*FM 22-100 FIELD MANUAL HEADQUARTERS NO. 22-5 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Washington, DC, 31 July 1990
MILITARY LEADERSHIP
page
Preface Introduction CHAPTER 1. Concept of Leadership 2. Foundations of Army Leadership Doctrine 3. Leadership in Action 4. What a Leader Must Be 5. What a Leader Must Know 6. What a Leader Must Do 7. The Payoff 8. Stress in Combat 9. The Environment of CombatAPPENDIX A. Leadership Competencies B. Leadership Styles C. Assuming a Leadership Position D. Officer and Noncommissioned Officer Relationships E. Development Leadership Assessment
GLOSSARY REFERENCES AUTHORIZATION LETTER
FM 22-100 Preface A Trained and Ready Army has as its foundation, competent and confident leaders. We develop such leaders through a dynamic process consisting of three equally important pillars: institutional training, operational assignments, and self-development. This approach is designed to provide the education, training, and experience that enable leaders to develop the necessary skills, knowledge, and attitudes. FM 22-100, Military Leadership, is the Army's basic manual on leadership. It has two purposes: to provide an overview of Army leadership doctrine, including the principles for applying leadership theory at all organizational levels to meet operational requirements; and to prescribe the leadership necessary to be effective in peace and in war. While this manual applies to all Army leaders, its principal focus is on company grade officers, warrant officers, and noncommissioned officers, the junior leaders of soldiers at battalion-squadron level and below. FM 22-100 incorporates the professional military values, the bedrock of our service, that all Army leaders must internalize in the earliest years of their careers. Army leaders must learn to fulfill expectations of all soldiers including other leaders. FM 22-100 addresses fundamental expectations: •Demonstrate tactical and technical competence. Know your business. Soldiers expect their leaders to be tactically and technically competent. Soldiers want to follow those leaders who are confident of their own abilities. To be confident a leader must first be competent. Trust between soldiers and their leaders is based on the secure knowledge that the leader is competent. •Teach subordinates. In training, leaders must move beyond managing programs or directing the execution of operations. Our leaders must take the time to share with subordinates the benefit of experience and expertise. •Be a good listener. We must listen with equal attention to our superiors and our subordinates. As leaders we can help solve any problem for a soldier or a unit. However, we can only do so if we know about it. We won't know about it if we don't listen. •Treat soldiers with dignity and respect. Leaders must show genuine concern and compassion for the soldiers they lead. It is essential that leaders remain sensitive to family members and include them in unit activities to the extent possible. Remember, respect is a two-way street; a leader will be accorded the same level of respect that he or she shows for others. •Stress basics. Leaders must demonstrate mastery of fundamental soldiering skills such as marksmanship, first aid, and navigation, as well as the requisite skills for their particular specialty, and be able to teach them to their soldiers. •Set the example. Leaders abide consistently with the highest values of the military profession and its institutions. They encourage within their soldiers a commitment to the same values. Leaders take pride in selflessly dedicating their service to ensure mission accomplishment. They are aware that they are always on parade--24 hours a day, seven days a week--and that all their actions set personal and professional examples for subordinates to emulate. •Set and enforce standards. A leader must know, and always enforce, established Army standards. Perhaps the most fundamental standard which must be maintained is discipline. Our soldiers must promptly and effectively perform their duty in response to orders, or in the absence of orders take the correct action. The fundamental mission of our Army is to deter war and win in combat. The American people expect that officers and noncommissioned officers at all levels will lead, train, motivate, and inspire their soldiers. Our soldiers and units perform difficult tasks, often under dangerous, stressful circumstances. To achieve excellence in these tasks, leaders must explain the importance of the mission, articulate priorities, and focus soldier and unit efforts to perform in an efficient and disciplined manner. Well led, properly trained, motivated, and inspired soldiers will accomplish any mission. Leaders in our Army have a challenge. They must take care of soldiers' needs; develop them into cohesive teams; train them under tough, realistic conditions to demanding standards; assess their performance; assist them with their personal and professional growth; and reward them for their successes. To meet that challenge our leaders must be competent, and confident in their ability to lead. Such leaders will remain essential to our Trained and Ready Army, today and tomorrow.
