Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Lieutenant Lessons…Continued

In his Modern War Institute article, Scott Ginther relayed 20 lessons from his path from West Point Cadet to Platoon Leader in Afghanistan. (Find it here.)

Much credit goes to then 1LT Ginther for clearly learning the right lessons as a young leader, and for taking the time to capture and share them with the force. I offer the following thoughts as an addendum to his insights, and intend them to show how the leadership environment changes in the transition from Lieutenant to Commander and Field Grade officer.

CAPTION

Posted on Sunday, April 6, 2014

12 Things Good Bosses Believe (Rule #2)

“My success — and that of my people — depends largely on being the master of obvious and mundane things, not on magical, obscure, or breakthrough ideas or methods.”

Robert Sutton’s second belief about good bosses reminds us that while it is important for leaders to create vision for the organization, the more important work deals with leading people through the tangible steps to achieve that vision.

bosses Consider commanders you’ve seen that set out “Command Philosophies” containing lofty goals and the challenge to reach ill-defined levels of “x” capability. These documents may chart a path but they’re not what the junior leader will rely on when he’s trying to do his part to reach those goals.

Our military typically operates in a complex environment during combat and a muddled, overtasked environment in garrison. It is the leader’s job to sort through the muck to clearly define the steps/systems the team must perform to reach his goal. Task – Purpose – Endstate. Teams need this clarity to perform well.

Incidentally, consider that our system affords certain perks and comforts to commanders (his own vehicle, good accommodations, etc) because it expects them to get their head out of the weeds and identify the “obvious” when the team is rowing too hard to see what’s ahead.

Subscribe to The Military Leader

Complete Archive of Military Leader Posts

Back to Home Page

Posted on Monday, March 31, 2014

Putting Ego in its Place (pt. 1)

“Never let your ego get so close to your position,
so that when your position goes, your ego goes with it.”
– General Colin Powell

It’s easy to assume a position of leadership or take the guidon of command, and think that we were made for the job…that the organization and its people need us there…or that we were ordained to lead.

The responsibility and the recognition of being a leader makes it easy to align our self-worth with our job. It can become who we are, our identity. Similarly, many of us display attitudes/emotions that fluctuate with how we think we are performing in our jobs (i.e., a bad day at work means a bad day at home).

General Colin Powell warns against letting the job overcome who we are, because one day the titles and responsibility will drift away, then what are we left with?

We should keep in mind a few key characteristics about leading in the military:
1. The unit you are leading is not yours…it’s the government’s.
2. The government didn’t create the job for you; it exists for the Nation’s people.
3. The unit and its members will continue to excel even after you leave.

So, it’s prudent to find a way to display passion for the work while appropriately divorcing emotional stability and self-worth. We can’t take the work’s esteem with us when we go. We can only focus on making a positive impact in the unit that outlasts our tenure.

Commander-Centric Leadership

“Why can’t we get anything done when the commander leaves!?!?”

Yesterday, we saw that leaders who empower subordinates and avoid micromanagement will likely see improved results and better work environments. But, pushing power down the chain is not such a simple concept in the military.

Army Regulation 600-20 plainly states:
“Commanders are responsible for everything their command does or fails to do.” There’s no misinterpretation: if it goes wrong, it’s the commander’s fault.

Take yesterday’s news about 9 Air Force commanders fired because subordinates cheated on skills tests. They were fired because their command decisions set a climate where officers felt pressured and were able to cheat on the tests.

Our military revolves around its commanders. They are the only leaders who can make decisions about the mission, structure, actions, and well-being of the command. This clear charter of responsibility, while a necessary aspect of our duty, can stall subordinate staff members who do not want to cross the commander’s decision authority.

“Commanders delegate sufficient authority to Soldiers in the chain of command to accomplish their assigned duties, and commanders may hold these Soldiers responsible for their actions.” AR 600-20 tells commanders to find a balance between delegation and control, but also charges them to develop and teach the unit’s members. This development not only shows the staff how they can support the commander’s decision making, but also prepares the staff members for their eventual commands in the future.

Questions for Leaders

Have you specified what decision authority your subordinate leaders can exercise?
Do you give left/right limits and let your subordinates make their own decisions in that band? Or do you require everyone to do it ‘your way?’
Have you asked your team for feedback about the command climate and the environment for decision making?

http://themanagersdiary.com/diary-entry-231-does-absence-make-the-staff-grow-stronger/

Subscribe to The Military Leader

Complete Archive of Military Leader Posts

Back to Home Page