Are different command, leadership and management skills and attributes needed at different levels of a military organisation? How commanders are best prepared for success at each level?
Introduction
Command, management and leadership are important terms in the contemporary military environment. Leadership and management are used interchangeably in the civilian market, but command is an exclusively military term. The contemporary military environment uses the three words together in explaining the role of the military. The three terms are closely related in the military environment, but little research has been carried out to compare them. However, command is considered the traditional role of leadership in the military. On the other hand, leadership and management in civilian terms can be integrated into military command to enhance effecting functioning of military organisations. The practices of leading, managing and commanding have evolved over time in the military environment.[1] They require new attitudes and skills in order to work together for the success of the military. Different command, leadership and management skills are needed at each level of a military organisation. In order to understand the command, management and leadership skills and attributes at each level of a military organisation, it is important to explain them separately first, and then explain their relationship with each other at each level of the military organisation.
Command
Command refers to the authority given to an individual within the armed forces so that he/she can give direction, control and coordination of the military. Legally, a command is given to a commander by higher authority, and he/she uses that authority to achieve a specific direction and mission. From the subordinates to the commander and to higher authorities, there is a hierarchy of command which allows commanders at each level to give authority to junior military staff. Authority is a key feature in formal military organisations whereby certain individuals of higher ranks exert control and direction over other individuals of lower ranks. In military studies, authority is considered as the freedom and right of a commander to exercise power of command and enforce obedience. Commanders in higher levels of the organisation have delegation skills. They retain their responsibility of command and devolve some specific areas of authority to subordinates. Commanders and subordinates on the lower levels of the organisation often have more tactical and operational skills and they take command from the commanders in higher levels.
The exercise of command occurs in different levels of a military organisation. In each level, a commander makes independent decisions and passes on his intentions to the subordinates. A commander in each organisational level therefore has the authority, duty and responsibility to act. Individual command in all levels involves the art of decision making, motivating, and directing all ranks.[2] Therefore, commanders at higher levels of the organisations have higher levels of decision making and motivation skills. Each level of the military organisation is also characterised by the C3I (command, control, communication and Intelligence). These command attributes are common at all levels of the organisation: grand strategic, military strategic, operational, and tactical levels.
Control is one of the aspects of command. It entails a commander’s role of organizing, directing and coordinating activities of the military allocated to him by higher ranks. For a commander at any level of an organisation to achieve his/her desired result, he/she should have a vision; understand concepts, missions, priorities and resource allocation; be able to assess people and risk; and should be able to engage in re-evaluation of the situation. Most importantly, a commander at a higher rank should possess the attribute of deciding on a course of action and leading his command.
The essence of organisational levels is enhanced by the need to have a structural organisation in order to achieve coordination among various activities. Hierarchical and the matrix organisational structures require that work activities should be shared among three levels of organisation: tactical, operational and military strategic level. In each level, command is given authority to provide direction to subordinates.[3] At each level of a military organisation, organisational command encompasses four key attributes: division of labour, allocation of authority, departmentalization and span of control. Higher levels of an organisation are highly mechanistic and consist of tight rules and policies. At these levels there are high divisions of labour, low delegation of authority, uniformity of activities across departments, and narrow spans of control.[4] In this regard, senior commanders at the organisational level make a lot of decisions about division of labour, devolution of authority, departmentalization and span of control.
Management
Management is a term used more in the civilian market than the military. It refers to the process of allocating and controlling resources such as human, material and financial resources to achieve organisational goals and objectives. One of the attributes of good management is the ability to achieve the right balance in resource allocation such that there will not be a shortage or an overabundance of resources. The roles of a manager are classified into interpersonal, informational and decisional roles. In terms of interpersonal roles, a manager is considered as a leader, figurehead and liaison. The informational roles of a manager include: monitoring (scanning for information), dissemination of information, and acting as a spokesperson in order to share information with outsiders. A manager also plays decisional roles such as entrepreneurship (seeking change), acting as a disturbance handler, resource allocation, and negotiation (reaching agreement).
The concept of management arose in the 20th century due to the emergence of large organisations. Complex enterprises operating in a fast-moving and changing environment require good management that can bring order and consistency in decision making.[5] While command-by-direction is concerned with the task, management-by-people is concerned with the freedom of subordinates.
Leadership
Leadership entails the process of working through other people to achieve organisational goals using a well defined vision.[6] In the contemporary military environment, strong leadership at every level of organisation is necessary. The quality of an organisation’s leadership determines the effectiveness of the organisation in delivering its mission and achieving its vision (Campbell, et al, 2010). Management is only concerned with policies, procedures, books rules; but leadership is concerned with trust, mission and vision. Leaders enable teams within various levels of an organisation to work together towards the achievement of the organisation’s mission and vision. Leadership entails various skills and attributes at different levels of an oganisations. Some of the leadership skills and attributes include: purpose and direction, trust, optimism, and results-oriented.[7] Leaders provide purpose, meaning and direction for their followers. Leaders in higher ranks should also be trustworthy and should also trust their subordinates at lower levels of the organisation.
