Category: Army

Attributes and Competencies of an Army Leader: A Reflective Essay

The purpose of this essay is to reflect upon my time here at the NCO Academy and to talk about which lesson I related to the most. I have learned an exponential amount of knowledge throughout my experience here Joint Base Lewis-McChord’s Basic Leader’s Course. I learned a great deal about the Army in general and also about leadership and the Army’s thought processes behind it. I can use this information and take it back to my unit as I prepare myself to progress in the ranks. One of the most important classes taught by our small group leaders was the lesson on the leadership requirements model (LRM). The Army’s leadership requirements model outlines the attributes and competencies of a leader.

Leadership and the Army is very important and it differs from person to person. We learn from our mistakes and from other NCO’s mistakes as what works and what does not work when you are in charge and have Soldiers under you. There are different leadership roles and require more or less effort. The LRM is based on the BE-KNOW-DO perception. This theory is based on our character, knowing the skills we need to have and the actions we take to become an effective leader.

The leadership requirements model contains 3 attributes of an Army leader. The attributes are character, presence and intellectual capacity. These ideas focus most on what a leader is instead of the actions a leader must take. Character is based on the person’s identity, which are factors that are central and internal and makes up that individual. A leader demonstrating character must live by the Army values and warrior ethos, and must show empathy towards soldiers. The Army values are essential for effective leaders and these values are key to helping us discern between what right and wrong. The warrior ethos represents all soldiers and their professionalism in the Army. Empathy is caring for soldiers in their time of need and not being based. We as leaders should try to fill the shoes of our soldiers and try to relate with their feelings and emotions. Attributes outline how leaders act in their environment.

The leadership requirements model contains 3 competencies of an Army leader. The competencies are to lead, develop and to achieve. We must learn to lead by example and know that our soldiers are watching what we do and will act accordingly.

Consistent communication is also very important. Communication is not just relaying information but also being able to partake in active listening. This shows that we genuinely care for our subordinates.

In conclusion, leadership is more than just being in charge of soldiers and just giving them orders. According to the leadership requirements model, as leaders we must learn to possess these attributes and competencies.

Essay on the Main Attributes of a Leader in the Army

Being a leader is an important role in the Army and almost every other organization in the world. Just being assigned the role of leader doesn’t dictate what kind of leader that you will be. There are certain attributes you must have to help ensure you are a successful leader. These will serve as the foundation for developing and growing as a leader. Being a leader is defined as “The person who leads or commands a group, organization, or country”. This clearly defines that being a leader is a position or role that anyone can be given. How you carry yourself and the attributes that you follow will determine what kind of leader you are. The attributes that a successful leader must live by are integrity, loyalty, decisiveness, courage, competence, and humility.

The first attribute – integrity – is defined as: “A firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). This not only means being honesty, but it means living up to your code of morals and not compromising them. By doing this, you are setting the example for your soldiers to follow. Which will inspire them to show up every day and do what’s morally right. There will be times in life where leaders will mess up, but you will gain people’s respect by owning those mistakes.

Loyalty is not only an attribute for a successful leader, but it is also the first Army value. The foundation of this attribute is simply commitment. This is more than just ensuring your soldiers get the training and resources they need. It also means to stand up for your soldiers and have their backs when it comes time. One of the biggest things that undermines trust in a leader is that exactly. Someone will not want to follow you if they don’t think that you’d stand up for them in a time of need. You must also be loyal to your leaders and peers. When something goes wrong you shouldn’t be talking behind their back and undermining the mission. Loyalty is not one sided and it is an essential attribute for a leader to possess.

Decisiveness is the ability to make a decision quickly and to do so with confidence. “In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing” (President Theodore Roosevelt). Soldiers look to their leaders to make timely decisions and to stick to them. In Garrison, indecisiveness can result in failure of a task or mission. In combat, indecisiveness can result in death and catastrophe. The greatest leaders in military history have practiced this attribute and it helped make them into that successful leader.

Successful leaders lead the way and often find themselves in new and unfamiliar circumstances. This requires courage to overcome fear that can come with these new situations. It’s about making the unpopular decision sometimes to benefit the greater good. Courage is one of the things that makes most other leader attributes effective. For example, without having courage a leader won’t be able to be effectively decisive. When people see leaders demonstrating this attribute, it inspires their subordinates to be courageous.

One of the first things a soldier looks for in a leader is competence. Competence doesn’t mean that a leader knows everything, but they know what to do. “Socrates believed that the one who clearly knows best what ought to be done will most easily gain the obedience of the others” (Michael McKinney, ‘The Importance of Competence’). If a leader doesn’t know their job, then they will be ineffective at being able to teach their subordinates. It is very important for leaders to be stewards of their profession and be proficient at their jobs.

One of the best things a leader can practice is humility. This attribute is harder to find in leaders, because it requires leaders to control their egos. “Humility doesn’t mean that you’re weak or unsure of yourself. It means that you have the self-confidence and self-awareness to recognize the value of others without feeling threatened” (Brian Tracy, ‘7 Leadership Qualities, Attributes & Characteristics of Good Leaders’). This means being able to identify people’s strengths and utilize them instead of being threatened by them.

Being a leader is role than can be assigned to anyone, but just having this role does not define the quality of the leader. There are important attributes that a leader needs to acquire in order to be effective and successful. These attributes are integrity, loyalty, decisiveness, courage, competence, and humility. Actively practicing these will build the foundation for a great leader and will inspire their followers to do the same. When leaders inspire these attributes in their followers, it will spread and benefit the future leaders of an organization.

Contemporary Issues at the Three Levels of Leadership in the United States Army

The Army is the largest or the United States Armed Forces (Reynolds & Shendruk, 2018). Like other military branches it exists for the purposes of defense and to serve the national interest. Like any organization, such as a corporation, it has a stratification of leadership with higher positions holding higher responsibilities over larger portions of the institution. This holds more emphasis in the military due to chain of command. Decisions, policy, and regulation trickle from higher echelons down to the lowest levels. When all levels are synchronized, and moving towards the same end state, it fosters disciplined initiative and efficiency. When synchronization does not occur, or subordinate leaders misuse time available, efficiency is lost. This is in detrimental to being able to generate and employ combat power. Even well-intentioned decisions and outcomes can produce this, with faults occurring at the direct, organizational, and strategic levels.

In warfighting the Army’s direct level of leadership is the most exposed, consisting of the team to company level. Leaders have to manage their team’s roles in operations while also providing holistic coaching and mentoring to service members (HQDA, 2012). Being at the bottom of the Army’s structure there is no shortage of requirements, from combat task to administrative, that these leaders are charged with. So many, in fact, that it is impossible for the direct level leader to be fully aware of all them.

A common fault of a direct leader is erring in the attempt to balance needs of individual team members with productivity towards mission sets and administrative requirements. This is an easy trap to fall into given the high operational tempo facing many units. It is worth noting, some momentum has been gathering to reduce administrative burdens at the direction of the Army’s top leaders (Millet & Esper, 2018).

