Small Unit Leaders' Initiative in Normandy
The amphibious landings in Normandy on D-Day, 1944, were preceded by a corps-sized, night parachute assault by American and British airborne units. Many of the thousands of aircraft that delivered the 82d and 101st (US) Airborne Divisions to Normandy on the night of 5-6 June 1944 were blown off course. Some wound up in the wrong place because of enemy fire; others were simply lost. Thousands of paratroopers, the spearhead of the Allied invasion of Western Europe, found themselves scattered across unfamiliar countryside, many of them miles from their drop zones. They wandered about in the night, searching for their units, their buddies, their leaders, and their objectives. In those first few hours, the fate of the invasion hung in the balance; if the airborne forces did not cut the roads leading to the beaches, the Germans could counterattack the landing forces at the water's edge, crushing the invasion before it even began.
Fortunately for the Allies and the soldiers in the landing craft, the leaders in these airborne forces had trained their subordinate leaders well, encouraging their initiative, allowing them to do their jobs. Small unit leaders scattered around the darkened, unfamiliar countryside knew they were part of a larger effort, and they knew its success was up to them. They had been trained to act instead of waiting to be told what to do; they knew that if the invasion was to succeed, their small units had to accomplish their individual missions.
Among these leaders were men like CPT Sam Gibbons of the 505th Parachute Infantry Regiment. He gathered a group of 12 soldiers-from different commands-and liberated a tiny village-which turned out to be outside the division area of operations-before heading south toward his original objective, the Douve River bridges. CPT Gibbons set off with a dozen people he had never seen before and no demolition equipment to destroy a bridge nearly 15 kilometers away. Later, he remarked, "This certainly wasn't the way I had thought the invasion would go, nor had we ever rehearsed it in this manner." But he was moving out to accomplish the mission. Throughout the Cotentin Peninsula, small unit leaders from both divisions were doing the same.
This was the payoff for hard training and leaders who valued soldiers, communicated the importance of the mission, and trusted their subordinate leaders to accomplish it. As they trained their commands for the invasion, organizational leaders focused downward as well as upward.
Mission Command as defined by the United States Army consists six distinct and critical principles. During World War II there were many examples of exemplary mission command that led to stunning victories for the Allies but also many examples of failure. The Battle for Arnhem or Operation Market-Garden was such a failure. Major General Robert Elliot Urquhart, the Commander of the 1st Airborne Division failed in not only in tactics but the ability to lead his division to victory. He did not completely misunderstand the principles of mission command, but four main areas in which he made critical mistakes were; Build a Cohesive Team Through Mutual Trust, Create a Shared Understanding, Accept Prudent Risk, and Exercise Disciplined Initiative.
COL Freeman beloved by his men, finally left the RCT at noon on 15FEB1951 with tears forming in his eyes. He was devoted to his Soldiers and his ability to assess the situation and ultimately secured a successful mission in Chipyong-Ni. He would issue orders with a “handshake, a grin, and provided words of encouragement before dangerous missions.” Chipyong-Ni was that type of mission. He didn’t like the situation, but issued the order as if he thought of the idea. He set the climate that extended down to the lowest Private in the RCT, to be proud and be victorious.
The 7th Cavalry Regiment's destruction at the Battle of the Little Bighorn in June 1876 is the subject of over a century of debate. LTC George A. Custer failed to exercise four key responsibilities that were expected of him as the regiment’s commander. He failed to understand the problem and environment, visualize a feasible solution, clearly describe it to his subordinates, and effectively direct his forces. These four aspects of mission command are integral to the operations process and help Soldiers understand and execute their commander's intent. Custer's failure to properly fulfill his role in the operations process resulted in his death and a strategic defeat for the nation.
The award-winning novel by Stephen Ambrose, Band of Brothers: Easy Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne from Normandy to Hitler's Eagle's Nest, discusses one of the greatest examples of mission command in the form of 1st Lieutenant Richard Winters and his role in the Brecourt Manor Assault. This battle is a textbook example of how to fight against a superior enemy force that outnumbered the unit by four times as much. Facing overwhelming odds with just 16 paratroopers against over 60 German Soldiers, 1LT Winters nevertheless prevails and succeeds in achieving his objective while minimizing casualties to just three Soldiers lost. Looking back further into the American Revolution, the Battle of Bunker Hill on the American side is one of the earliest examples of Mission Command under the command of COL William Prescott.
With careful planning, co-operation, good leadership and courage, Currie managed to bring out the characteristics of a well thought out success at Vimy Ridge in April of 1917 (Dancocks, 1985). Sir Arthur Currie’s responsibility was to command the 1st Canadian Division (Hyatt, 1987). He pushed his troops to undergo rigorous training and to prepare themselves by using a life-size course, with every trench marked by tape and a flag (Dancocks, 1985). Currie designed very accurate maps and he had a small-scale plasticine model built so that it could be studied by all soldiers. Arthur Currie insisted that his division’s knowledge of the enemy was excellent (Dancocks, 1985).
