringing in new programs or even improve Army programs, bringing new things to the Army, or even new rules that soldiers must go by. Their focus here is a long-range vision from 5 to 20 years. If there was no leadership in the strategic level, everyone in the Army will be misguided.

Levels of Leadership in the Army

What does leadership mean? Leadership is someone of higher ranking who influences people by providing direction, motivation and improving the organization at the same time. The purpose of this essay is to inform you about the three levels of leadership and how each level is as important as the next. Each of these levels are very important because they each play a different role in the Army. It goes from the lowest level to the highest level of the Army. Without leadership in each of these roles, we wouldn’t be able to accomplish most of the stuff we have accomplished today. Leadership is what helps keep the Army together and moving.

The three different levels of leadership are direct, organizational and strategic. Direct is the lowest level going to organizational then strategic being the highest. In direct it all deals with leadership in the battalion levels. With organizational it all deals with brigade level. For strategic, the leadership is from DoD to the government. In this level it can be military personnel to DA civilian leaders. All these levels have the same objective of progression in the Army. But they all also have their own goals to achieve. The way these all can relate to each other is trying to plan and see where we can progress and do better. Push to make our Army better and grow together as a whole unit. The Army is changing every day and without all of these levels, we wouldn’t be able to be where we are today.

Direct level leadership is very important. This level starts from the very beginning. Leaders should be able to motivate, give direction and help soldiers learn what’s right from wrong in the Army. They deal with short-range planning and mission accomplishment. Helping soldiers progress in any area they have trouble with is important for future missions. If the leadership in this level isn’t properly conducted, it could really affect the soldiers’ future performance. They won’t be so sure how things work and maybe even not be able to progress because they weren’t taught the right way. Soldiers in this level should be aware of their role, that way in case they go up to organizational, they know little of what to expect. Without the direct level the mission sent from the higher levels wouldn’t be able to get accomplished.

When a soldier is doing an awesome job, they can go up to organizational. Organizational would include leaders at brigade through corps levels. Here they deal with everyone throughout the brigade. Leaders learn to manage multiple priorities and establish long term vision. They are able to help battalions when they are struggling or if the issue is higher than what the battalion is able to deal with, it would go to them. Organizational plan most of the training that happens throughout the brigade. For this level you have to be good at problem solving and figuring out difficult situations. This level requires a lot of extra skills that are very essential. Having communication skills is also very important because you will be dealing with a lot of people and planning. They are indirectly and focus on medium-range planning. From 1 to 5 years. Without the organizational level, the direct level wouldn’t have any guidance.

Lastly, the strategic level is the highest level. This consist of the highest military personal and DA civilian leaders. It works through the Department of Defenses. It goes as high as division, to the corporate level, all the way through to the national level. They are responsible for large organizations and influence several thousands of people. It involves running the Army. Here they develop plans, policies, guidance and laws. These leaders try focusing on the environments in today’s Army to understand them for future organizational roles. People in this level work closely with higher level leadership. Their decisions can impact a lot which is why you should fully think things through. Anything you say can affect more than you think. They have wide range consequences as well. Leaders here need to have knowledge in a lot of the subjects they deal with which can be legislative, DoD and governmental. The leadership shows full support in Army values, traditions, and ethics. They deal with bringing in new programs or even improve Army programs, bringing new things to the Army, or even new rules that soldiers must go by. Their focus here is a long-range vision from 5 to 20 years. If there was no leadership in the strategic level, everyone in the Army will be misguided.