Analysis Of Organizational Management During The United States Military

In 2012, General Dempsey states “Mission Command is fundamentally a learned behavior to be imprinted into the DNA of a profession of arms.” The way Mission Command has evolved through the past years is indicative to the US Military adjusting to a new threat. The concept of Mission Command is not new, what is important is how General Dempsey states “Education in the fundamental principles of mission command must begin at the start of service and be progressively more challenging..” The General emphasizes the need for education at the start of the individual’s service. Additionally, this highlights the United States Army’s doctrinal adjustment to the new threat. During the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US faced an enemy whose creativity and adaptability are two of its greatest assets. The fast-paced situation changes in both of those AOs required tactical level leadership maintain the autonomy to “exercise disciplined initiative.” This type of initiative historically leads to mission success, specifically in fast-paced situations where a key to success is forcing the enemy to react.

Transitioning to command from any other leadership challenge in the military requires that an officer experiences a mental shift in his/her approach to exercising the newly granted authority, responsibility and accountability for the unit. Army doctrine suggests that authority, responsibility, and accountability are inherent attributes of command. These attributes of command coupled with the expectations of the commander, demand a new and holistic approach to commandership, which is defined as exercising the art of command through leadership, management, and command.

I have chosen to write about the United States Army for my Organizational profile. Not only was it extremely interesting to look at the organization that I love and how it functions, but it is the one business that I feel most comfortable with. The Army employs approximately 530,000 Active Duty Soldiers and 330,000 civilians, making it one of the largest, most powerful corporations in the world. Founded in 1775, it is one of the oldest businesses in the United States and is rich with history, symbolism, and structure (citation, year).

Leadership in the military is the characterization of a complex mix of organizational, situational, and mission demands on a leader who applies or uses personal qualities, attributes, and experi-ences to exert influence on the organization, its people, situations or missions . Challenging and complex situations are a proving ground for leaders to making efficient, timely and reasonable decisions . An Army requires leadership to make choices and establish a unifying direction for the organization . As the incoming BDE CDR, taken over from Col Michael Lanks, I must ana-lyze the situation at the 4th ABCT. The aim of this analysis is to address the challenge of poor communication and lack of cooperation in the 4th ABCT Unit.

As a manager within the military, the status quo is always disrupted every three to four years. This change in leadership brings a different perspective on policies and

The military faces many challenges every day. Amidst the obvious of protecting the country from outside, hindering sources there are other flaws that members face regularly. One such issue is an ethically driven problem revolving around sexual assault and misconduct. Over the last few years there have been many reports of sexual abuse starting in Lackland, Texas, at the training annex, and all the way to some of the highest ranking officials. In response to the uptick in these cases, the Air Force has pushed an awareness initiative.

The United States Military has proven to be one of the most effective organizations in the world. Numerous businesses and corporations throughout the years have modeled management practices of the military structure. This author will leverage seventeen years of military experience, and will provide abundant examples of the military’s management process. There are several similarities between the military and the business world’s managerial structure. The subsequent analysis will reflect how planning, leadership, organization, staffing, and controlling are modeled in the military as management tools, much like the functions for managing a business.

The leadership is part of the organization in peace and wartime as well. In peacetime, the leader has different challenges than in wartime. According to ADRP 6-22 (2012), “NCO leaders are responsible for setting and maintaining high-quality standards and discipline.” However, it does not mention about where and when, so this is the main duty for NCO in all circumstances. The commander has to apply and adapt to the situations to provide a good operating team, where the motivated subordinates to fulfill their roles. The roles of the team member are different; they have different problems in the garrison than the operational area. Therefore, this paper compares the garrison leadership with the combat leadership from the perspective of the

that extends far beyond the combat elements or even the individual marine. Even though the rich

Organizational politics are unofficial ways that business gets done from influence to power as long as there are humans involved there will always be organizational politics (DuBrin, 2013). In the military this is also true it can be argue on both side whether it is helpful or harmful. In threw officer corps organizational politics becomes more important the higher you go in rank. Normally early in your career you work with a higher ranking officer that feels that you have the potential to be a senior officer later in your career. That senior officer can ensure that you get the jobs you need to be promoted. There also schools that you will need to attend in order to make the next rank as well. The evaluations reports that you receive from the

I learned a lot about centralization from your paper, and I agree that it aligns closely with the U.S military’s hierarchical organizational structure. It is also clear from your research that determining which structure is more effective, centralized or decentralized, depends on who is asked, and it also seems to depend on the industry. For example, Satterlee (2014) explained that where and how decisions are made has a direct impact on timeliness and innovation, and if the industry is one predicated on being first to market with the latest technology, then it would certainly seem logical to encourage a decentralized structure. Still, I wanted to research specific research regarding organizational structure for multinational organizations.

Looking at the transactional leadership approach, which is management-by exception and is common in military operations, “The transactional leadership style upholds this mission through leaders who create dynamic relationships with subordinates” (Clintron, J., n.d.). USAA combines the best of all three as the foundation of its organizational culture. There are many departments within the organization and through our research it is noted that even though innovation is highly cultivated, positive leadership development is essential, and core values are deep-rooted, shared leadership flows at the top

It is not uncommon for individuals in a private corporation or in a state public sector organization to associate leadership concepts with the top brass in today’s military. Individuals will make the assumption that if someone obtains a certain rank in the military then that person must possess the skills and qualities of an all-encompassing leader who can successfully lead the most complex of organizations. Such assumptions, however, do not consider that the modern military does not work in this manner and leadership is much more complex. Since 2003, the Army has fired 129 of its top leaders while who were commanding either a battalion or a brigade (Tan, 2015). The military is in fact limited and without external resources for leadership and without exception operates in an environment that grooms and grows its leaders from the bottom up. This limits the ability of all of the armed forces, including the United States Army, in allocating good leaders when at the top tier of the organization.

This paper discusses my leadership experience as a Naval Officer and the application of theories, processes, and ideas included in the coursework for the United States Marine Corps Command and Staff College and The University of Oklahoma Master of Arts in Administrative Leadership program. The lessons learned from the two academic programs provided context as well as a deeper understanding of leadership theory that proved valuable during my executive leadership tour, and will continue to serve me throughout the remainder of my military career and

@Chris, @Erik and @Tomas – From what I hear you all, the military seems to work in a multi-dimensional configuration. In addition to a committed leadership, clearly set objective and roles, defined operating system, it seems to be in a continuous state of learning and adaptation both individually and as a group. Even though combat is the primary military purpose, adaptation as in real world seems to drive the essential roles of leadership and organizational culture.