Effective leadership should be felt across all levels of the organisation. At the lower levels of an organisation, people feel empowered if the higher-level leaders exhibit the key attributes of leadership, especially sense of direction and purpose.[8] In a hierarchical military organisation, leaders up in the ladder of ranks should value learning and demonstrate competence in order to empower those below them. Therefore, learning and development are even more important attributes at the senior levels of leadership than at lower levels. Where there is a leader, there is always a team. The team is considered to be at lower levels of the organisation. Therefore, at higher levels of an organisation there are stronger leadership skills and at the lower levels there are stronger teamwork skills. Effective leadership at the top leads to more stimulating, challenging, fun, and fascinating work at the bottom.
In military organisation, shared vision is the most powerful engine in driving the military towards success and excellence.[9] This can be achieved through effective leadership. Military leaders share the organisation’s vision through others at all levels of the organisation. This requires an effective communication mechanism to share the vision throughout the organisation. Therefore, leaders at higher levels of military organisations should develop effective communication skills so that they can disseminate information down the hierarchy and share the vision of the organisation effectively from one level to another. The shared vision of a military organisation should be alive at every command level, and leaders at the top should demonstrate sufficient attributes of good vision sharing.
A corporate vision operates in three levels of command: strategic, operational, and tactical. At the strategic level, leaders demonstrate the overriding philosophy of the organisation. They have the skills to formulate a good vision and communicate it effectively to the operational and tactical levels of the military organisation.[10] At the operational level, leaders exhibit good execution skills. They put the philosophy and vision of the military organisation into action. The philosophy of the organisation is then manifested in the behaviour of military staff at the tactical level including each airman and navy.
Leaders at the top disseminate the vision to all the three levels, and the middle level leaders allow the vision to permeate from the top to the bottom. The strategic leaders also exhibit evaluation attributes; they evaluate the vision of the organisation so that it may handle new challenges in the contemporary military environment. Strategic leaders in a military organisation pay attention to the vision of the organisation constantly. They serve the long term interests of the military by planning, setting goals and providing strategic vision. Leaders in the operational and tactical levels have the ability to implement set goals and strategic vision of the organisation. They also implement change as recommended by the strategic level leaders. Leaders in all levels of the organisation care about their missions and their people. Leadership at all levels is an important aspect of success in Air Force’s involvements in war and peace (Baran & Scott, 2010). Leadership skills in the three levels of military organisations are essential in the profession of arms. Mutual trust among and respect among ranks are key leadership skills across all levels of a military organisation.
Relationship between Leadership, Management and Command skills and attributes
Leadership, management and command skills and attributes are complementary to each other. They are all human matters, and are required for the success of the military in a complex and volatile contemporary environment.[11] The model of leadership, management and command in the three levels of a military organisation is shown in the figure below.
Command, leadership and management have different skills and attributes at each of the levels of the organisation as shown in the figure above. Tactics make steps on which operations leap, and strategy guides and directs the path. It is difficult to manage people effectively at all levels of the organisation; they must be led.[12] Competent leadership is needed at all levels of the organisation in order to enhance the effectiveness of command and management procedures up and down the hierarchy.
Traditional military environment is guided by bureaucracy whereby the military is controlled, ordered and coordinated from the top. These are the functions of command and management. As military organisations become more complex and volatile in the contemporary environment, leadership is becoming critical. Leadership demonstrates innovativeness and creativity at all levels of the organisation. This is opposed to the ordering attributes of command and management which only yield routine procedures with no innovation and no creativity. The ordering and directing attributes of command and management usually come from the top level of the military organisation (strategic level), but leadership skills and attributes are distributed across all levels of the military organisation. Leadership breaks the barriers of resistance to change and develops new “unthinked” thinking.[13] Intellectual growth is also a common leadership attribute that is distributed across all levels of management. The most important attribute of leadership over management and command is that it enables people to work together towards a common goal, inspiring each other and challenging traditional systems to perform and succeed in a volatile military environment.
Leadership skills cannot be imposed on someone by higher authority; but senior management passes directing and controlling attributes to junior managers by delegating duties to them. In general, management and command attributes are demonstrated by senior ranks and specific positions while leadership attributes are exercised at every level of an organisation. Leaders don’t just delegate duties; they give power (command authority) to others. Traditional command requires the senior level of the organisation to be the only level that exercises command authority; but leadership bestows that authority to all other levels of the organisations. This leadership attribute is justifiable in contemporary military environment because military is a risky duty. Sometimes the Air Force at the lowest level of the organisation may be faced by a situation of life and death. In this case, the affected military personnel will not wait for direction from the commander. Instead, he takes appropriate measures which he/she thinks are the best courses of action given the situation. A commander with good leadership skills gives his/her team members the power to exercise command authority, so that when they are faced with such a situation they can always make quick and effective decisions.