FM 22-100 Introduction The changing face of war poses special challenges for our Army. Because of the increasing complexity of the world environment, we must prepare to respond across the entire spectrum of conflict. Just as we have changed our doctrine, weapons, and force structure, so have our potential enemies. These changes have dramatically altered the characteristics and demands of modern combat. More than ever, we need competent and confident soldiers, leaders, and units to meet these challenges. We must work to strengthen our ability to employ new equipment and to execute our operations doctrine. We must also focus on developing leaders at all levels who understand the human dimension of war and are able to go from theory to practice where its application is required. Understanding the human element will help us win in situations where we may be outnumbered or face an enemy with excellent weapons and equipment. This understanding is equally important in low-intensity conflicts where we expect to have better equipment than the enemy has, but face a struggle of competing principles and ideologies. In either environment, we can only succeed if we have better-prepared leaders, soldiers, and units than the enemy does. Examining situations where soldiers are likely to be called on to fight or to deter aggression helps identify future leadership challenges and focus on the kind of leaders needed. The worst-case war may be a "come as you are war," fought with little time for buildup or preparation. Because of the speed and devastation of modern warfare, battle success may well depend on the effectiveness of existing small units during the first weeks of battle. Across the entire spectrum of conflict, independent actions and operations within the commander's intent will be necessary. In limited and general war, the turbulent intermixing of opposing units may blur distinctions between rear and forward areas. Combat will occur throughout the entire length and breadth of the battlefield. In the midst of this fast-paced battlefield, leaders must take the initiative, make rapid decisions, and motivate their soldiers. They must effectively maneuver their units, apply firepower, and protect and sustain their force. In low-intensity conflicts, leaders will also be under great stress and have to display as much or more discipline than in conventional war. Short periods of intense fighting may interrupt long periods of relative inaction. The signs soldiers are trained to watch for may not help them distinguish friend from enemy. To achieve operational success, leaders may have to restrict the amount of combat power used. These restrictions can frustrate soldiers and leaders of small units. The stress of this environment, coupled with a possible lack of popular support on the home front, will require leaders to motivate their soldiers without many of the traditional supports accorded soldiers in battle. The nature of future operations places significant demands on leaders. Specifically, the Army needs leaders who- •Understand the human dimension of operations. •Provide purpose, direction, and motivation to their units. •Show initiative. •Are technically and tactically competent. •Are willing to exploit opportunities and take well-calculated risks within the commander's intent. •Have an aggressive will to fight and win. •Build cohesive teams. •Communicate effectively, both orally and in writing. •Are committed to the professional Army ethic. LEADERSHIP REQUIREMENTS The Army's leadership doctrine lays out principles that, when followed, provide the tools to execute our operations doctrine. It suggests that leaders must satisfy four leadership requirements: •Lead in peace to be prepared for war. •Develop individual leaders. •Develop leadership teams. •Decentralize. Lead in Peace to be Prepared for War The Army needs leaders who sustain their ability to look beyond peacetime concerns and who can execute their wartime missions even after long periods of peace. Difficulties in maintaining this focus in peace arise because responsibilities and priorities may blur. Leaders must guard against the natural peacetime tendency to use "efficient" centralized methods of training and "zero defects" approaches to day-to-day operations. Administrative activities are important, but they must not take priority over realistic combat training. The key to maintaining a proper perspective is the ability to look beyond garrison concerns. Leaders must develop units through their wartime focus on all activities. They must recognize that the fast pace of combat allows little time to learn new skills, so they must develop units that can respond rapidly to changing situations. The way leaders train their soldiers and organizations in peace is the way these organizations will fight in war. Develop Individual Leaders The Army has made a total commitment to develop leaders by providing the skills, knowledge, and attitude necessary for them to exhibit the leadership characteristics and traits discussed in this manual. This objective is accomplished through a dynamic leader development system consisting of three equally important pillars: •Schools. These institutions provide the formal education and training that all soldiers receive on a progressive and sequential basis to prepare them for positions of greater responsibility. The NCOES is a good example. •Experience. Operational experience through duty assignments provides leaders the opportunity to use and build upon what was learned through the process of formal education. •Self-development. Individual initiative and self-improvement are keys to training and developing every leader. The formal education system has limits to what it can accomplish; the leader can and must continue to expand that knowledge base whether through Army correspondence courses, civilian education, reading programs, or any of a number of self-study programs. •As a leader you have a responsibility to assist your subordinates in implementing all three of these leader development pillars: you must help obtain school quotas for deserving soldiers and then ensure prerequisites are met before attendance; you must have a plan to develop your subordinates while in your unit; and you must encourage the self-discipline required in your soldiers to want to learn more about their profession. At all levels, the next senior leader has the responsibility to create leader development programs that develop professional officer and NCO leaders. Leaders train their subordinates to plan training carefully, execute it aggressively, and assess short-term achievements in terms of desired long-term results. Effective leader development programs will continuously influence the Army as younger leaders progress to higher levels of responsibility. The purpose of leader development is to develop leaders capable of maintaining a trained and ready Army in peacetime to deter war, to fight and control