LEVELS OF LEADERSHIP
There are many ways an organization can distribute leadership roles. The United States Army has an effective way of delegating work and organizing the chain of command; they do this by categorizing the levels of leadership in to three main groups: Direct, Organizational, and Strategic. All three levels are extremely important, one level cannot stand without the other. While Direct level leaders tend to deal with people on a more personal level, the Organizational and Strategic level leaders need to be able to organize entire organizations indirectly and delegate the work load to the appropriate personal and do so effectively.
Direct level leadership is concerned with the here and now, with short-term decisions and risk management for instant gain within their organization. At this level, team leaders must make sure the needs of their team members are met while at the same time still being able to complete the mission. A direct level leader is required to be proficient with their technical skills, extremely knowledgeable with the equipment they work with, and have good amount of experience on how to operate that equipment as well. In other words, they need to have a good grasp on the fundamentals of their job specific MOS so that they can effectively lead by example. He has to lead and guide his Soldiers all while working
…show more content…
The United States Army has an effective way of delegating work and organizing the chain of command; they do this by categorizing the levels of leadership in to three main groups: Direct, Organizational, and Strategic. All three levels are extremely important, one level cannot stand without the other. While Direct level leaders tend to deal with people on a more personal level, the Organizational and Strategic level leaders need to be able to organize entire organizations indirectly and delegate the work load to the appropriate personal and do so
The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief analysis of the United States Army’s organizational structure and its culture and how these two elements impact its workers, associates and affiliates. This paper will first examine the Army’s history, development and structure to highlight the origins of the Army’s culture. Secondly, a brief history of the Army’s organizational development will be followed by a close examination of its philosophy and supporting beliefs. Lastly, this paper will discuss the role of the Army’s leadership, their response to critical issues and the organizational structure of the Army. An analysis of the army’s top leaders will help the reader to understand the Army culture more thoroughly in the context of the Army’s organizational structure. More specifically this section of the paper will examine the Army leadership’s response to the current geo-political environment and other related issues. In conclusion, this paper hopes to highlight the Army’s overall functioning from an organizational standpoint and emphasize that idea that the Army is like a functional corporation. This will be accomplished by addressing various key questions throughout this text.
As the incoming brigade commander, LTC (P) Owens, I see the critical leadership problem facing the 4th Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT) is the inability or unwillingness of Colonel Cutler to lead and manage change effectively. In initial talks with Col Cutler and in reviewing the brigade’s historical unit status reports, the 4th ABCT performed as well as can be expected in Afghanistan, but as the onion was peeled back there are numerous organizational issues that were brought to the surface while I walked around and listened to the soldiers of the 4th ABCT, in addition to reviewing the Center for Army Lessons Learned (CALL) report. One of the most formidable tasks of a leader is to improve the organization while simultaneously accomplishing
There are 11 Army Publications used as references (ADP 3-0, ADP 6-0, ADP 6-22, ADRP 5-0, ADRP 6-0, AR 350-1, AR 600-100, FM 3-13, FM 27-10, TC 1-05). ADRP 6-22 is composed of 11 chapters, divided into four parts. 3. What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'? Background and Discussion a. ADRP 6-22 discusses necessary topics in order to become a multi-skilled, competent, and responsive Army leader.
A military officer must manage pieces of one of the largest organizations in the United States government - an organization that accounts for the third largest piece of the American budget and is comprised of 1.3 million active sailors, soldiers, airmen, and marines, many of whom are tasked with being deployable to any location within 48 hours. This is only possible through concise, professional communication on the part of every service member, especially
Leadership can come in many forms and from many perspectives. In the heat of combat, the leadership from a Navy Seal is much different than that of a leader in a high school dorm. Through reading Extreme Ownership I found how leadership completely changes depending on the perspective. Leadership in combat is completely dependent on quick, decisive execution, whereas leadership in the dorm is more dependent on taking time to work with everyone before arriving at a solution.
The most notable difference between these two levels of leadership is the part that leaders take in soldiers’ training. Both types of leadership are actively involved in the training process. Tactical Leaders participate directly in the training process on a daily basis, whereas organizational leaders act more as supervisors. Tactical leaders always are close to the front, right next to their subordinate soldiers both in the barracks and on the field. They mostly exert their leadership by personal presence and “lead by example” model. The organizational leaders will be more involved in providing a broad vision, developing concepts, setting up the goals and guidelines, and planning the training process rather than executing it. These different dimensions of responsibilities require different levels of education accordingly.