I experienced this during 2016 while assigned as a platoon sergeant in a field artillery battalion. We were under two separate brigade level headquarters, division artillery and the brigade combat team. In preparation for the BCTs multiple combat training center rotations we would service infantry companies as they executed platoon and company live fires. We were to be collectively trained to a platoon level certification to support (HQDA, 2019). Additionally, the DIVARTY placed further training requirements on certification levels and their own additional, high impact, training events. This was compounded by the doctrinal requirements prescribing semi-annual certifications. When a critical member of a howitzer section was injured, attended school, or left the unit certification and qualification was lost from the section to the company. Which then required additional training and renewing certifications. My subordinate leaders, and to extent myself, tended to fail in cross training during available time for the interest of continuity. Time for opportunity training was being forfeited at the chance of giving the team a break. Albeit, much of the break time was used to meet other demands, such as menial tasks, a litany of details, or other required training.

The organizational level of Army leadership extends from the battalion through division. It is here that the logistics, larger operational planning, and power of the purse meet to enable the lower echelons. Like smaller organizations, there are no shortage of demands and mission sets. There is a propensity for these organizations to take on more of a work load, without pushing their concerns higher, and seemingly with little regard for the burden already being shouldered at the direct level. Again, drawing from my experiences as a platoon sergeant, there were considerable obstacles to overcome from the battalion and brigade elements. Chiefly, in the reporting of the sunny disposition.

To meet all the training events previously mentioned, it takes considerable effort in the maintenance system. This required involvement from every level of leadership, accurate reporting, and also that funds are applied against requisition of parts. This is coupled with the fact that no commander wants to call their teams out or unavailable. This produced a less than honest assessment of capabilities being reported by the battalion. In maintenance, for example, I continuously found myself without the required parts to keep my platoon worth of howitzers, and wheeled vehicles, fully mission capable. This was despite placing parts on order, ensuring both the platoon and maintenance sections had correct documentation, and that it was all recorded in the Army’s automated maintenance system. The battalion would report equipment fully mission capable, then would lose the justification for ordering parts, and refused to deadline equipment to ensure funds were prioritized for said parts. In three instances, the automated maintenance system was purged, each time with the promise that it would correct errors that were supposedly ours.

This continued for the entirety of my tenure, despite three combat training center rotations and a yearlong stint as the Global Reaction Force (Pernin et al., 2016). At each major event blame was placed on my team for not having fully mission capable equipment. We constantly struggled with loss of wheeled vehicles. The chief reservation of this inaccurate reporting is the repercussions to be faced if placed into combat with the same degraded equipment. The U.S. had just escalated intervention in Syria the year prior (The Associated Press, 2019). Instead of having weapon systems that could achieve near to first round fire for effect capabilities we would be relegated to antiquated methods that require more time at all levels of the fire process. Time that would presumably be spent as observing elements are in contact with an enemy. Moreover, we could potentially be static on the battlefield, unable to move without reliably maintained wheeled vehicles. The organizational leaders placed priority on being able to take on more events over the very possible reality of our on-call mission.

The strategic level of leadership seamlessly overlaps the higher echelons of organizational leadership, reaching to the National Command Authority. The title can be deceiving, as there is much administrative and policy directed from these top echelons. The stand out issue I’ve experience due to strategic policy is professional growth for subordinates and peers.

Professional enhancing positions for field artillery men and women are very much top heavy. There is no incentive for branch to move lower enlisted between units. Moves to other organizations would allow greater exposure for future senior leaders to experience different organizations, weapons systems, and leadership relationships. This could be done cost effectively by conducting moves without changing stations, as almost all posts have multiple like organizations. This idea benefits sergeants and staff sergeants, as a change in organization would remove them from an environment they developed in, granting better optics as a leader.

Junior leaders are essentially stuck in place in order to meet key development time. This key development time is weighted with greater emphasis on one or two positions. Positions that place junior leaders in operations or administrative billets are considered, colloquially, to be unbeneficial for their career. However, would it not be valuable for the Staff Sergeant to have the exposure of seeing the operations process? Is it not valuable for a junior leader to understand the myriad of channels that a battery, or company, training room utilizes to provide administration for the element? Even if causing a slower promotion timeline, the investment in establishing administrative expertise would be significant value added to the Army.

Junior leaders are effectively offered broadening opportunities only if the timing is right. Should promotion occur too close to a proposed assignment they could be kept at the unit to begin time in their next key development position. It is no longer unheard of for service members to reach sergeant first class at the same duty station, even in the same organization. When afforded broadening assignments the value of those assignments towards promotion are held to only a handful of positions (Williams, 2018). With the desire being for holistic leadership, as expressed by the Army, there are potential gains to be made by in providing junior leaders with any broadening assignment.

As a result of the Army’s professional growth model, within my experience in the field artillery, I consistently received under experienced junior leaders. This tied into the difficulty of managing training at the direct level. Maintaining readiness, just in regards to personal, was endless and never plateaued into a sustained period. This was further impacted by the decisions, and the consequences of those decisions, at my organizational level of leadership. It is not an unfair assumption that this is occurring in other formations.

While faults at the three levels of leadership are not of ill intent, they drastically impact the warfighting readiness and capabilities of the platoon. The Heritage Foundation’s assessment of the U.S. military power rated the Army’s capability as only marginal (2018). With effort the appropriate actions and policy could be emplaced, at all levels of leadership, to reduce the burdens placed on our most exposed elements. It would pay in dividends, not only for the boots on the ground warfighter, but to the Army’s overall capability.

References

1. Headquarters, Department of the Army (2012, August). ADRP 6-22 Army Leadership. Retrieved from https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/adrp6_22.pdf.
2. Headquarters, Department of the Army (2018, February). TC 3-09.8 Fire Support and Field Artillery Certification and Qualification. Retrieved from https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/ARN14888_TC%203-09×8%20FINAL%20WEB%201.pdf.
3. Milly, M.A. and Esper, M.T. (2018, April 13). Army Directive 2018-07 (Prioritizing Efforts – Readiness and Lethality). Retrieved from https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/ARN9184_AD2018_07_Final.pdf.
4. Pernin, C.G., Best, K.L., Boyer, M.E., Eckhause, J.M., Gordon, J., Madden, D., Pfrommer, K., Rosello, A.D., Schwille, M., Shurkin, M., and Wong, J.P. (2016). Enabling the Global Response Force: Access Strategies for the 82nd Airborne Division. Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1161.html.
5. Reynolds, G.M. and Shendruk, A. (2018, April 24). Demographics of the U.S. Military. Retrieved from https://www.cfr.org/article/demographics-us-military.
6. The Associated Press (2019, January 11). A Timeline of the US Involvement in Syria’s Conflict. Retrieved from https://www.apnews.com/96701a254c5a448cb253f14ab697419b.
7. The Heritage Foundation (2018, October 4). Introduction: An Assessment of U.S. Military Power. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/military-strength/assessment-us-military-power.
8. Williams, J.D. (2018, August 3). Career Management Field (CMF) 13 FY 18 SFC Centralized Promotion Selection Board Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.hrc.army.mil/asset/19546.

