People need leaders to communicate the goals and vision for errands and to help them achieve goals. One example of this is informal leadership, where individuals follow a person whom they consider credible or knowledgable. Picture 1 is the graphic organizer of this essay, which will focus on the foundations of army leadership. Leadership is the basis of the Army’s ability to complete operations and defend the nation’s interests, and it is based on integrity and commitment to assist subordinates and help them develop their competencies.
Unlike any other organization, the Army is involved in operations that endanger the people working for it, and this type of environment requires exceptional leaders who can communicate the purpose of each assignment. The leadership in this organization is linked to its history, the state’s principles, an alliance to the mission, and the leader’s authority (Clark, n.d.). In general terms, leadership consists of two elements, a leader, who guides, and those who are led (Morgan, 2020). Each organization and individual may define leadership differently, considering their experiences and views, which is why it is essential to review the foundations of leadership. For the Army, formal leadership is necessary because this organization is based on a structure where each individual knows their tasks and responsibilities. However, formal credentials are not always the basis of leadership, and a leader has to possess certain characteristics and qualities.
Within the Army, the relationships between supervisors and subordinates are strictly regulated, which includes a clear outline of leadership, its meaning, and foundations. According to Munteneau (2016), the Army defines three types of competencies that leaders should develop: the ability to lead, assist, and achieve. This reassures that the leaders are capable of leading soldiers into the battle operations and dangerous situations and succeed in these efforts. Additionally, this means that in the basic definition of an army leader, there is a concept of assisting the subordinates.
From another perspective, the basis of the Army’s leadership is linked with the foundation of the state: the democratic principles (Munteneau, 2016). These are the central values and standards of performance within the Army. Moreover, the Army was created to protect the democratic principles and the state, which also form the basis of its leadership. Next, there are three leadership levels in the Army: direct, organizational, and strategic, each linked to different objectives and performance standards (“Army leadership and profession,” 2019). Each leader has a clear outline of their responsibilities and scope of the decisions, which points out another foundation of leadership — formal regulation. Munteneau (2016) also mentioned the history of the Army’s development as one of the core foundations of its leadership. Mainly, the Army’s leaders have to be competent and responsible for their work, but also they have to be engaged in developing their subordinates’ skills and knowledge.
An army leader has to be a trustworthy individual who has earned a reputation for being reliable and competent. Munteneau (2016) defines the three core elements that form the basis of leadership as “integrity, authenticity, and commitment” (p. 3). This means that an army’s leader should be trustworthy and have a reputation of a good leader and a person committed to severe their country and make the best designs possible. These factors are mostly intangible and require one to show that they have integrity and follow the ethical standards on a daily basis. Although one may argue that formally, an army leader is anyone with a formal responsibility to lead, this appointment lacks the foundation of leadership, which is authority. However, considering that the military is mostly engaged in completing dangerous tasks and operations, it is essential to have leaders who are viewed as authoritative figures.
The leadership foundations are linked to the different units within the Army: team, section, and squad. At each of these levels, a leader should be capable of communicating each action’s purpose and creating a sense of urgency for completing an operation (Clark, n.d.). For example, colonels and generals work on developing strategic plans for the Army. They should be able to communicate the purpose of these plans or the necessity to achieve them to protect the nation. However, at each level, the authority of the figure, combined with the link to the state’s democratic values, the Army’s history, and the leader’s commitment to helping their subordinates develop their skills and competencies, is the foundation of leadership in the Army.
In summary, the leadership in the Army is a core value that allows the units to complete dangerous operations for the nation’s benefit. Although in this paper several views on the Army leadership foundations are presented, it is evident that the integrity of the leader and their ability to guide and assist their subordinates is the core basis of these foundations. Moreover, a true Army leader has to engage in developing the skills and competencies of their subordinates.
References
Army leadership and the profession. (n.d.).
Clark, M. (n.d.). Introduction to army leadership.
Morgan, J. (2020). What is leadership, and who is a leader?
Munteanu, A. R. (2016). Army leadership. Web.