wars that do start, and to terminate wars on terms favorable to US and allied interests. The ethical development of self and subordinates is a key component of leader development. To succeed in upholding their oath of office, leaders must make a personal commitment to the professional Army ethic and strive to develop this commitment throughout the force. Every leader must be a role model actively working to make his subordinates sensitive to ethical matters. Leaders must not tolerate unethical behavior by subordinates, peers, or superiors. We must develop and nurture trust that encourages leaders to delegate and empower subordinates. Subordinate leaders may then begin to make the decisions that are properly theirs to make and to develop the judgment and thinking skills they will need in battle. This approach requires leaders to recognize that subordinates learn by doing and gives subordinates a chance to try their own solutions. The purpose of leader development is to develop leaders capable of maintaining a trained and ready army in peacetime to deter war. Develop Leadership Teams The ability to develop a leadership team is essential to success in war. While we have traditionally viewed leadership as an individual influence effort, today's operations doctrine demands we also view it in terms of leadership teams. A leadership team consists of a leader and those subordinates necessary to plan and execute operations. For example, a platoon leader's leadership team usually consists of a platoon sergeant and the squad leaders. Developing leadership teams is even more important in larger, more complex organizations. Leaders must develop a team that anticipates requirements and exercises initiative within the commander's intent. Units may fail because of a single leader's ineptness, but units succeed in combat because of the collective efforts of leadership teams. An effective leadership team will provide continuity in combat that is tied to a commander's intent instead of to a specific leader or person. Responsive teams react quickly because of their common understanding of mission requirements. Decentralize Decentralization is a peacetime objective because you want to develop leaders capable of making tough decisions in a combat situation. To decentralize requires a more senior leader to release authority for execution at a lower level. Leaders must create a leadership climate where decision making is decentralized to the appropriate level. This climate is necessary for subordinate leaders to learn and then to demonstrate the mental flexibility, initiative, innovation, and risk-taking skills that our training and operations doctrine require. 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. Although leaders should not do most things themselves if subordinates can and should do them, they must be capable of performing those tasks. This requires the judicious interplay of centralization and decentralization. Leaders must tailor decentralization to the ability, training, and experience of subordinates who may need to be coached and supported as well as empowered. Although decentralization must allow for subordinate initiative in matters of judgment within the commander's intent, leaders must hold subordinates strictly accountable for their actions at their level of responsibility. When honest mistakes are made, leaders must be willing to coach, encourage, and train subordinates. All must realize that decentralization is not a cure-all and successful implementation requires patience. The key is to develop subordinates' ability to solve problems. The leader must establish standards, decide what needs to be done, and then let competent subordinates decide how to accomplish the mission. KEY ELEMENTS OF OUR LEADERSHIP DOCTRINE The study of the skills, knowledge, and attitudes of effective leaders of the past has identified certain leadership factors, principles, and competencies they have mastered. These are the key elements of our leadership doctrine and provide a framework at all levels for developing self, subordinates, and units. The leadership factors and principles are discussed in Chapter 2; the competencies are discussed in Appendix A. LEVELS OF LEADERSHIP There is general agreement that leaders lead in different ways at different organizational levels. Junior-level leaders accomplish missions and build teams primarily by using the direct face-to-face leadership mode. In larger organizations, the scope of missions broadens and leading is more complex. Senior-level leaders and commanders provide vision, influence indirectly through layers of large units, build organizations, and create conditions that enable junior-level leaders to accomplish tasks and missions. Two modes of leadership cut across all levels--direct and indirect. All leaders use both modes, but the following diagram shows how the proportion of influence shifts from predominantly the direct mode at junior levels to predominantly the indirect mode at senior levels. Do not try to use this diagram to put yourself or others in a particular category. Its value is only to show how the mix of the two leadership modes can vary at different levels. This manual focuses mainly on the direct leadership mode.
SOURCES OF LEADERSHIP DOCTRINE Five manuals contain our leadership doctrine. Each manual addresses specific leadership needs, supports our operations doctrine, and contributes to our Army's ability to fight or to deter aggression: •FM 22-100 tells leaders how to lead in a direct, face-to-face mode. •FM 22-101 tells leaders how to conduct leadership counseling. •FM 22-102 tells leaders how to develop soldier teams at company level and below that can meet the challenges of combat. •FM 22-103 gives principles and a framework for leading and commanding at senior levels. •FM 25-100 provides expectations and standards for leaders on training doctrine. THE STRUCTURE This manual presents a direct leadership framework that complements our operations doctrine. Where possible, it relates the concepts to the experiences of leaders of our Army in past conflicts. Part One of the manual discusses doctrinal factors and principles of leadership as they relate to the leadership used from squad and section through battalion and squadron levels. Part Two of the manual discusses leadership in action. It tells what a leader must BE, KNOW, and DO by relating the concepts to past conflicts and then discusses the payoff of applying sound leadership. Part Three discusses special considerations of leadership in battle: stress, leadership in continuous operations, and the effects of weather, terrain, and high technology. This manual presents the requirements for leading and points for you to consider when assessing and developing yourself, your subordinates, and your unit. It is not intended to tell you exactly how you should lead. You must be yourself and apply this leadership doctrine in the situations you will face.