Leadership and the Army Profession

In the Army profession, what and how do you define leadership? A glance at it and one would perceive the typical definition of leadership. However, it is so much more than that in the Army. In this essay, you will learn the definition of Army leadership as well as the purpose and components in it.

“Military leadership is an art, a creative activity based on character, ability, and mental power”, – Geoffrey Regan (‘Narren, Nulpen, Niedermacher’; original title: ‘Military Blunders’).

Leadership is the lifeblood of the army per ADP 6-22. An Army leader is anyone by assumed rule or assigned responsibility inspires and influences people to carry out a mission or goal. Leadership is as a mix of organizational, situational, and mission demands on a leader. The Leader then uses his experiences, qualities, and abilities to guide his team or organization to complete the mission. Leaders have difficult and complex situations known as the proving grounds. Those grounds are where their decisions are timely, just, and effective. The leader is one of the most important roles in the army. An effective leader that cannot give his team or organizations a purpose, missions would fail.

Leadership is essentially nothing without purpose. Leadership is the process of influencing others by providing a purpose, direction, and motivation to accomplish the mission and to improve the organization. Being a good leader involves influence. Learning, monitoring, and improving is how leadership is always a developing skill. Often certain personalities and traits can affect the process. The process is for a leader to influence other people to accomplish the mission or to fulfill a purpose. The job of the leader is to convey an upbeat environment. The accomplishment of a mission is not the only goal. Developing others and improving the organization is a goal as well.

As a leader, you try to unify elements into one to complete a mission or task. Those elements consist of mission command, information, movement and maneuver, intelligence, fires, sustainment, and protection. Leadership serves a motivational purpose. That purpose is to energize others to meet a challenging goal. As a leader being flexible, balancing uncertainty in a team, and offering a climate where subordinates can explore their options for further growth.

In conclusion, it should be noted that leadership in the army profession is extremely important and has its own characteristics, due to the importance of the profession and the responsibility placed on it.

Followers and Servant Leadership in the Army

The purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast followership and servant leadership. In the military, no matter where you go, there will be followers and there will be leaders among your team. So, basically, in order for a mission to get accomplished, leaders of a unit should have their soldiers to have a role among the two. Followership and servant leadership are shown within the seven Army values as well.

Followership in Army term means “actions of someone in a subordinate role”. Therefore, he or she have to be willing and able to follow a leader. There are 5 types of followership. Which are known as, sheep, alienated followers, yes people, effective followers, and survivors. Followers can be dependent or independent and they can be either active or passive.

The servant-leader shares power, “puts the needs of others first and helps people develop and perform as highly as possible” (Jeff Foley, April 24, 2017). Sometimes, leaders are taken for granted; however, they have respect and will help one another to complete the mission. Servant leaders give direction and guidance to their soldiers for what need to be done and how to do it. Therefore, leaders have more responsibility than followers.

Followership and servant leadership have similarities as well; they are both independent, critical thinkers, and also caring people. In the United States Army, all soldiers live by the 7 Army values. They all can make a great follower as well as a great leader. Servant leadership and followership consist of having different decision making also. Leaders have the final call no matter of the situation. On the other side, followers don’t. Even if the follower doesn’t agree with the leader’s decision, he or she still has to complete the task.

In conclusion, servant leadership and followership both have similarities and differences. The main difference in my opinion is the fact that the followers have less choice of decision-making. If the military don’t have followers and leaders in the organization, it probably wouldn’t work out as requested. It’s important to remember that everyone isn’t meant to be a leader; some people need to be guided and that’s very acceptable. Without the followers, the leaders wouldn’t be in their position because they wouldn’t have nobody to guide. Hopefully this can also be a motivation for the follower to work harder to reach a goal such as becoming a leader one day.

Leader Development Army Essay

Abstract

Leadership is a convention amongst all successful organizations whether civilian or military, exceedingly respected for its power to motivate achievement and translate revelation into results, Vince Lombardi once said: “Leaders aren’t born, they are made”. “Setting conditions, providing feedback, enhancing learning, and creating opportunities are the fundamentals of leader development” (FM 6-22, pg. 41), how have I advanced others? I have successfully advanced soldiers both professionally and personally, by utilizing the fundamentals of leader development on a daily basis, creating a growing dynamism of subsequently contributing assets to the Army. The development of my Soldiers is always my first priority, this foundation made it possible to achieve higher levels of developing others.

Leadership

Being a leader is a challenge and is easier said than done. General George S. Patton said, “Do everything you ask of those you command.” I have developed others by following the fundamentals of developing a leader and personally molding my behavior. This allows me to set the conditions, as well as foundations, in the daily development of my subordinates. Which led to my assignment of leading the dental clinic at Camp Shelby. There is no replacement for the practical experiences of life including triumph, adversity, and frustrations; using my experiences as a soldier and as a civilian to ensure necessary feedback is provided. Everyone learns and retains knowledge in different ways; No two individuals are the same. Enhanced learning is a necessary technique to aid the goal to develop others. Maintaining situational awareness and being engaged as a leader is an essential tool to will ensure more opportunities are created for others. “In a leader development survey, leaders ranked: leading a unit, personal examples, and mentoring as the three most effective ways to develop their leadership qualities” (FM 6-22, pg. 3-1).

Structural philosophies vary by duty assignment; providing direct leadership is my duty as a leader; one of three levels of leadership. Leading by example is a mindset to help others develop in new ways every day. Consistently challenging myself in a personal and professional manner, promotes a core challenge to subordinates. Prioritizing and designating a time for leadership development on a consistent basis allows my soldiers to be surrounded by a positive learning environment. As the leader, I am to provide the resources and encouragement essential to earn professional recognition and rewards. Identifying the importance of knowing my soldiers and continuously placing their needs above my own permits me to obtain vital information about my subordinates.

I am a proud mother and wife making it necessary to display my behaviors according to to be an influential role model and leader. My approachability is required for my success in developing others. My mother instilled in me at a young age, the significance of how I demonstrate approachability. She always taught me to treat others as I want to be treated, this trait creates mutual respect and trust guaranteeing appropriate relationships are formed. The development process of change is not immediate but ongoing, similar to learning. During my initial counseling with a new soldier, I share my Individual Development Plan (IDP), which has proven successful in setting the conditions and standards. Within the initial counseling, I informally ask thought-provoking questions that assist me in gathering information on my Soldier’s education, proficiencies, and goals thus creating a course of action within an IDP. The thought-provoking questions ignite two-way conversation ensuing in shared experiences, motivation, and the self-confidence to tackle additional goals with milestones deemed necessary for their development.

“Leaders who demonstrate behaviors supportive of learning and development create a learning environment for the whole organization” (FM 6-22, pg. 42). My current leadership identifies and inspires the development of others from gained knowledge of individuals with distinctive skills, abilities, and circumstances.

My advanced preparation of training the trainers allowed me to receive and provide feedback, these fundamental identified accurate and descriptive observations from the training to be executed. Train the trainer training was conducted and executed under my direct guidance and oversight by those who excel above their peers ranging from E-2 through E-5. Mission requirements within the clinic created impediments; the feedback I observed and received from the trainers was instrumental in streamlining the efficiency of unit-level training.