In a firm, management and leadership are important and needed. Leadership and management are similar. Actually, leadership and management are totally different. The leadership would influence the firm. The leader would have difference leadership styles to lead the subordinate.
We can identify three major cultural dimensions that help us to understand what leaders must focus on as they guide the transition of the Army. First, professional Identity, which is guided by Soldiers at all levels who are striving for excellence in their functional specialty, i.e., HR Sergeants. Soldiers who have goals and ideals of the Army to ethically put service and duty first. HR Sergeants are trained and well educated in their field. They are taught to put Soldiers first and have great customer support skills. Second, community, the sense in which Soldiers stop thinking about “I” and start thinking “we”. The bond among units who not only believe in cohesion with Soldiers, but their families too. The HR Sergeants are there to take care of Soldiers when financial issues arise with them or their families and don’t back down until the situation is solved. Last, hierarchy, which leads to order and control and provides Soldiers with moral reference and a sense of direction. The HR Sergeant has the mentality of mission first, knowing who to contact at the next level for assistance helps get the mission
All soldiers, especially leaders, are highly recommended to keep a certain set of values that radiate throughout the entire U.S. Army. They are challenged to keep them near and dear to their hearts and to define and live them every day. A leader is one who takes these challenges serious and abides by
Chain of Command – This establishes the level of authority from the bottom to the top within the organization and the level of authority each managerial position will hold. Additionally, the chain of command will outline the reporting process.
Leadership is contagious throughout the world and most importantly in the Army. It is not just my view, but of all leaders, at all levels, that organizations are responsible for setting conditions that lead to long-term organizational success. As I reflect on my experiences, through experience and observation, I realize how my values, beliefs, and perspectives about leadership continuously evolve over time. Recognizing these changes over time helps me better understand that people in organizations have different perspectives in life. This leadership narrative serve as important guiding principles for how I will lead at the organizational level and represents my thought, values and beliefs.
Introduction According to the Oxford Dictionary, a leader is defined as “the person who leads or commands a group, organization, or country” (Oxford Dictionaries, 2013). Though there is a definition for what a leader is, people still have different ideas about what a leader should be and how he or she should act. There has never been a concrete idea of what a leader is; the only thing we know is that this person is the one in charge of the unit. We look at characteristics of those people we see as leaders and use those attributes to compare other people to see if they are able to be as good as, or even better than, those aforementioned leaders. We have to keep in mind that in different situations, leaders must do different tasks which indicates the need for different qualities.
In the book Good To Great, the author talks about a compelling modesty and the qualities it takes to be a Level 5 Executive leader. The 10 qualities listed in the book are being quiet, humble, modest, reserved, shy, gracious, mild-mannered, self-effacing, understated, and not believing in their own clippings. Though these are not necessarily qualities that are linked with great leaders it turns out based on this study that they actually are the ones that stand out from good leaders to great ones.
As an officer in the United States Army, it has been imperative for me to understand every facet of leadership and why it remains important to be an effective leader. During this course, I have learned some valuable lessons about myself as a leader and how I can improve on my leadership ability in the future. The journal entries along with the understanding of available leadership theories have been an integral part of my learning during this course. For all of the journals and assessments that I completed, I feel it has given me a good understanding of my current leadership status and my future potential as a leader. All of the specific assessments looked at several areas in regards to leadership; these assessments covered several separate focus areas and identified my overall strengths and weaknesses as a leader. Over the course of this paper I will briefly discuss each one of these assessments and journal entries as they pertained to me and my leadership.
In fact, decentralization in the administrative arena holds as much potential for strengthening organizational productivity as initiatives in field operations. When particular activities—such as attendance at certain seminars-- must be reported regularly, those absolutes move to the head of the list whether deserved or not. Having an “administrative mission command” environment where end-states are described but methods left to local commanders should be as important as the tactical “mission command” mindset. For example, in an administrative “mission command mode” problems with sexual harassment or bullying might be deal with