FM 22-100 A Concept of Leadership PART ONE LEADERSHIP IN PRINCIPLE Our operations doctrine is leadership intensive. FM 100-5 states, "The most essential element of combat power is competent and confident leadership. Leadership provides purpose, direction, and motivation in combat." The mandate for competent military leadership is simple and compelling; quality leadership must exist throughout the force if the nation is to have an army ready for combat. Just as successful armies train as they intend to fight, successful leaders lead in peace to be prepared for war. The leadership doctrine in this manual can help you- •Identify the leadership challenges that exist across the entire spectrum of conflict and provide the means to meet those challenges. •Learn what a leader must BE, KNOW, and DO to lead soldiers, teams, and units that can operate effectively in all operational situations. •Understand the special leadership requirements of combat. •Find other sources of leadership information to help you develop your leadership skills. THE BATTLEFIELD CHALLENGE In battle, you must inspire your soldiers to do things against their natural will--possibly to risk their lives--to carry out missions for the greater good of the unit, the Army, and the country. To lead soldiers in peace and in war, there are certain things you must BE, KNOW and DO. Although some people seem to have a natural ability to lead others, most leadership skills do not come naturally. They are learned through hard work and study. Studying and discussing this manual and then putting the ideas into practice can help you meet the challenge. To make good decisions and take the right actions under the stress of battle, you must understand the demands that will be placed on you, your superiors, and your subordinates. Once you have a clear picture of the battlefield challenges, you can set goals for yourself, your subordinates, and your unit to prepare for combat. Without actually being in combat, you must get a realistic picture of what battle is like. Studying military history can give you insight into what combat has been like for past leaders and troops and help you relate the leadership challenges of the past to those of today. THE BATTLEFIELD CHALLENGE: Inspire soldiers to do things against their natural will -- to carry out missions for the greater good of the unit, the Army, and the country. The armies of some of our potential enemies outnumber us. They possess large numbers of excellent tanks, personnel carriers, artillery pieces, airplanes, and chemical and nuclear weapons. Our Army needs competent and confident leaders who are bold, innovative, and willing to take well-calculated risks within the commander's intent. Human nature has not changed since man first engaged in war; leaders and soldiers in future battles will experience the same fears and emotions felt in past battles. Leadership will continue to be the most essential element of combat power, providing the key to mission accomplishment, winning battles, and protecting the ideals of our nation. To help you understand the demands of battle, this manual presents some actual cases of soldiers in combat. These cases illustrate what you must strive to BE, KNOW, and DO to lead soldiers successfully in battle. LEADERSHIP DEFINED Leadership is the process of influencing others to accomplish the mission by providing purpose, direction, and motivation. Providing Purpose Purpose gives soldiers a reason why they should do difficult things under dangerous, stressful circumstances. You must establish priorities, explain the importance of missions, and focus soldiers on the task so that they will function in an efficient and a disciplined manner. Providing Direction Direction gives soldiers an orientation of tasks to be accomplished based on the priorities set by the leader. The standards you establish and enforce will give your soldiers order; tough training will give them confidence in themselves, their leaders, each other, and their equipment. Providing Motivation Motivation gives soldiers the will to do everything they are capable of doing to accomplish a mission; it causes soldiers to use their initiative when they see the need for action. Motivate your soldiers by caring for them, challenging them with interesting training, developing them into a cohesive team, rewarding successes, and giving them all the responsibility they can handle. Effective leaders use both direct and indirect influence to lead. You will probably influence your soldiers mainly in a direct manner, but others above you in your chain of command will use more indirect methods. SUMMARY Our operations doctrine is leadership intensive. Leadership is the most essential element of combat power. Leading effectively is not a mystery and can be learned through self- study, education, training, and experience. Successful leaders prepare for war by training and leading as they intend to fight. To prepare your soldiers to operate effectively across the entire spectrum of conflict, there are certain things you must BE, KNOW, and DO. Leadership is the process of influencing others to accomplish the mission by providing purpose, direction, and motivation. Purpose gives soldiers a reason why they should do difficult things under dangerous, stressful circumstances. Direction shows what must be done. Through motivation, leaders give soldiers the will to do everything they are capable of doing to accomplish a mission. Effective leaders use both direct and indirect influence to lead.
FM 22-100 CHAPTER 2 Foundations of Army Leadership Doctrine This chapter will help you understand the doctrinal factors and principles of leadership. As you lead and train soldiers, this information will help you accomplish missions and care for soldiers. The factors and principles are the foundation for leadership action discussed in Part Two of this manual. THE FACTORS OF LEADERSHIP The four major factors of leadership are always present and affect the actions you should take and when you should take them. They are the led, the leader, the situation, and communications. The Led The first major factor of leadership is those soldiers you are responsible for leading. All soldiers should not be led in the same way. For example, a soldier with a new job or task normally needs closer supervision than a soldier who is experienced at that same job or task. A soldier with low confidence needs your support and encouragement. A soldier who works hard and does what you know must be done deserves your praise; a soldier who intentionally fails to follow your guidance or meet clear standards may need to be reprimanded or punished. You must correctly assess your soldiers' competence, motivation, and commitment so that you can take the proper leadership actions at the correct time. You must create a climate that encourages your subordinates to actively participate and want to help you accomplish the mission. Key ingredients to develop this relationship are mutual trust, respect, and confidence. The Leader The second major leadership factor is you-- the leader. You must have an honest understanding of who you are, what you know, and what you can do. You must know your strengths, weaknesses, capabilities, and limitations so that you can control and discipline yourself and lead your soldiers effectively. You must continuously ensure that each soldier is treated with dignity and respect. Assessing others may be easier than looking honestly at yourself. If you have difficulty assessing yourself, ask your leader what he would like to see you change about