Ridgway Transition To Command

Independent of the Army and country you serve, leadership is always an important subject. There are many civilian books and military manuals talking about leadership. The United States Army divides the subject leadership in three levels. These levels are Direct Leadership, Organizational Leadership, and Strategic Leadership. In this paper, the focus will be only about the first two levels. According with you rank, you will work more in one of these levels. Because of that, most part of time there is not much interaction between higher-level leaders and lower level leaders. Despite the limited interaction between higher level leaders like Brigade commanders with the lower level leader like company commander it’s not affect a satisfactory mission accomplishment.

The creed of the noncommissioned officer is a baseline for all noncommissioned officers Corporal all the way up to Sergeant Major, on how to conduct oneself in the leading of soldiers. It does not outline every single situation you may come into throughout your military career but if you live this creed then you should be set for success. In this paper we are going to take an in depth look into the creed and how you can apply every aspect of it to leadership.

The critical leadership problem the 4th ABCT faces are consequences of the continued past brigade change of command without an organizational vision to address it, and different Commanders leadership styles that have affected the effectiveness, organizational culture, and climate within the 4th ABCT. This case study paper analyzes the critical leadership problems on the 4th ABCT. The aim of this essay is to explain how the Army leadership attributes; direction, guidance, and organizational vision; and a positive environment are factors that enable

This paper on Leadership will compare the primary differences and characteristics between the tactical leader and the organizational leader. I will provide you with the basics for development, characteristics, and the fundamentals that help guide and influence each leader’s style and how they influence Soldiers to follow them. Leaders at all levels demonstrate their values, knowledge, skills, and abilities in many different means and methods in

The Army's definition of leadership is “the process of influencing people by providing purpose, direction and motivation while operating to accomplish the mission and improving the organization.” An army leader is anyone who inspires and influences people to accomplish their goals. Leaders motivate people both inside and outside the army to help them pursue their goals, focus thinking, and shape decisions for the better of the army. Leadership can be acquired by anyone as long as they have the self-determination to do so. The main principles of leadership in the army are broken down in to the acronym LDRSHIP (loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, personal courage), characteristics the army aims to instilled in each

One important expression for army leadership is BE-KNOW-DO. Army leadership begins with what the leader must BE, the values and attributes that shape character. A leader can think of these as internal and defining qualities possessed all the time. As defining qualities, they make up the identity of the leader. Values and attributes are the same for all leaders, regardless of position, although refined through experience and assumption of positions of greater responsibility. For example, a sergeant major with combat experience may have a deeper understanding of selfless service and personal courage than a new soldier.

I am Joseph Maruska, I am currently a Major in the United States Air Force. This essay will introduce you to my personal command philosophy. It will also summarize and analyze a brief interview recently conducted with a current squadron commander using my own leadership philosophy as a guide. Throughout this essay I will draw upon my own personal experiences and thoughts, lessons discussed throughout the Leadership and Command Course, as well the discussion with a current squadron commander. Leadership and command styles come in many different forms and there is not necessarily a correct or incorrect way to lead depending on your organization or current turn of events. This essay is simply my thoughts after being in the Air Force for the last eleven years.

Commanders set overall policies and standards, but all leaders must provide the guidance, resources, assistance and supervision necessary for soldiers to perform their duties. Mission accomplishment demands that officers and NCOs work together to advise, assist and learn from each other. There are two categories a Noncommissioned Officer’s responsibilities fall under: command and individual responsibilities. Command responsibility refers to collective or organizational accountability and includes how well the unit performs their missions. For example, a company commander is responsible for all the tasks and missions assigned to the company; his superiors hold him accountable for completing them. Commanders give military leaders the responsibility for what their sections, units, or organizations do or fail to do. NCOs are therefore responsible to fulfill not only their individual duties, but also to ensure that their team and unit are successful. The amount of responsibility delegated to you depends on your mission, the position you hold and your own willingness to accept responsibility. Individual responsibility means you are accountable for your personal conduct. Soldiers in the Army have their own responsibilities. Individual responsibility cannot be delegated; it belongs to the soldier that wrote the check. Soldiers are accountable for their actions, to their fellow soldiers, to their leaders, to their unit

Mission Command The purpose of this paper is to describe how I will utilize some of the principles of mission command to build leaders that act on disciplined initiative and can operate without the commander’s supervision to reach the desired end state. Today, mission command plays a vital role in our modern military force; it provides the subordinates with the ability to function on their own. This gives them the capacity to tackle particular problems and accept prudent risks to reach the commander’s desired end state. Some of the principles that I will be talking about in this paper are; build cohesive teams through mutual trust, create shared understanding, exercise disciplined initiative.

Borrowing from the field of counselor supervision (Cal Stoltenber, Brian McNeill, and Ursula Delworth), the role or responsibility of the supervisor is to create a safe environment in which the employee can work through the developmental issues or challenges they face in order to gain the necessary motivation, autonomy, and self-awareness they need in order to successfully move to the next level of development. Leadership challenges are vast. For the military there seem to be just a handful of common challenges in which I will attempt to review and provide options in overcoming them.

Leadership is the art of influencing others to achieve a mission by offering motivation, purpose, and direction. In the military, there is a concept called chain of command, which is the authority some individuals lawfully exercise over subordinates by virtue of their positions, assignment, or rank (Spyglass Hill, n.d.). Equally, the chain of command is the most important and fundamental organizational technique used in the military. It is the commanders’ responsibility to achieve the assigned unit objectives while caring for property and personnel in their command. Thus, the basic duties of a military leader include accomplishing a specific mission and safeguarding soldiers’ welfare. In essence, a leader in the military has three kinds of duties: implied, directed, and specified roles. Every leader must exercise professional ethics, which encompass being loyal to the unit, the military, and this nation. Thus, military leaders should offer selfless service when on duty by putting the goals and needs of the unit, the nation, and the military ahead of their personal interests.

Within the U.S. military, leadership is generally considered something of a given. It is a fundamental ingredient of warfare, without which the outcome of a combat operation cannot be assured. The leader is the brain, the motive power of command, upon whom subordinates rely for guidance and wisdom, and depend upon for good judgment. The leader must be determined, unflappable and charismatic; confident in delegation of authority; able to combine the various strands of command into a common thread; seasoned, intelligent, and thoughtful.

Commanders who understand the operations process will achieve success on the battlefield. To achieve success leaders need to understand their role in the operations process, how their actions drive the staffs in the planning, preparation, execution and ongoing assessment of the situation. The actions of the commander and staffs will have a direct result on the ability of the units to execute the operation at the right time and place on the battlefield.

“Leadership, the lifeblood of an army, makes a difference every day in the United States Army. Since the formation of the Continental Army until today with Soldiers deployed around the globe, Army leaders have accepted the challenges before them. The United States Army has always had great leaders who have risen above hardships and have drawn on a range of leadership qualities to influence Soldiers, build units, and accomplish the mission.” (ADP 6-22, 2012)

Since the beginning of Army transformation efforts in the late 1990s, and debatable “success” in Operation Iraqi Freedom, the Army has championed multiple studies to find the ways and means to inculcate officers with the necessary experiences, attributes, competencies, and strategic artistry to make it possible for the Army to succeed in its current challenges.4 In the past, the Army placed greater emphasis on the transformation of structures and systems such as development of the modular force, base re-alignment, and Future Combat Systems (FCS) rather than intellectual growth, multi-faceted development, and affording appropriate experience levels of leaders that will influence the changing Army.5 Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to analyze a successful strategic leader of the past, in this case that leader is General George C. Marshall.