Enhanced learning is a necessary action in my development of others. It is with this fault that identified the proper course of action that was necessary for the development of others. “Because leaders vary in their skill and experience level, an effective way to learn is directly from unit role models” (FM 6-22, pg. 57). By following this enhanced learning fundamental of leader development, by providing proper feedback to the subordinate, the organization, and Army as a whole benefit from this action, thus improving their capabilities and perspective on the privilege of serving the country.

Upon completion of each mission, the soldiers complete an After Action Review (AAR), it is each AAR that validates my success as a leader. It is with my successful development of others that “Integrating these efforts into a holistic program will establish lasting operating norms” (FM 6-22, pg. 69). Returning to the clinic please me greatly but I remain unselfish and have expressed to my command my intent in training others to create opportunities for them. My development of others within the clinic has enabled their future to assume greater responsibilities with higher visibility ensuring opportunities to grow and be more efficient.

General Colin Powell once said “The most important thing I learned is that Soldiers watch what their leaders do, you can give them classes and lecture them forever, but it is your personal example they will follow”, it is with this that I lead by example to develop others. With the use of the fundamentals of leadership development, I have successfully developed subordinates into leaders and others into trainers, contributing to developing members of the Army. Initially establishing my tone and demonstrating my personal behaviors set the conditions necessary for developing others that followed me, demonstrating comradery and assuming greater responsibility with the execution of missions tasked. My personal experiences recognized the importance of observing subordinates and providing developmental feedback, it is with this I trained trainers and a unit to execute missions with precision and expertise. The positive and enhanced learning environment I fostered has proven to be instrumental to our unit’s current successful execution of missions. The most important course of action implemented was the shadowing tool, creating opportunities, enhancing mission efficiency, and enabling future leaders for the unit. My development of others will never cease upon mission completion but will be passed on, positively impacting the unit, installation, and the Department of Defense.

References

1. Allen, C. (2012) Our Veterans Deserve better. Armed Forces Journal, April 2012
2. https://ssl.armywarcollege.edu/dclm/pubs/Our%20Veterans%20Deserve%20Better%20(Allen,%20AJF,%20Apr%202012).pdf
3. U.S. Department of the Army. (2015). Leader Development. Field Manual 6-22. Washington,
4. DC: U.S. Department of the Army. Retrieved from https:// armypubs.army.mil.

Legal and the Nco Leader

This informative essay will introduce and break down the responsibilities of a Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) and their legal obligations toward a Soldier and the Army as a whole. An NCO is a leader, appointed above lower enlisted Soldiers to provide training and mentorship to prepare them to become future leaders of the Army. NCOs will sometimes branch off into different areas, whether it is an instructor or drill Sergeant who trained incoming and seasoned Soldiers directly. This, however, comes with legal responsibilities, which are governed by the Army and can sometimes land an NCO in a predicament if violated.

What is duty? This is the legal and moral obligation of an NCO, which is always expected to be upheld. NCOs are considered the backbone of the Army with that comes vast responsibilities and expectations. For example, the new private with little to no experience will be looking for guidance from an NCO, and if that NCO fails to provide said guidance this private will end up misled if not molded. As an NCO, one is expected to lead, by taking appropriate actions to accomplish the mission. If unclear orders are given, an NCO should ensure that he or she seeks further clarification before executing the same to cover oneself. Oftentimes an NCO is directed to do something that may have been legally and ethically immoral but due to the chain of command, some may feel the need to execute and not question. However, as a Noncommissioned Officer, whether it may be a young Corporal, you must exercise personal courage and question, questionable orders to ensure your safety. As an NCO, your position comes with a few duties, which are specified, directed, and implied. Specified duties are related to one’s job, such directives are as follows: Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, and Department of the Army (General Orders). Most of which can be found in AR 600-20 and should be referred to if ever in doubt. Directed duties are either given orally or written by your platoon sergeant or higher. This can range anywhere from simply monitoring the cleaning of the line to taking charge of quarters (CQ) and staff duty. Implied duties are where commonsense plays its part. This will support a specified duty, where instructions are given but implied tasks are not stated in those instructions. For example, you are the NCO tasked with prepping the vehicle for Sergeant Time training (STT). You were told to ensure supplies needed for this training are loaded prior to the day of training; it would be an implied task to have water, MREs, CLS supplies, and things that are essential to the training even though your instructions may have been vague. Implied duties will give you an insight into the type of NCO you have, his or her ability to take initiative, think on one’s feet, have moral character, and be responsible.

As a Noncommissioned Officer, you are responsible and accountable for your actions and that of your Soldiers. You are obligated to the Army, your unit, and the Soldier’s success. You are expected to be proficient at your job and possess the ability to train and guide effectively to create cohesion, which will see the success and development of your Soldiers and unit’s intent. Even though Soldiers are responsible for their own personal conduct, it also falls on us NCOs to enforce and ensure that Soldiers are adhering to and enforcing this unto their peers. Leaders are expected to lead and as such must provide clear and concise information to their Soldiers regarding their responsibilities and required contributions as a member of the team.

NCOs will find themselves working hand in hand with Officers to delegate and ensure that the job is done in a timely manner. Timeline is everything and it is the NCO’s responsibility to ensure that timelines are being met with little to no hiccups. Command Authority and General Military Authority are two basic types of authority found in the Army. Command Authority is the authority leaders have over soldiers by virtue of rank or assignment. Command authority originates with the President and may be supplemented by law or regulation. Even though it is called “command” authority, it is not limited to officers – you have command authority inherent in your leadership position as a tank commander or team leader, for example. Noncommissioned officers’ command authority is inherent in the job by virtue of their position to direct or control soldiers. Therefore, you may have two Staff Sergeants (SSG) but one is slotted in a Sergeant First Class (E7) position, which eventually enables him to command authority over the other SSG. General military authority is authority extended to all soldiers to take action and act in the absence of a unit leader or other designated authority. It originates in oaths of office, law, rank structure, traditions, and regulations. This broad-based authority also allows leaders to take appropriate corrective actions whenever a member of any armed service, anywhere, commits an act involving a breach of good order or discipline. For example, Soldier disobeyed a direct order given to him by an NCO, depending on the severity and repetitiveness of the Soldier’s action the NCO can recommend further administrative actions/corrective training (for ex. Counseling or Article 15 under UCMJ).

As a leader, it is essential that you maintain a counseling paper trail so in the event you recommend punitive actions against a Soldier, you have the necessary paperwork to back up your reason. FM 27-1, Chapter 7, also provides guidance to commanders on corrective training. A noncommissioned officer cannot apply a non-judicial punishment on a Soldier (such as an Article 15 or extra duty), he or she can only make the recommendation, but in the end, it is up to the commander’s discretion to act and finalize base on the evidence provided. The term “Smoked” used to be a form of corrective training but is no longer allowed (according to AR 600-20). As the saying goes “The punishment must fit the crime”, this simply means that you cannot punish a Soldier for being late by giving him or her extra duty. You should, however, provide on-the-spot corrections or verbal warning to ensure tardiness and deficiency is corrected. If this behavior persists then you recommend further corrective training. Overall, the role of a noncommissioned officer is very vital to the success of the Army and should be treated as such. It takes patience, dedication, intellect, and willingness to serve in the capacity of a noncommissioned officer. As an NCO, you must ensure you are in accordance with regulations because regulations do change, and it is highly recommended that one stay abreast of this to provide knowledge and support, and operate as an effective leader.