the way you lead your soldiers or you support him. Do not put him on the spot. Give him time to think of specific suggestions and then meet with him to talk about them. You can also seek the counsel of your peers, or ask an experienced subordinate how well he thinks you issue orders or provide needed information. Consider all these points of view and then work on improving yourself. The Situation The situation is the third major leadership factor. All situations are different; leadership actions that work in one situation may not work in another. To determine the best leadership action to take, first consider the available resources and the factors of METT-T. Then consider the subordinate's level of competence, motivation, and commitment to perform the task or mission. In one situation, you may have to closely supervise and direct a subordinate's work. Another situation may require you to encourage and listen to ideas. In still another, you may need to both direct and encourage a soldier to ensure he can accomplish a task. Appendix B discusses styles of leadership in more detail. The situation also includes the timing of actions. For example, confronting a subordinate may be the correct decision, but if the confrontation occurs too soon or too late, the results may not be what you want. You must be skilled in identifying and thinking through the situation so that you can take the right action at the right time. Appendix C contains ideas to consider when you assume a leadership position. What if you take the wrong action? It happens. We all make mistakes. Analyze the situation again, take quick corrective action, and move on. Learn from your mistakes and those of others. Communications Communications, the fourth major leadership factor, is the exchange of information and ideas from one person to another. Effective communications occurs when others understand exactly what you are trying to tell them and when you understand precisely what they are trying to tell you. You may communicate what you want orally, or in writing, through physical actions, or through a combination of all of these. You must recognize that you communicate standards by your example and by what behaviors you ignore, reward, and punish. The way you communicate in different situations is important. Your choice of words, tone of voice, and physical actions all combine to affect soldiers. Leadership is more than setting the example and bravely leading a charge. The ability to say the correct thing, at the appropriate moment and in the right way, is also an important part of leadership. In peacetime you must create the kinds of bonds that enable soldiers to follow you so that they will conduct themselves properly in combat. You must win their trust and confidence before, rather than after, combat has commenced. An important element is to convey the facts and requirements accurately without the added confusion of your personal bias. What and how you communicate either builds or harms the strength of the relationship between you and your soldiers. Discipline and cohesion in units come from these relationships. Effective communications implies that your soldiers listen and understand you. Since soldiers listen to leaders who listen to them, you must work hard at understanding exactly what your soldiers are saying to you. Good listening is hard work but you can learn. Do not interrupt when others are speaking. Look at the person speaking; listen to what is said and also to how it is said since emotions are an important part of communications. If you listen to your subordinates, they will listen to you. Interaction of the Factors The four major leadership factors are always present but, in every situation, they affect each other differently. The most important factor in one situation may have little importance in another. You must constantly consider all four factors of leadership and choose the best course of action. Mistakes happen when leaders fail to consider all four leadership factors and see how they affect each other and mission accomplishment. Self-assessment, study, and experience will improve your understanding of the four major factors of leadership. THE PRINCIPLES OF LEADERSHIP The 11 principles of Army leadership are excellent guidelines and provide the cornerstone for action. They are universal and represent fundamental truths that have stood the test of time. Developed in a 1948 leadership study, the principles were first included in leadership doctrine in 1951. Use these principles to assess yourself and develop an action plan to improve your ability to lead. Examples throughout this manual give you ideas of how to apply these principles. Here is an explanation of each of the leadership principles. PRINCIPLES OF LEADERSHIP •Know yourself and seek self-improvement. •Be technically and tactically proficient. •Seek responsibility and take responsibility for your actions. •Make sound and timely decisions. •Set the example. •Know your soldiers and look out for their well-being. •Keep your subordinates informed. •Develop a sense of responsibility in your subordinate. •Ensure the task is understood, supervised, and accomplished. •Build the team. •Employ your unit in accordance with its capabilities. Know Yourself and Seek Self-Improvement To know yourself, you have to understand who you are and to know what your preferences, strengths, and weaknesses are. Knowing yourself allows you to take advantage of your strengths and work to overcome your weaknesses. Seeking self-improvement means continually developing your strengths and working on overcoming your weaknesses. This will increase your competence and the confidence your soldiers have in your ability to train and lead. Be Technically and Tactically Proficient You are expected to be technically and tactically proficient at your job. This means that you can accomplish all tasks to standard that are required to accomplish the wartime mission. In addition, you are responsible for training your soldiers to do their jobs and for understudying your leader in the event you must assume those duties. You develop technical and tactical proficiency through a combination of the tactics, techniques, and procedures you learn while attending formal schools (institutional training), in your day-to-day jobs (operational assignments), and from professional reading and personal study (self-development). Seek Responsibility and Take Responsibility for Your Actions Leading always involves responsibility. You want subordinates who can handle responsibility and help you perform your mission. Similarly, your leaders want you to take the initiative within their stated intent. When you see a problem or something that needs to be fixed, do not wait for your leader to tell you to act. The example you set, whether positive or negative, helps develop your subordinates. Our warfighting doctrine requires bold leaders at all levels who exercise initiative, are resourceful, and take advantage of opportunities on the battlefield that will lead to victory. When you make mistakes, accept just criticism and take corrective action. You must avoid evading responsibility by placing the blame on someone else. Your objective should be to build trust between you and your leaders as well as between you and those you lead by seeking and accepting responsibility. Make Sound and Timely Decisions You must be able to rapidly assess situations and make sound decisions. If you delay or try to avoid making a decision, you may cause unnecessary casualties and fail to accomplish the mission. Indecisive leaders