Military Leadership and Likership.

Military Leadership and Likership.

Research Topic

Military leadership and likership is the broad topic to be researched on. The topic of military leadership and likership has been used to describe the employment of military strategies and tactics in battlefields and generating combat power. The study is aimed at determining the characteristics and motivation of military leaders and the approaches used within the military context and how it influences routine military work. This topic will look at military leadership and likership in the context of the human element and how they interact with people to succeed in wars (Arnold, Loughlin &Walsh, 2016). The design of the study is to show how organizational leadership within military context influences results in the battlefield. A holistic approach is taken in studying models of military leadership and how leadership strategies are used to accomplish specific missions.

Research Problem

A study that descriptively identifies the degree of motivating military leadership and military policy on leadership could remedy the situation of failed military operations. Approaches employed by military leaders have a lot of influence on specific missions their troops are carrying out. Given the complexity of some fights and situations, military leadership strategies should be looked at holistically from the chain of command to coordination.

The research seeks to understand the main issues and factors related to leadership responsibilities, preparation, and allocation of resources that could affect the ability of a leader to succeed. The study seeks to address how military leaders can address the gaps in their operations. Military leaders are faced with a constant change of tactics by the enemies, complexity of missions, and a lot of uncertainty.

Despite thorough training of commanders and generals, these uncertainties are dynamic, and therefore military leaders ought to be proactive to remedy the situation of failed operations. It noteworthy that military failure has a lot of repercussions to a country than any other profession. Is there a specific military strategy that is most effective that should be taught to military leaders? Therefore, perhaps a qualitative study on military leadership and likership strategies will assist in providing a solution to the problem.

The context of military leadership is very complicated since leadership is not very unique but depends on military operations. In the military profession and training, there are no specific leadership strategies taught to the military leaders; therefore, military leadership may be viewed just as generic literature leaders. However, leadership in the military context is worth studying and research due to its distinctiveness (Boney, 2016).

Literature Review.

The model used in military leadership has been grounded from a historical perspective and research. Past experiences during missions have shown what strategies and models work best for the military. Most army models in the USA and across the globe have used this mode as it identifies critical competencies and attributes that should be used in any military setting. The leader requirement model contributes significantly to individual and unit readiness and effectiveness. Lack of these attributes has led to a lot of fatalities and failed missions.

The leadership model requires that military leaders should have the following; one is character. Army leaders should have integrity values and have service ethos. Leaders should have the empathy to the troops they lead and have some humanity. Army leaders should have intellectual and have mind agility so that they can make informed and well thought out decisions and judgments. Having mental rigor helps the leaders in innovating new tactics. For army leaders to be qualified and competent, they should be able to lead others and build trust among their followers as well as being able to influence (Boney, 2016).  Army leaders should be prepared to achieve the desired results and goals and improve the performance of the respective teams. Therefore, it is for paramount importance for military leaders to have these soft skills while leading particular operations

There several factors that influence the military leadership process. The first is the institutional context. This leadership refers to the general characteristics and tenets of professional leaderships and how they are trained to use their expertise. The second factor that influences the military leadership process is the combat environment in which the militaries operate. The complexity, lethality, and moral intensity of different missions affect the military operation to be followed. These two factors are under-researched in the development of operational leadership. The following literature review will provide insight into leadership issues (Boney, 2016).

Relationship Skills.

Military leaders are supposed to engage socially with their troops to create alliances and trust with them hence leading effectively. This engagement helps in the reading intentions of the people they are lead and creating influence, which motivates the soldiers into action. Subordinate soldiers evaluate formal leadership in the form of trust. Creating cohesive units is always established outside the organizational structure. In most scenarios, effective leadership is hindered and compromised because of trust (Gibson, 2017).

It is of paramount importance for leaders to develop strong communication and diplomatic skills as well as strong emotional intelligence. These underlying skills help in evaluating situations and also building capacities to manage and employ social skills to guide reasoning and action. Monitoring and management of conditions require excellent social skills because, in wars, leaders are expected to be aware of and manage the effects of war. The USA military adopted training of social skills to their soldiers as it is equally important as the combat skills. In most scenarios, the USA military is always in peacekeeping missions where there a lot of cultural differences, and there are high levels of misunderstandings. For example, the American army and Afghanis army have a lot of cultural differences and disagreements, which can be lethal.

The concept of leadership for the militaries is based on instrumental rationalism as opposed to mechanist idea. The mechanist idea assumes that human beings are rational and able to change their environment. A scientific perspective on leadership believes there is limited rationality among human beings, and therefore, proper communication with the troops makes them understand the complexity of their environment. According to the constructive theory argument, communication and interaction between human beings are vital to people reasoning together.

Military leaders ought to be innovative while tackling a particular problem. Military leadership can be divided into two that is, transactional leadership style and transformational leadership style. Military leadership is a human endeavor, unlike leadership in an organization. Decision made by military leaders has direct impacts on societies both in the short term and long term while affecting human life and hoe they go about their activates. Lack of leadership quality has resulted in poor and irrational decisions that have led to a lack of livelihood for most people. Because of this reason, THE USA air force focuses more on leadership systems as well as the practice of individual leaders. In all military operations, the weight of command lies with the leader, and hence responsibilities are bestowed on one person. Decisions made during wartime have monumental consequences, and thus leaders ought to balance actions and missions.