JROTC Essay on Leadership

There are research studies that have been conducted on JROTC. Most of these have been based – on outcome studies that have focused on the effects of participation in an Army JROTC program. One of the first of these studies was conducted in Pennsylvania’s public secondary schools in 1973 by Seiberling. He investigated the effectiveness of JROTC (Air Force, Army, and Navy) in relationship to three desired to-learn outcomes: leadership, citizenship, and self-reliance. He used the Gordon Personal Profile to measure leadership, the Pennsylvania Student Questionnaire (Secondary), Section F-Citizenship to measure citizenship, and the Self-Concept as a Learner Scale to measure self-reliance. In a comparison of 97 JROTC cadet seniors with 97senior non-JROTC seniors matched on sex and Intelligent Quotient (IQ) scores, Seiverling found no significant differences at the .05 level between the mean scores

of JROTC cadets versus non-JROTC seniors on any of the three desired to learn outcomes. Since that time, there have been at least two studies similar to that of Seiberling. Hawkins (1988) compared 83 senior-level Army JROTC Cadets with 92senior level students who were not exposed to nor taught JROTC courses in seven public secondary schools located in Central Virginia. Each cadet had received JROTC courses for at least two years. Although Hawkins used the same measure of citizenship as Seiverling, he used Stogdill’s Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire Form XII to measure leadership and used the California Test of Personality, Section A, Self-Reliance to measure self-reliance.

The collective mean scores revealed that JROTC cadets scored higher than non-JROTC students in all three variables of interest, but none were significant at the .05 level. In the second of these similar studies, Roberts (1991/1992) compared 59 Army JROTC Seniors with 59 non-JROTC students at six different high schools in Nevada. In contrast to the cadets in Hawkins’ study, the cadets in Roberts’ study had been enrolled in JROTC for a minimum of four years. Roberts used the same measures of citizenship and self-reliance as Hawkins but substituted the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (40 Item Short Form) to measure leadership. He found significant differences in mean scores between JROTC and non-JROTC students at the .05 level on each of the desired learning outcomes. JROTC students scored significantly higher than their non-JROTC counterparts. Bachmann (1994) and Rivas (1995) found that JROTC participation may significantly increase self-esteem scores for some students. Bachmann analyzed the effects of participation in an Army JROTC program on leadership behavior and self-esteem for 94 high school juniors in three separate secondary schools located in California.

There were 47 students in each group from a comparable demographic sample in California. The JROTC cadets had been in the program for at least two years. Bachmann utilized the same questionnaire as Roberts to measure leadership, the Self-Esteem Inventory to measure self-esteem, and designed a Student Demographic Questionnaire which surveyed gender, ethnicity, and academic achievement. Results indicated that the mean scores for JROTC students on leadership and self-esteem were significantly higher than for students not exposed to the JROTC program. Bachmann found differences within gender. Male JROTC students scored significantly higher than non-JROTC males on their mean scores for leadership, but no significant difference was found in their mean scores for self-esteem. However, female JROTC students scored significantly higher than their non-JROTC counterparts on mean scores in self-esteem, but no significant difference was found in their mean scores for leadership. Similarly, Rivas (1995) measured self-esteem and learning skills development in JROTC students. Learning skills were defined as planning and time management, organizational skills, and goal setting.

The target population was 117male and female students attending four separate high schools in Illinois and Michigan. Rivas surveyed only first-year JROTC cadets at the two high schools in Michigan and surveyed advanced third-year and fourth-year JROTC cadets at the two schools in Illinois. Using a pretest/post-test design, he administered the Coopersmith’s Self-Esteem Inventory Adult Form to measure self-esteem, and an original instrument to measure learning skills development. Results showed that students in the first-year JROTC program scored significantly lower than the students in third-year and fourth-year JROTC on self-esteem and learning skills. At the six-month posttest, results indicated that measures of self-esteem increased for all students, but only the first-year cadets showed gains in learning skills. It should be noted that Rivas does not specify the grade level of each first-year cadet. It is possible that these results could be confounded by students’ grade levels. In contrast to Bachmann (1994), Rivas found no gender bias in his results, suggesting that both males and females may benefit equally from JROTC.

In another study, Boykins (1992/1993) researched the relationship between leadership, academic achievement, empowerment, and participation in JROTC for black male students. Boykins interviewed 14 black students, three JROTC instructors, and five teachers at one public high school in Arizona. Although he found no statistically significant differences in academic achievement between their Grade Point Average (GPA)before they entered the JROTC program and their GPA at the time of the study, he did find evidence to support that black male JROTC students felt empowered. Although Boykins acknowledged that the teachers did not appear very familiar with the program, their responses about the benefits to students were positive. Probably the most relevant study for the purposes of the present research was conducted by Harriill (1984). He investigated the attitudes of high school principals located in the Third ROTC Region towards the official objectives of Army JROTC. He obtained data from 160 high school principals from Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas.

The survey instrument consisted of seven statements concerning the mission of Army JROTC, nine statements concerning beliefs about JROTC, and a free response portion for additional comments. Results indicated that principals were in general agreement with the seven Army JROTC objectives as both ideals and current practices in their schools. Principals also indicated a favorable attitude towards other aspects of the program including the development of self-discipline, improvement of self-concept, provision of a source of identification, growth of patriotism, and leadership ability. They viewed JROTC as a bridge between the school and the community. Based on these limited findings, there is some suggestion that students might benefit through JROTC participation in at least two ways: empowerment and self-esteem. Although results from research findings are contradictory, it is possible that participants may also benefit from leadership, citizenship, and self-reliance. In addition, high school principals have indicated a favorable attitude toward JROTC programs, thus suggesting that JROTC may produce positive benefits to students, the high school environment, and the local community. Controversy Regarding JROTC In a speech on August 24, 1992, President George Bush proclaimed that JROTC is a great program that boosts high school completion rates, reduces drug use, raises self-esteem, and gets these kids firmly on the right track, (Coumbe &Harford, 1996). Other United States officials have echoed this positive regard. For example, in an open statement from the United States Department of Education dated August 28, 1991, many positive advantages to JROTC were outlined;

1. The provision of positive role models at a critical time in an at-risk student’s life. Become an active part of an organized unit may be the deciding factor to remaining in school;
2. The opportunities to develop leadership potential and how to live and work cooperatively with others are attainable. Students who continue in advanced years of training themselves become role models for younger students;
3. The high-performance expectations established in this program provide the disciplinary structure lacking in a student’s home life, where he/she learns to appreciate the ethical values and principles that underlie good citizenship which include integrity, responsibility, and respect for constituted authority;
4. Group participation in drill practices provides an opportunity for camaraderie as well as an emphasis on physical fitness in maintaining good health. Students learn to be well groomed and to follow instructions and commands;
5. Along with other school programs on drug abuse, JROTC will reinforce the dangers of substance abuse in a group atmosphere which provides positive support in avoiding peer pressure;
6. There is a definite correlation to social studies curricula as students are taught the skills of good citizenship and the historical significance of the military in American history. Students who learn discipline in this program often establish a positive tone in the total school population, thereby reducing the disciplinary problems in the classroom and on school grounds;
7. The presence of a JROTC unit can become a source of pride for any community equal to sports teams, marching bands, etc., who get high exposure at parades and school functions;
8. Classwork in JROTC also teaches logical thinking and communication skills;
9. JROTC programs provide educational and vocational opportunities to at-risk students who question ‘why should I stay in school? and
10. One of the courses of study in the program is Marksmanship and Safety.

