Expectation for Leaders - Part Two

To See Part One

Army leaders are expected to develop leadership teams.

Leaders develop leaders. Without leaders, organizations run slower and less efficiently. Sure you can have managers and operations will run smoothly, but leadership teams help move organizations from efficiency to excellence. With a team you are less likely to have problems with a single inept leader (in other words, good leadership teams strengthen the weaknesses of a leader). Let me explain.

Leaders have strengths and weaknesses. Unfortunately, we tend to gravitate towards those with like strengths. Good leaders recognize this and create teams that complement his or her strengths while excelling in the leaders weaknesses. Why? If a leader is allowed to concentrate just on their strengths, they are better for the team and the organization. If a leader is forced to work in their weaknesses, then they become a hindrance to the organization and wear themselves out (working in your weaknesses can cause stress and burn out!).

By staffing your weaknesses, you improve the overall effectiveness of the organization. Here’s the kicker – you cannot be jealous of another’s strengths. If you staff your weaknesses, then expect them to excel in that area; it only makes you better.

This is why it is important to develop a good leadership team. Even if you do not have all the pieces, a good team will provide continuity when the tasks deem it. As the FM 22- 100 says, “Responsive teams react quickly because of their common understanding of mission requirements.” Build your team!

Army leaders are expected to decentralize.

De-what? Decentralize. It means to spread out ones abilities or to delegate responsibility. If everyone awaits one central leader to make all the decisions, something is going to get undone or someone is going to get hurt.

Being a leader requires one to trust those they put in charge of smaller portions of the organization. You have to trust them to make the best decisions possible for their job. It also means using their decision making as a means of training leaders in how to make better decisions and how to analyze their decisions so they can refine them. Giving them command builds the mental flexibility, initiative, innovation, and risk-taking skills necessary to get the job or tasks done.

“Army doctrine recognizes the high-quality soldier of today. The leader is responsible to develop each soldier’s potential and to give competent subordinates authority and responsibility.”

Delegation is a difficult task. If a leader never learns to train and then to trust their subordinates, they will never develop leaders. Does this mean a leader gives over all their responsibility? No. Moving up the leadership chain means you will only have more responsibility.

“Leaders must tailor decentralization to the ability, training, and experience of subordinates who may need to be coached and supported as well as empowered.”

You see, leaders who learn to delegate take on new roles as they give out responsibility. Becoming a coach and mentor is the most influential part of leadership, and it is best attained through decentralization of certain duties.

Does decentralization mean a subordinate has the right to make any decision? No. Subordinates must be held accountable to the commander’s intent, the company’s ideals and mission, or the pastor’s vision. Acting outside of these boundaries means the subordinate is affecting their own rule and this causes chaos. Good decentralization means repeating and reiterating the goals and standards of the organization. It also means providing the proper feedback on mission details.

Is decentralization the answer to all leadership woes? No, but it will develop problem solving skills in emerging leaders and teach them how to teach others. Set the standards, decide on what needs to be done, and let the subordinate decide on how to accomplish the mission. Now that’s good Army teaching.