create hesitancy, loss of confidence, and confusion. You must be able to anticipate and reason under the most trying conditions and quickly decide what actions to take. Here are some guidelines to help you lead effectively: •Gather essential information before making your decisions. •Announce decisions in time for your soldiers to react. Good decisions made at the right time are better than the best decisions made too late. •Consider the short- and long-term effects of your decisions. Set the Example Your soldiers want and need you to be a role model. This is a heavy responsibility, but you have no choice. No aspect of leadership is more powerful. If you expect courage, competence, candor, commitment, and integrity from your soldiers, you must demonstrate them. Yoursoldiers will imitate your behavior. You must set high, but attainable, standards, be willing to do what you require of your soldiers, and share dangers and hardships with your soldiers. Your personal example affects your soldiers more than any amount of instruction or form of discipline. You are their role model. Know Your Soldiers and Look Out for Their Well-Being You must know and care for your soldiers. It is not enough to know their names and hometowns. You need to understand what makes them "tick" and learn what is important to them in life. You need to commit time and effort to listen to and learn about your soldiers. When you show genuine concern for your troops, they trust and respect you as a leader. Telling your subordinates you care about them has no meaning unless they see you demonstrating care. They assume that if you fail to care for them in training, you will put little value on their lives in combat. Although slow to build, trust and respect can be destroyed quickly. If your soldiers trust you, they will willingly work to help you accomplish missions. They will never want to let you down. You must care for them by training them for the rigors of combat, taking care of their physical and safety needs when possible, and disciplining and rewarding fairly. The bonding that comes from caring for your soldiers will sustain them and the unit during the stress and chaos of combat. Keep Your Subordinates Informed American soldiers do best when they know why they are doing something. Individual soldiers have changed the outcome of battle using initiative in the absence of orders. Keeping your subordinates informed helps them make decisions and execute plans within your intent, encourages initiative, improves teamwork, and enhances morale. Your subordinates look for logic in your orders and question things that do not make sense. They expect you to keep them informed and, when possible, explain reasons for your orders. Develop A Sense of Responsibility in Your Subordinates Your subordinates will feel a sense of pride and responsibility when they successfully accomplish a new task you have given them. Delegation indicates you trust your subordinates and will make them want even more responsibility. As a leader, you are a teacher and responsible for developing your subordinates. Give them challenges and opportunities you feel they can handle. Give them more responsibility when they show you they are ready. Their initiative will amaze you. Ensure the Task is Understood, Supervised, and Accomplished Your soldiers must understand what you expect from them. They need to know what you want done, what the standard is, and when you want it done. They need to know if you want a task accomplished in a specific way. Supervising lets you know if your soldiers understand your orders; it shows your interest in them and in mission accomplishment. Oversupervision causes resentment and undersupervision causes frustration. When soldiers are learning new tasks, tell them what you want done and show how you want it done. Let them try. Watch their performance. Accept performance that meets your standards; reward performance that exceeds your standards; correct performance that does not meet your standards. Determine the cause of the poor performance and take appropriate action.1 When you hold subordinates accountable to you for their performance, they realize they are responsible for accomplishing missions as individuals and as teams. Build the Team Warfighting is a team activity. You must develop a team spirit among your soldiers that motivates them to go willingly and confidently into combat in a quick transition from peace to war. Your soldiers need confidence in your abilities to lead them and in their abilities to perform as members of the team. You must train and cross train your soldiers until they are confident in the team's technical and tactical abilities. Your unit becomes a team only when your soldiers trust and respect you and each other as trained professionals and see the importance of their contributions to the unit. Employ Your Unit in Accordance with Its Capabilities Your unit has capabilities and limitations. You are responsible to recognize both of these factors. Your soldiers will gain satisfaction from performing tasks that are reasonable and challenging but will be frustrated if tasks are too easy, unrealistic, or unattainable. Although the available resources may constrain the program you would like to implement, you must continually ensure your soldiers' training is demanding. Apply the battle focus process to narrow the training program and reduce the number of vital tasks essential to mission accomplishment. Talk to your leader; decide which tasks are essential to accomplish your warfighting mission and ensure your unit achieves Army standards on those selected. Battle focus is a recognition that a unit cannot attain proficiency to standard on every task, whether due to time or other resource constraints. Do your best in other areas to include using innovative training techniques and relooking the conditions under which the training is being conducted, but do not lower standards simply because your unit appears unable to meet them. Your challenge as a leader is to attain, sustain, and enforce high standards of combat readiness through tough, realistic multiechelon combined arms training designed to develop and challenge each soldier and unit. SUMMARY The factors and principles of leadership will help you accomplish missions and care for soldiers. They are the foundation for leadership action. The factors of leadership are always present and affect what you should do and when you should do it. Soldiers should not all be led in the same way. You must correctly assess soldiers' competence, commitment, and motivation so that you can take the right leadership actions. As a leader, you must know who you are, what you know, and what you can do so that you can discipline yourself and lead soldiers effectively. Every leadership situation is unique. What worked in one situation may not work in another. You must be able to look at every situation and determine what action to take. You influence by what you say, write, and, most importantly, do. What and how you communicate will either strengthen or weaken the relationship between you and your subordinates. The principles of leadership were developed by leaders many years ago to train and develop their subordinates. The principles have stood the test of time and the foremost test--the battlefield. Use the principles to assess how you measure up in each area and then develop a plan to improve your ability to lead soldiers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1Kenneth H. Blanchard and Keith L. Kettler, "A Situational Approach to Leader Development."