How to prepare commanders for success at each level
This section is just a summary of the steps that can be taken to prepare commanders for success at each level of the military organisation. Such steps can be deduced from the earlier sections where the management, command and leadership attributes and skills at different levels of the organisation were addressed.[14] It is clear certain attributes are suited for different levels of the organisation; hence commanders can be prepared for success at each level by instilling key attributes at each level.
Leadership skills such as trust, communication, vision and mission drive, delegation of command authority, creativity, respect, and open minded thinking are exercised at all levels of the organisation. Commanders can be prepared for success at all levels by enhancing effective leadership attributes and skills in all levels of the organisation.[15] They should also be trained in order for them to develop the competence they need as managers to direct, order and predict procedures down the hierarchy. They should be taught to lead and manage the military at all levels of the organisation. Commanders should also be supported and tolerated by all members of the organisation in order to prepare them for success at all levels of the organisation.
Conclusion
Military organisational hierarchy includes three levels: strategic, operational and tactical levels. It is clear that command and management attributes and skills are a bit similar because they involve directing, ordering and commanding down the hierarchy. Management attributes at the strategic level of the hierarchy include ordering, directing and predicting; while the management attributes at lower levels include taking orders and allocating resources. Leadership skills and attributes are distributed across all levels of the organisation. Leaders at the strategic level develop a vision for the organisation and share it down the hierarchy while the lower level leaders demonstrate the ability to implement the set goals and initiate changes where appropriate in order to achieve the vision and mission of the organisation as set by the top leaders. Cooperation across all levels of the organisation is a key leadership attribute and should be embraced by commanders. Commanders should also learn to devolve authoritative power and trust his subordinates.
References list
Baran, B., & Scott, C. 2010. “Organizing ambiguity: A grounded theory of leadership and sense- making within dangerous contexts.” Military Psychology, 22: S42–S69.
Bennis, W.G. 1997. Managing People is like Herding Cats. London: Kogan Page Limited.
Campbell, D.J., Hannah, S.T. and Mathews, M.D. 2010. “Leadership in Military and Other Dangerous Contexts: Introduction to the Special Topic Issue.” Military Psychology, 22(1), S1-S14.
Gerstner, C.R., & Day, D.V. 1994. “Cross-cultural comparison of leadership prototypes.” Leadership Quarterly, 5: 121-134.
Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B., Luthans, F., & Harms, P. 2008. “Leadership efficacy: Review and future directions.” Leadership Quarterly, 19: 669–692.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. 1984. The management of organizational behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Luthans, F. 2002. Organizational Behaviour, 9th International Edition. New York: McGraw Hill.
McMaster, H.R. 2010. “Remaining True to Our Values Reflections on Military Ethics in Trying Times.” Journal of Military Ethics, 9(3): 183-194.
Mintzberg, H. 1973. The Nature of Managerial Work. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Sweeney, P. 2010. “Do soldiers reevaluate trust in their leaders prior to combat operations?” Military Psychology, 22: S70-S88.
[1] McMaster, H.R. 2010. “Remaining True to Our Values Reflections on Military Ethics in Trying Times.” Journal of Military Ethics, 9(3): 183-194.
[2] McMaster, H.R. 2010. “Remaining True to Our Values Reflections on Military Ethics in Trying Times.” Journal of Military Ethics, 9(3): 183-194.
[3] Campbell, D.J., Hannah, S.T. and Mathews, M.D. 2010. “Leadership in Military and Other Dangerous Contexts: Introduction to the Special Topic Issue.” Military Psychology, 22(1), S1-S14.
[4] Luthans, F. 2002. Organizational Behaviour, 9th International Edition. New York: McGraw Hill.
[5] Luthans, F. 2002. Organizational Behaviour, 9th International Edition. New York: McGraw Hill.
[6] McMaster, H.R. 2010. “Remaining True to Our Values Reflections on Military Ethics in Trying Times.” Journal of Military Ethics, 9(3): 183-194.
[7] Sweeney, P. 2010. “Do soldiers reevaluate trust in their leaders prior to combat operations?” Military Psychology, 22: S70-S88.
[8] Mintzberg, H. 1973. The Nature of Managerial Work. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
[9] McMaster, H.R. 2010. “Remaining True to Our Values Reflections on Military Ethics in Trying Times.” Journal of Military Ethics, 9(3): 183-194.
[10] McMaster, H.R. 2010. “Remaining True to Our Values Reflections on Military Ethics in Trying Times.” Journal of Military Ethics, 9(3): 183-194.
[11] McMaster, H.R. 2010. “Remaining True to Our Values Reflections on Military Ethics in Trying Times.” Journal of Military Ethics, 9(3): 183-194.
[12] Bennis, W.G. 1997. Managing People is like Herding Cats. London: Kogan Page Limited.
[13] Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B., Luthans, F., & Harms, P. 2008. “Leadership efficacy: Review and future directions.” Leadership Quarterly, 19: 669–692.
[14] Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B., Luthans, F., & Harms, P. 2008. “Leadership efficacy: Review and future directions.” Leadership Quarterly, 19: 669–692.
[15] Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. 1984. The management of organizational behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
