Army Leadership Philosophies

What is Army Leadership
Leadership philosophy is one of the most important things an Army leader can bring to a unit because it is the intellectual foundation upon which all action is based. A leader without a philosophy of leadership is like a house built on sand: the first wave that comes along will exhaust it and quickly a succession of waves will reduce it to nothing. Leadership philosophy on the other hand is like a castle built on rock: no wave can wear it down, no assault can penetrate it. As an Army leader, the leadership philosophies that I would bring to a new unit would be 1) to always be honest, as honesty demonstrates transparency and forces one to be accountable for one’s thoughts, words and deeds; 2) to always be supportive no matter the situation; and 3) to inspire my unit to want to achieve its potential and develop towards the ideal forms pointed out by Plato so many centuries ago—the one, the good, and the true (Santas, 1980).
In the military it is not uncommon to identify attributes such as honor and integrity with philosophies of leadership. The reason for this is that leaders are expected to uphold and embody high-minded principles so that others are reminded of what they themselves should strive to be. Some expect that leaders are meant to authoritarian, to make all the decisions for underlings, who never think they have to one day think for themselves. However, the Army does not teach such a version of leadership. The six principles of mission command are based on the idea that even followers are expected to lead and make decisions on their own at some point—and effective command leaders are responsible for making sure that followers know that (ADRP 6-0, 2012).
Some of the most important components of leadership are the ability to communicate effectively, the ability to listen, the ability to create a sense of shared understanding, and the ability to inspire with a vision. The unit must be able to rally behind and around its leader, but the leader must also be able to rely upon his unit and trust that each individual will do the job expected of him. In many cases, this will require having a great deal of flexibility as no mission proceeds according to plan. Sometimes things change, the environment holds surprises, and those tasked with executing certain objectives must alter the manner in which they achieve those objectives. The main point is that effective leadership is never rigid: it allows for contingences and makes it clear that followers will be expected to make adjustments when adjustments are needed so that the objective can be achieved in spite of obstacles that arise. To get followers to understand that, however, requires communication and clarity from the leader: if the leader does not make it very clear how important it is to achieve the objective and thinks that simply giving out commands is sufficient, he will never teach his followers to think and react.
My philosophy of leadership is based on the need to think. Philosophy itself is the study of wisdom. That means a philosophy of leadership is really the study of how to lead wisely and well. Leading is not the same thing as commanding. It is not the same thing as teaching. Leaders are different in that they must represent the best that there is: they are put forward or put themselves forward because they serve as the embodiment of what the common soldier should strive to be. They lead because it is the natural position for them to adopt. The model always precedes the apprentice. The apprentice looks to the model for guidance. The apprentice expects to grow and develop and the model expects the same.
In my philosophy, I would expect the members of my unit to want to grow and develop, too. I would expect them to be willing to take the initiative and to become leaders themselves. Trust, of course, is critical. A leader must trust his training, his soldiers and himself as a leader. He must be willing to be positive just as he expects his soldiers to be willing to grow and develop to become the ideal soldier and ultimately the ideal leader.
Keeping positive is essential. The Army’s Master Resiliency Training (MRT) is a clear example of why this is so. MRT is based on the idea of positive psychology, which shows that people need basic, fundamental good things in their lives to stay focused in overcoming adversity. Without a sense of the good in life they will not be resilient enough to face obstacles and rise above them. They will sink into depression and self-loathing as they are defeated again and again either by what life throws at them or by themselves and their own negative attitudes. Often they will not even know why they are so defeatist. The leader trained in positive psychology will know, however, that the reason is simple: the soldier has no fundamental awareness of or belief in the good. The reason Plato focused on the good is that he knew this was the prime motivating force—the ideal calling to all people and urging them to be better, to climb upwards, to rise above the pitfalls and find the goodness, truth and beauty in life. Even soldiers need to be aware of beauty for it humanizes and makes us appreciate what we have and why we have to fight to keep it.
My philosophy of leadership would ultimately come down to showing my unit why it matters that we do what we do and that we do it well. Every member counts because every member is part of the whole—and the whole would not be whole without each one of us. My job as a leader would simply be to show the way and then allow them to begin to grow and reach up to embrace the good.
References
ADRP 6-0. (2012). Mission command. Headquarters, Department of the Army.
Santas, G. (1980). The form of the Good in Plato's Republic. Philosophical Inquiry, 2(1), 374-403.