At a time when gun control is a popular topic, such a program is ideal for teaching students proper techniques of firearms and the dangers they represent(and students have great fun in this course and receive immediate feedback). Other similar claims of benefits to students have been made by military personnel through JROTC pamphlets and literature (Coumbe & Harford, 1996). Among these many benefits are self-discipline, confidence, organization, ethics, integrity, responsibility, good citizenship, and leadership training. Essential learning skills are also taught such as decision making, time management, planning and organizing, goal setting, and teamwork.

The program also helps cadets compete for Senior ROTC scholarships and appointments at military academies (Army Junior ROTC Program, 1996).JROTC is not without its opponents. Lutz and Bartlett (1995) researched JROTC programs at high schools around the country and examined claims by JROTC officials reviewed the program’s outcomes and analyzed the curriculum and textbooks. Lutz and Bartlett take issue with the fact that the Department of Defense(DOD) does not conduct research studies to evaluate their claims about program effectiveness. For example, JROTC literature claims to: prevent dropouts; prepare minorities and low-income students for success, and benefit ‘at-risk’ students. However, these authors contend that neither the DOD nor any of the military branches collect data on dropout or graduation rates or minority and low-income adult job attainment. Additionally, the benefits to ‘at-risk’ students are questionable, given that the JROTC programs may refuse students with behavior problems or low achievement histories. Lutz and Bartlett also point out that the JROTC curriculum and textbooks are not normally scrutinized by the state or local school boards. In fact, they claim that the curriculum is rarely reviewed by any educational unit. In Virginia, each military branch develops its own curriculum and trains its own instructors. There is no one at the Virginia Department of Education who is designated to be in charge or oversee the JROTC program’s implementation (Charles Finley, Virginia Department of Education, Department of Compliance, Specialist, Accreditation; personal communication, November 6, 1996). Lutz and Bartlett’s (1995) book entitled Making Soldiers in the Public Schools has fueled a coalition movement against JROTC programs. This movement has tried to block the formation of new JROTC programs in the Nation’s public schools. The coalition has many concerns. They believe that marksmanship training encourages violence, school board costs of maintaining a program are too high, JROTC’s claims regarding dropout prevention have never been verified, not enough women are JROTC instructors, and retired gay and lesbian officers are excluded from becoming instructors (American Friends Service Committee, 1996).

The President of the United States, as well as the United States Department of Education, have endorsed JROTC. Along with military officials, they have claimed that JROTC offers many positive benefits to students who enroll in the program. However, due to the lack of available evidence, opponents of JROTC have formed coalitions to stop the expansion of JROTC in public schools. Because of their role in the schools, school counselors are in a position to perceive possible benefits to students from involvement with the JROTC program. School counselors may be able to contribute knowledge to help resolve the controversy which surrounds JROTC.

Leadership and the Army Profession: Essay

Training is an essential element of any military organization. One military organization, in particular, is the Army. Training helps the commander to assess the level of competitiveness within the units and to determine the improvements necessary to make the unit become more efficient. The unpredictability of the environment in which the Army fights is a complex factor that needs to be taken into consideration during all Army fights. While the current fight is in the Middle East, Afghanistan or Iraq, the next fight could be in a totally opposite environment. All the tactics and techniques learned while in the Middle East are irrelevant if the next challenge the Army faces is in the jungles of the Amazon in Brazil. Therefore Army trains constantly, in different environments, with different techniques, and in various situations. These type of training methods ensures the Army readiness at all times. Additionally, it enables the Army to deal with any situation that emerges from anywhere on the globe. This is why its number one priority is readiness. A strong fundamental of Army training is to produce leaders at all levels of the unit that can take decisive actions enabling them to mold and form proficient units. Thereby facilitating the integration of different elements in its war-fighting function.

Creating leaders that can develop a unit and accomplish the mission is very essential for the success of the Army. To do so, the Army continuously trains ordinary people to make them effective leaders who can convert commanders’ intent into a reality. An efficient way to do so is to get the training as close to reality as possible. One of the Army training objectives is to train to win (ADP 7-0). Although the training content and the mission of all Army units are different, the fundamental training contains similar characteristics across the board. For instance, one of the Army’s philosophies is, “Train in tough conditions, in a realistic environment, with ever-changing challenges” (ADP 7-0). These conditions are essential to birth a true leader that can lead an Army unit in a direction of success. As soldiers train in these environments, the information they know already can now be mastered, even in tough conditions. When under pressure, individuals tend to have a difficult time performing a task that they know well. An increased level of stress combined with a chaotic environment can be detrimental to everyone if not handled properly. A doctor may lose the ability to perform best in a routine procedure because of the inability to manage stress properly at work. The doctor must be able to counterattack the stress and work his or her way through the chaos effectively without jeopardizing the patient’s life.

Moreover, a leader, should be able to face any chaotic environment and still be proficient in performing the assigned duties at the same time. The Army fulfills this requirement by putting all its soldiers through intense training regardless of rank or status. This method of training creates an Army leader at all levels of the Army organization. In addition, training defines and teaches each soldier their respective role as a leader, even while leading in different positions.

There are different levels within the Army organization that range from squad leaders to division-level leaders. Training provides the framework knowledge necessary for operations for all leaders to follow. The mission of a squad-level leader will be different from the mission of the Battalion level leader. For instance, a senior commander has the objective to provide the necessary resources to train during a training. On the other hand, a platoon Sergeant will conduct the mission analysis to determine the best support for the platoon’s battle tasks. This enables all the different levels of leadership to better understand their role as part of a total functioning Army organization. During training sessions, the unit conducts several rehearsals and repetitive actions in order to improve the unit performance. This creates a soldier that is mentally strong and physically fit to endure when faced with tough and hard conditions. According to Field Manual 6-0 chapter 12, “Rehearsal helps Soldiers build a lasting mental picture of the sequence of key actions within the operation (FM 6-0).” Rehearsal creates a habit within all soldiers as they train multiple times on the same tactics. It leads to the efficiency and effectiveness of the soldier as an individual and to the unit as a whole. Also, training helps improve the skills and contributes to the soldier’s career progression. As soldiers train, they become knowledgeable of different circumstances and increase their ability to respond better to different situations.