According to the hierarchy structure of the military, subordinates are required to respond to their leaders, respectively. There are numerous ways of showing this respect for the superior, like through the use of salute, title usage, among others. The United States of America has different methods of training its military leaders; for example, Officer Candidacy School (OCS) and Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC). The training is mainly conducted to equip the leaders with skills of properly managing their subordinates, especially during missions and how to deliver desired results effectively. The leaders are given more responsibilities as well as authority. They are relied upon to deliver the success of their subordinates, and therefore there is a higher level of accountability. In stressful situations and missions, leaders are supposed to give directions despite the working conditions.

Military Operating Environment

The environment in which militaries operate is complex and usually affects their psychological makeup. Research showed that individuals could become aroused emotionally when working in a particular environment, which can distort the decision making of these individuals. The military goes through a lot of exposure, which is a risk to their safety, which may cause traumatic stress. Being subjected to these conditions continuously may degrade the performance of the leaders hence lowering their effectiveness. Research shows that military leaders have a critical role in influencing the ability of their troops to make sense out of extreme conditions (Stokesbury, 2018).

Military leaders should also be taught the psychological perspective of dealing with their troops. Human judgment and action deteriorate while working under extreme pressure. Pressure may impair reasoning and ability to make critical judgments while in essential missions of combat. Leaders should have the cognitive ability to maneuverer this challenge, and therefore both the leaders and their followers must work under pressure. To avoid traumatic experiences during operations, leaders should apply their soft skills by humanely treating the troops. Autocratic leadership may only complicate such matters and may be ineffective in such issues.

To reduce the complexity of missions under challenging situations, leaders should form small effective groups that are manageable. Effective groups are capable of stimulating an environment where they can perform duties collectively and hence having a lean operation. It is also easy to monitor a small group of troops compared to huge groups in a stressful environment. Social interaction between people of the same group may give morality to the soldiers, which then can influence their attitudes towards a particular mission. The adaptive organizational system may be used in the military operation to bring more efficiency (Kirchner & Akdere, 2017)

Leadership Styles

There are different leadership styles adopted in military leadership. The first form of leadership is where there is shared responsibility within a particular military group. In this case, everybody within the group has a certain form of responsibility, and it emerges from the interaction of members. The overall group is a shared vision among all member plays a role in achieving the group’s goal. This kind of leadership is ideal as it is transformative since every member is pushed into action by their fellow members. Shared leadership can achieve its objective more efficiently compared to other leadership styles. This is a modern leadership style (Smiljanić, 2016).

The traditional leadership style in the military structure is divided into two. There is a transformational leadership style and transactional leadership style. In these styles, there is a distinct leader as opposed to a collective group or shared leadership, but they seek to support and reinforcement from other members of the group. Transformational leadership is leadership aimed at growing subordinate staff into a future leader. In this style, there is group motivation and a shared group goal though members are passive in leading. Transformational leadership is meant to grow subordinate; therefore, it helps in motivating the whole team into action.

Measuring Leadership

There are different methods of measuring leadership performance within the military structure. Measuring leadership is critical as it may be used as the basis of evaluation on the performance of certain leaders. Self-Leadership Questioner (SLQ) is one of the methods used to evaluate leadership within the military setting. It was a traditional method and was designed to measure self-leadership. The questionnaire consisted of 35 questions in which a person would self-assess on a point from one to five. Another technique used in the evaluation of leaders in the Leaders Knowledge Test (LKT) which determines the perception other people hold of someone’s leadership style. It is mainly done by subordinates to assess the performance of their leaders (Smiljanić, 2016).

Summary of Findings

The findings of the study show that military leadership, military environment, and character of military training has a lot of influence on performance. The results showed that there is organizational leadership, team or shared leadership, and task leadership in the military structure. Leaders who are commanders or generals have routine tasks and missions that must be completed and have to supervise their juniors to get work done. The competence of a Leader is measured by evaluating themselves or by their juniors. The flow of command from the leader has to be followed to the letter by their subordinates. (Taylor, 2018).

Leadership, especially in the military context, is complex. Uncertainty of warfare requires leaders to be very adaptable as they engage in activities that are quite complex and ambiguous. Modern war requires that leaders can deal with both their troops and the civilians. Failing to improve cultural awareness will prove to be a critical vulnerability for U.S. forces. Bureaucracy may be the main undoing in the military services within the USA. Strategic military leaders should champion for a better military environment, better training as well as rewarding junior soldiers through career development (Ulmer, 2018). The paper also finds out that soft skills such as empathy, the right attitude, and humanity are critical skills for any military leader. These soft skills are essential weapons when dealing with a troop primarily through creating trust and being aware of subordinates.

Further research should be done on approaches that should be developed in cooperation with the civilians to defeat the enemy.

References

Arnold, K. A., Loughlin, C., & Walsh, M. M. (2016). Transformational leadership in an extreme

context. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.

Boney, C. R. (2016). Crossing the military rank divide: A qualitative study of military leadership

and motivation in the U.S. Armed Forces (Doctoral dissertation, Capella University).

Gibson, A. (2017). Is There a Difference between Good Management and Good Leadership; If So,

What Mixture of the Two Does the Modern Police Service Require?. The Police Journal, 67(1), 6-14.

Kirchner, M., & Akdere, M. (2017). Military leadership development strategies: implications for   training in non-military organizations. Industrial and Commercial Training.

Smiljanić, D. (2016). Transformational military leadership–Requirements, characteristics, and

development. Vojenské rozhledy, 25(MC), 18-48.

Stokesbury, J. L. (2018). Leadership as an Art. In Military Leadership (pp. 53-70). Routledge.

Taylor, R. L. (2018). Military leadership: In pursuit of excellence. Routledge.

Ulmer, W. F. (2018). Leaders, managers, and command climate. In Military leadership

(pp. 97-106). Routledge.