FM 22-100 CHAPTER 3 PART TWO LEADERSHIP IN ACTION CHAPTER 3 The Face of Battle and the Leader
You can learn about the human dimension of warfighting by studying past battles. To lead in combat, you must be competent and courageous, demonstrate initiative, understand human nature, consistently set the example, and inspire others. This chapter provides examples of effective combat leaders who demonstrated these characteristics. PAST BATTLES The following selected accounts of history illustrate the human side of warfighting by describing how leaders led their subordinates during combat engagements. As you read each account, think about answers to these questions: •How did the leader accomplish the mission? •How did the leader in each case inspire soldiers to willingly face the stress and danger of battle? •What was the key factor that led to victory? •What did the leader do prior to battle to prepare himself and his soldiers? •How do the actions of these leaders demonstrate the leadership factors and principles discussed in Chapter 2? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Battle of Gettysburg The fight at Little Round Top on 2 July 1863, between the 20th Maine Regiment and two Alabama regiments--the 15th and the 47th--provides a case study of leadership and unit cohesion in battle. It gives a picture of leadership In one of the most significant small-unit actions in the Civil War. The 20th Maine soldiers marched more than 100 miles in the five days before the fight. On the evening of 1 July, when they stopped to bivouac, an order came to continue the march. A decisive battle had just begun that day between General Lee's invading Confederate Army and the Union Army at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. All Union Army units were badly needed by the next day At about 0200, they stopped to sleep. At 0400--again without food--they continued their march, reaching Gettysburg around noon. The 20th Maine was one of four regiments in the brigade commanded by Colonel Strong Vincent. At about 1600, as the 20th Maine was moving to its assigned defensive position, an officer rode up and spoke excitedly to Colonel Vincent. There was much gesturing toward a rocky hill called Little Round Top. The soldiers of the 20th Maine did not know it then, but because of a series of mistakes, this key terrain was unprotected. General Buford's two cavalry brigades had been defending it, but since they had taken heavy casualties in another fight and were out of rations, they were allowed to withdraw. The Army commander incorrectly assumed that: another cavalry unit was available to replace Buford's unit. Wrong assumption, failure to communicate clearly, and failure to check had left Little Round Top unguarded. At about 1545, General Warren, the Army chief engineer, climbed to the top of Little Round Top to observe enemy movements. He saw its importance to the battle and, to his horror, realized it was unguarded. General Warren sent for help and Colonel Vincent volunteered his brigade to defend Little Round Top. During the 15 minutes remaining before the Confederates attacked, Colonel Vincent did an outstanding job of reconnaissance and selected defensive positions. His brigade followed him up Little Round Top. Colonel Vincent led the 20th Maine to its position and gave the commander, Colonel Chamberlain, his mission: ''This is the left of the Union line. You understand. You are to hold this ground at all costs ! '' 1 Chamberlain quickly gathered his company commanders and stressed the importance of their mission. He ordered them to move their units into a defensive line with the right flank company firmly anchored on the 83d Pennsylvania Regiment and the left flank on a large boulder that he pointed to. He showed them the trace of ground he wanted defended. He ordered them to move by using a battle drill maneuver to form a defensive line two ranks deep. This ensured that all companies were tied in on their flanks and that a soldier was ready to fight the moment he was in position. After placing his regiment, Chamberlain's thoughts turned to his exposed left flank, The soldiers saw him gazing intently at Big Round Top. They remembered past battles where he had shown a skill common to all good combat leaders. He could imagine the possible dangers and take actions in advance to guard against them. He realized the disaster that would occur if the enemy got around his weak left flank. So he ordered Captain Morrill to take B Company 100 or 200 meters toward Big Round Top, screen the left flank, and take appropriate actions. Captain Morrill positioned his company behind a stone wall at the base of Big Round Top. They were soon joined by 14 US sharpshooters who had been driven back from their earlier positions by General Hood's attacking division. The 20th Maine's defensive line was barely in position when it was fiercely attacked along its entire front. An officer reported to Chamberlain that he had seen a large body of troops moving behind the attacking Confederates. Climbing up on a rock, Chamberlain saw the force moving to attack his exposed left flank, B Company would not be able to stop this large force. Chamberlain had to think fast and creatively. Nothing in the tactical manuals covered this type of situation. His companies were in a defensive line, two ranks deep, as shown below. Quickly analyzing the situation, he ordered his company commanders to extend left and back to block the flank attack. Pointing to the large boulder at the left end of the line, he ordered the new line to be formed there--at right angles to the existing line. This meant that each company would cover twice the normal defensive frontage. Their defense would be thin--one rank deep. To deceive the enemy, Chamberlain directed that the maneuver be achieved while continuing the same volume of fire to the front. The noise of heavy fire made normal voice control impossible. Still, the regiment performed this difficult, unpracticed tactic with remarkable speed and coordination. Each soldier and squad moved together, keeping up the fire and avoiding gaps in the defense. After the battle, the survivors of the 20th Maine would always marvel at how well and how quickly they accomplished that maneuver under fire.2 It was a unique combination of tactical battle drills--created in the mind of Colonel Chamberlain to fit the particular situation on that day. Minutes after the new line was formed, it was attacked by the battle-hardened soldiers of the 15th Alabama Regiment. (This regiment and the 47th Alabama Regiment were under the command of Colonel Oates.) Oates' soldiers were tired and thirsty. They had marched all night and day and were unable to wait for a lost watering party sent out just prior to