Training exposes the strengths and weaknesses of each unit. During training, different courses of action can be implemented. These different courses of action give a bigger picture of the unit efficiency and their inefficiency. The benefit of the revelation of this big picture is that the Army can focus on exploiting its strengths. Thus, reducing and minimizing its weaknesses. This tactic will make all units more effective and less vulnerable. Tactical training makes it difficult for the adversary to infiltrate the unit. Weaknesses and strengths help Army units sort through tactics in order to determine the best course of action to implement. This increases the lethality of the unit as they only implement courses of action that resulted in the desired outcome. Post-training technics that can strengthen the unit include peer review and command evaluations, building on the unit’s strengths and reducing their weaknesses, and providing collective feedback to the unit. All of these outcomes mentioned, but not limited to, can improve the unit internally.

The most famous feedback mechanism that the Army uses is called an After Action Review (AAR). An AAR is a written report that consolidates lessons learned and best practices to follow during the course of an operation. “An AAR serves as a dynamic between task performance and execution to standard” (FM 6-0). With an AAR, Army units can understand better why the task was not performed to standard. They can then work on ways to improve and turn around all the factors of the training that did not work in the prior task. An AAR also has historical benefits. As commanders and soldiers enter and leave the unit, the mission remains the same. When a soldier leaves a unit, the soldier is equipped with all the knowledge they have learned and is able to take that knowledge to another unit to help make that unit a success. On the other hand, if a soldier has not been equipped with the same training, the new soldier will continue to make the same mistakes. A lack of training and leadership knowledge will reduce the proficiency for the unit’s mission. It will also take a long time to train the soldier. Despite this shortcoming, an immediate counter-response available to make the necessary mid-term corrections is the AAR. When the proper AAR is conducted and documented, the unit can execute the mission without making the mistake that soldiers have made in the past. This gives a significant advantage to the unit by reducing time on preparing, planning, and executing.

In order to win a war, the Army has to rely on the competence of its total forces and their ability to integrate the fight at different levels. The Army is composed of several branches that help support its fight. These branches include medical, engineers, transportation, and many more. Each one of these branches, in collaborative efforts, helps support Army fighting forces with materials, equipment, and many more. In order to integrate the warfighting function efficiently, support units have to train just as much as the fighting unit. It is historically known throughout war history that, forces target supply elements in order to disable the fighting elements that are on the front line. Without any supply, such as ration, ammo, fuel, and many more; fighting forces, regardless of their capability, are at a serious disadvantage. Throughout World War II, allies countlessly bombed German strategic supply factories in order to reduce the capabilities of the German force. Therefore, the support unit should train in combination with the fighting forces to familiarize themselves with the conditions and environment that they will be operating in while supporting the fighting forces. Without a joint training effort, support forces will be under-trained and vulnerable to enemy strategic planning to obstruct supply support from reaching the front line.

In conclusion, in today’s Army, training is the most essential factor that makes the Army strong and relevant. Without the pertinent training, the Army is an organization vulnerable to any enemy. With training, individual soldiers acquire the essential skills that will make them decisive leaders at all levels within the Army unit. Moreover, with training, the commander can assess the level of their assigned unit, their readiness, and their capability. Training also shows the commander what the unit weaknesses may be. With training efforts, the commander can exploit their strengths and reduce their weaknesses. This will make the unit more efficient and effective. Training helps to facilitate the integration of all Army forces into the warfighting function. To win its fight, the Army requires the collaboration of all its forces! Without training, this collaboration will not be possible. However, through training, all the units can contribute their perspective, and contribute strategic plans on how they can help support the fight in order to win. Training is the most crucial aspect of today’s Army!

References:

1. ADP 7-0 training. (August 2018). Retrieved from https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/ARN18024_ADP 7-0 FINAL WEB.pdf.
2. ATP 3-21.10 Infantry Rifle Company. (2018, May). Retrieved from https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/ARN8519_ATP 3-21×10 Final Web.pdf.
3. FM 6-0 COMMANDER AND STAFF ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS. (2014, May). Retrieved from https://www.milsci.ucsb.edu/sites/secure.lsit.ucsb.edu.mili.d7/files/sitefiles/fm6_0.pdf.
4. FM 7-0 TRAIN TO WIN IN A COMPLEX WORLD. (2016, October). Retrieved from https://www.usar.army.mil/Portals/98/Documents/resources_docs/TRAIN.pdf?ver=2016-10-13-162825-717.
5. Petrick, J. (n.d.). The Importance of Leadership Training in the Army. Retrieved from https://work.chron.com/importance-leadership-training-army-23722.html#targetText=Leadership training is important because of a soldier’s success and morale.

Critical Essay on Foundation of Army Leadership

Leadership in Army is one of the most important qualities required. According to Storey (2016), there are a number of different leadership styles which can be utilized to maximize the performance of a team. They highlight that for leadership to be profitable, motivational and influential qualities should be characteristics of a successful leader. The Army (ND) highlights in its Army Leadership Doctrine the importance of a quality leader and defines leadership as a combination of character, knowledge, and action that inspires others to succeed. They state that Leadership is the ability to lead people over influence as appose to authority and having the ability to encourage individuals to achieve a common goal. The Army requires this ability at all levels to enable the completion of its missions to the highest possible standard. The Army can implement a number of ways to create leaders within its ranks. This assignment will focus on how the 6 Royal Logistic Corps (RLC) regiment implemented Kotters’ 8-step change model. In particular, forming a coalition, communicating the vision, and empowering action will be considered.

Appelbaum et al (2012) state that Kotter’s eight steps of change model were first introduced in 1995 in an article titled ‘Leading Change’, written by Dr. Kotter. They highlight that the eight steps are: creating a sense of urgency; forming a guiding coalition; developing an inspired vision; conveying the new vision; empowering others to enact the vision; generating short-term wins, sustaining acceleration of the vision; and the final step, instituting permanent change. This model appeared to be successful due to its ability to identify key change barriers encountered by small, mid-sized, and large companies such as Ford, General Motors, and Airways when attempting to implement a business change (Airiodion, ND). They state that steps are beneficial to large companies that employ numerous employees as it provides clear guidance for the change process. However, Expert Program Management (ND) argues that it is a top-down model which could result in potential opportunities being overlooked if all employees are not involved in the vision. Furthermore, they state that it can lead to resistance and resentment amongst employees who are not actively involved in the vision of change. They also state that the model does not elaborate on how a company could sustain the change.

The Army focuses its leadership doctrine on John Adair’s three-circle model of Action Centred Leadership, published in 1973. Action Centred Leadership is largely considered the leading expert on organizational leadership. (CMI, 2008). The academy has been training and educating Army leaders for over 200 years. It is seen in such high regard as the center of leadership training that other nations send their future leaders to the academy to train and learn leadership skills (Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, ND). The Action Centred Leadership three-circle model has withstood the test of time in an ever-changing society where managers and businesses must adapt to stay ahead. This simple and practical model is figuratively based on three overlapping circles. These represent achieving the task, building and maintaining the team, and developing the individual as supported by CMI (2008). The model’s concept asserts that the three needs of task, team, and individual are fundamental aspects of leadership, as people expect their leaders to help them achieve the common task, build the synergy of teamwork, and respond to individuals’ needs. The task needs work groups or organizations to come into effect because one person alone cannot accomplish it. The team needs constant promotion and retention of group cohesiveness to ensure that it functions efficiently. The team functions on the ‘united we stand, divided we fall’ principle. The individual’s needs are the physical factors, for example, salary. Psychological factors could include recognition, sense of purpose, and achievement as supported by CMI (2008).