In order to receive a victory in the Battle of the Bulge, General Patton used Mission Command Analysis in order to understand how he can be successful for this mission. The first thing of understanding t...
Part 1, The Basics of Leadership, Chapter 1 covers Fundamentals of Leadership while Roles and Relationships are covered in Chapter 2. This section describes and depicts levels of Leadership. We as a military are set apart from other non-military professions in that Soldiers must be prepared to use deadly force and have the courage required to close with and destroy the enemy. All leaders, from non-commissioned officers and warrant officers, to commissioned officers, inherently possess a great responsibility. The repercussions of decisions and actions impact the lives of Soldiers and their families. Additionally, these decisions affect the battlefield environment including enemy and non-combatants, both military and
Throughout the battle, you see numerous Army Values and Warrior Ethos being used. “I will never leave a fallen comrade”, was the etho used the most, to reach the separated platoon. The battle also shows that not all tactical orders are effective, but as a leader you must never second guess yourself.
In the summer of 1944, General George S. Patton and his 3rd Army successfully broke through heavy German Forces resistance from the Normandy invasion. German forces were in total disarray by the end of August 1944. Patton pleaded with his boss, General Omar Bradley, that if 3rd U.S. Army could be allocated as little as 400,000 gallons of fuel, he could be inside Germany in two days. Time was crucial before the inevitable reaction by the Germans to shore up their defense, preventing Patton from advancing. General Bradley refused Patton's request for more fuel; Unfortunately, General Patton advanced to Germany. Morale ran high throughout Patton’s Army, and there was no sign of heavy resistance before the German border. Consequently, by early September, the 3rd U.S Army had ground to a virtual halt along the flooded Moselle River. In places, Patton's tanks and vehicles ran out of fuel on the battlefield and their swift momentum outran their supply lines (Fugate, 1999). Lack of logistics allowed the German forces to take advantage of Patton’s Army and initiate one of the largest tank battles of World War II, the Battle of Arracourt.
During the battle, COL Hughes moved to areas under heavy fire to advice his commanders directly and motivate his Marines to push forward. He exhibited extraordinary professionalism as he maintain his presence as a true ground commander who fought side-by-side with his Marines. Initially, cloud cover was heavy and poor weather prevented close air support (CAS) and artillery support. With organic assets readily available, he personally directed fire support on enemy defenses slowly weakening Communist forces hold on the city. Clearly, COL Hughes was able to inspire trust to his subordinates whose end result was a cohesive team that fought a successful battle
According to Army Doctrine Publication (ADP) 6-0, mission command philosophy is, “the exercise of authority and direction by the commander using mission orders to enable discipline initiative within the commander’s intent to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations.” Commanders execute mission command throughout all phases of the operations process. ADP 5-0 states that, “Commanders drive the operations process.” The six steps that allow Commanders to drive the operations process are: understand, visualize, describe, direct, lead, and assess. I will discuss four of these steps used by COL Freeman’s analyze his ability to properly execute mission command in this Battle.
The book Black Hearts by Jim Frederick is an in-depth narrative about the 1st platoon, Bravo Company 1-502nd Infantry 101st Airborne Division deployed to Iraq in 2005. The leadership failures documented in this book range all the way from the general officer level down to the lowest private. LT general Ricardo Sanchez failed to understand the climate his command group was entering as they were deployed into Iraq. From then on the entire leadership failures continued to compound upon each other with improper time to plan. It is customary to have a six month lead time to have a proper battle hand off when preparing to take over an AO from another unit. To compound this problem, the entire time the 502nd was in pre-deployment training, they were preparing for the rigors of urban combat. In reality, they were given six weeks to recon their new area of responsibility and were going to a countryside crafted by the heavens for guerilla warfare. As Colonel Ebel said in the book, “It is not going to be an easy road. They are not even sure of what they have in the area. It just feels bad. We can expect a real fight.”
When then leader measures what was supposed to happen with what actually happened, the leader and involved personnel will then find out if the job was completed to standard. Also the leader needs to know from the personnel involved, what to keep doing and what can be done different to get those same or better results. All feedback should be honest and factual. This is the information that the leader will use to makes thing better; to make the operation run more smoothly. All of this defines the most successful and impactful Army leaders.
The most effective commanders through their leadership build cohesive teams. Mutual trust, shared understanding, and accepting prudent risk serve as just a few principles for mission command. Mutual trust is the foundation of any successful professional relationship that a commander shares with his staff and subordinates. The shared understanding of an operational environment functions, as the basis for the commander to effectively accomplish the mission. While my advice for the commander on what prudent risks to take may create more opportunities rather than accepting defeat. Incorporating the principles of mission command by building cohesive teams through mutual trust, fostering an environment of shared understanding, and accepting prudent risk will make me an effective adviser to the commander, aid the staff during the operations process, and provide an example for Soldiers to emulate.
The Army spends a great deal of time making followers into leaders and leaders into followers by utilizing several levels of training throughout their military career. This training allows a Soldier to perfect the knowledge and skills required to be an effective leader in every aspect of their job. ...