During the study of Action Centred Leadership, it was found the Royal Air Force (RAF) has not implemented Action Centred Leadership in the Services Leadership Doctrine ‘AP7001 2020 Inspiring Leadership. This could suggest that the model is not fit for every business with a large workforce. This could be due to its authoritarian approach, applicable in a formal environment but less relevant to the modern workplace where leadership advocates values-based principles to empower the diversity of thought, challenge, and innovative thinking (Royal Air Force, 2020). Despite this, the model has been an integral part of the Army’s Leadership doctrine since the 1970s suggesting that the model is still relevant and has the potential to succeed if performed correctly. In relation to Army, an example of success could be campaigns from the Falklands War or current-day operations. These opportunities give junior leaders appropriate opportunities to excel in their careers.

Poor leadership within Army can affect the standard of how well tasks are completed and can affect all ranks within 6 RLC. Discipline cases within 6 RLCs are rising due to the lack of mentorship and guidance from Junior Non-Commissioned Officers (JNCO). Tasks and responsibilities are failing to be completed to the standard the Chain of Command expects. This could be a result of senior ranks failing to realize when JNCOs are poorly conducting themselves or due to the lack of empowerment allowing JNCOs to start and complete tasks independently. To combat this lack of leadership, 6 RLC could implement Kotters’ 8-Step Model to instigate change.

In relation to 6 RLC, the Commanding Officer (CO) and Regimental Sergeant Major (RSM) concluded the lack of leadership amongst the unit stemmed from a lack of mentorship and empowerment with the unit’s JNCOs. The unit decided to regenerate the Corporals (Cpls) Club. This action to regenerate the Cpl’s Club can be seen as Step 2 in the Kotters’ 8-Step Model, forming a guiding coalition. The Cpls Club will provide a sanction where None Commission Officers (NCOs) can collaborate to discuss matters between themselves, creating an inclusive environment. The Cpls Club will include events such as dinners and social events allowing members to participate in team bonding. More than half of the regiments’ JNCOs have opted to be part of this Cpl’s Club. This strongly suggests there was a requirement within the JNCO cohort to have their own establishment.

The Cpls Club will replicate any other mess within Army. It has an established committee with its own members voting in a thrusting Corporal who is keen on its development and success as its President of the Mess Committee. The committee organizes and runs the club’s meetings, and sets agendas and plans for future events. The Regimental Quarter Master Sergeant (RQMS) oversees the Club on behalf of the RSM and the CO to ensure it is run correctly and to conduct development lessons and study days. The Club has organized a number of events with leadership training and study as its focus. For example, a Tri Mess Dinner Night, where the Officers, Warrant Officers (WO) and Sergeants (Sgt) Mess, and the Cpl’s Club came together for a formal Dinner night within the Sgts Mess. Leadership talks were given during the event by representatives from each Mess concentrating on the Army Leadership Code (ALC) and our Values and Standards. Study days have been planned and executed, honing in on the ALC with the aim of developing our younger commanders and soldiers into strategic soldiers enabling an adaptable workforce with more capabilities.

At all levels in 6 RLC, empowerment has been encouraged. Since the introduction of the ALC, the unit has had a lot of success in recent operations. The large number of junior promotions within the Regiment as compared to others demonstrates this. When our junior troops were given acting rank, they were prepared because empowerment had been introduced and they were in the thinking stages, allowing the Regiment to be more productive and meet its outputs.

In relation to the Cpl’s Club, it appears the 3 steps from Kotter’s Model: step 2 forming a coalition, step 4 communicating the vision, and step 5 empowering action have been implemented and are on a successful trajectory. In relation to step 2 of the Kotter Model, the Cpl’s Club has brought highly motivated and thrusting JNCOs together. Its events are accomplished by focusing on leadership at the very heart of each event. By bringing this cohort of people together, the regiment will be able to provide powerful change as these are the individuals who are the bedrock of the regiment. Not only do they live with our soldiers, but they also train and are ultimately role models for our future leaders.

With regards to step 4, conveying the vision allows and provides freedom to the JNCOs to run their own club with their own selected committee. It also enables them to organize events how they see fit, with the only input being to focus on developing leadership. JNCOs should be aware of how critical their role is to the regiment’s success. This could potentially enable them to feel valued, giving them a sense of importance. Demonstrating the value of each JNCO’s role and talents aids engagement and buy-in at the unit’s most fundamental level, its soldiers. At the team level, there should be an understanding of how one’s success affects others. A vision is a statement of what the regiment hopes to achieve in the future. A vision must be conveyed in order to achieve its goal of inspiring, clarifying, and focusing on work highlighted by the Centre of Creative Leadership (ND).

Concerning step 5 which empowers others to enact the vision. The JNCOs will be responsible for implementing the change therefore it is critical that they have the necessary skills, resources, and confidence to succeed. When the vision is communicated across the unit, leaders should become aware of individuals who are resistant to the change. By fostering an environment of openness, leaders can discover the root of resistance and remove any barriers to personal development and progress within the initiative. Those who buy into the vision will be empowered and inspired, thereby alleviating the resistance. which will relieve this resistance while creating empowered and inspired individuals who buy into the vision. JNCO empowerment can promote retention by instilling higher trust in leadership, encouraging motivation, and encouraging creativity. When compared to leaders who do not empower their JNCOs, leaders who do empower their JNCOs are more likely to be trusted by their subordinates. This isn’t to argue that empowering JNCOs entails assigning duties to subordinates that the Chain of Command doesn’t want to do. Leaders who empower their JNCOs operate as coaches, encouraging and supporting their staff to achieve their best work (Wong, 2020).

Lack of leadership is difficult to measure and does not provide quantitative data. Despite this, there are different types of metrics within the unit that can be utilized to evaluate progress which is influenced by leadership. For example, the number of notices to terminate (NTTs) prior to the Club’s regeneration and study could be recorded. If NTTs fall in a quarterly time period, it could potentially indicate that the implementation was successful. Alternatively, another metric is for Regimental Headquarters to follow current discipline cases before the Club is formed, and then measure in three months. A decrease in the number of cases suggests that JNCOs are guiding and mentoring Soldiers who are taking a more in-depth approach to their work. Another approach is the use of a Climate Assessment which is a support tool to advise and inform the Commander. This system identifies key issues, risks, and actions for future tasks. It could be utilized as a method of providing commanders with a candid assessment and feedback on issues enabling them to make informed decisions in the future.

In conclusion, it is evident that Kotter’s model enables organizations to implement effective change in order to achieve productive outputs. Quality leadership is essential in promoting change in collaboration with effective change models.