the attack. Even so, they attacked with great courage and violence. From this point on, the battle was so fierce that none of the participants were able to describe exactly what happened. For the soldiers involved, the battle took on the quality of a dream. Chamberlain saw that a cross fire had demolished the center of his line. The color bearer and single comrade were gallantly defending the entire center. Chamberlain sent his brother and an orderly to fill the gap. The Alabama Regiments charged at least six times. Chamberlain said that at times there were more of the enemy around him than of his own soldiers. Squads of attacking Confederate soldiers bayoneted their way through the defenses, but somehow the determined Maine men threw the Rebels back. Many soldiers on both sides were killed or wounded during this phase of the battle. Chamberlain was wounded in the foot by a flying shell fragment, and his thigh was severely bruised where a bullet struck his sword scabbard. A lull in the battle came after the sixth violent charge. Chamberlain knew that he was outnumbered and that each of his soldiers had only one or two rounds of ammunition remaining. He learned the Confederates were forming for another charge and knew his unit, out of ammunition, would be overpowered by the superior numbers and firepower of another Confederate assault. To withdraw would cause the defeat of the Union Army. He analyzed the situation and chose the course of action he believed had the best chance of success. He ordered his soldiers to fix bayonets and charge not for heroics but because that was their best chance for success. He reasoned his unit would have the advantage of attacking downhill. Furthermore, the surprise and violence of the attack might take the initiative from the enemy and give the 20th Maine the psychological advantage. That decision left Chamberlain with a tactical problem the field manuals did not address. He had to keep the two halves of his regiment together. He quickly developed a plan in his mind and ordered the left flank to charge first, anchoring its right flank company place. When the left half of the regiment was abreast of the right half, the entire regiment was to charge down and to the right--like a great swinging door the right flank company firmly hinged on the 83d Pennsylvania Regiment. After Chamberlain gave the order, young Lieutenant Melcher leaped in front of his company, sword flashing in the sun. Already under attack, the left half of the regiment charged, driving the Confederates before them. When the left half of the regiment was abreast of the right, Chamberlain quickly moved forward, leading his men down and to the right. The regiment was a raging body, charging toward the Alabama soldiers 30 yards away. Before the Alabamians could fire, the 20th Maine was upon them. At point- blank range, a Confederate officer fired his pistol at Chamberlain and missed. With Chamberlain's sword at his throat, he surrendered. The Confederates were stunned. They fell back to the position of the 4th and 5th Texas Regiments. There the 20th Maine charge might have failed if not for a great stroke of surprise--that powerful weapon of war that explodes in the mind, destroys reason, and incites panic. Captain Morrill's B Company and the US sharpshooters were hiding behind a wall at the base of Big Round Top. They had not been able to see the 15th Alabama moving to attack Chamberlain's left flank. After the 20th Maine's charge, however, the retreating Alabamians came into view. Captain Morrill's force started firing into the flank and rear of the Confederates. According to Colonel Oates, it was the devastating surprise fire of B Company that caused panic in his soldiers. They thought a large force of Union cavalry was attacking their rear--even though there was no Union cavalry in the battle. Colonel Oates and his company commanders thought they were surrounded. He ordered a retreat--each man to break out as best he could. At that point the two Alabama regiments panicked and ran. They did not realize that one more attack could have started the entire Union line tumbling like a house of cards. Colonel Oates later said General Lee was never so close to victory as that day on Little Round Top. He also said he never knew a greater regiment than the 20th Maine, or a greater leader than their gallant colonel. The 20th Maine swept their brigade's entire front. They wanted to keep attacking General Lee's whole army. Some were yelling that they were "on the road to Richmond.'' 3 Colonel Chamberlain's ability to stop them is a tribute to the discipline of the unit. They had captured about 400 prisoners from four different Confederate regiments. The slopes of Little Round Top were littered with hundreds of dead bodies--blue and gray. The 20th Maine started the battle with 358 riflemen; they suffered 90 casualties. Forty were killed or died of wounds. For a few moments, the fate of an Army and a nation rested on the shoulders of 358 farmers, woodsmen, and fishermen from Maine. They were led by a colonel who was a seminary graduate and who had been a professor of languages less than a year before the battle. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Combat Patrol in Korea The regiment planned the patrol action on 28 March (1952), and named Lieutenant John Chandler patrol leader. His mission was to conduct a combat patrol to Noname Ridge to kill or capture any enemy encountered. For the job, he was to take a force consisting of two reinforced rifle squads. Chandler received the patrol plans on the afternoon of 2 April. He selected two squads from his 3d Platoon and several men from the other squads in order to have a total of 20. including himself. The next afternoon (3 April), he took his 19 men to a high point overlooking the planned route and briefed them on the patrol scheduled for that night. He pointed out the objective, one of the enemy construction sites on Noname Ridge, and explained that he hoped to surprise an enemy working party while it was digging and unarmed. If possible, the patrol would capture one or more North Koreans, or kill them if capture was impossible. Using available maps, Chandler constructed a sand model outlining the most prominent terrain features and the patrol objective. The model was good enough to plan the routes of advance and withdrawal and to show the known characteristics of the objective area. Finally Chandler reminded the men of the battalion's rule concerning casualties. ''Casualties, dead or wounded,'' he said "are never left by the rest of the patrol. If any man is left on the field, the entire unit will return to find him and bring him back." When the patrol assembled after supper, Chandler divided the men into two sections: an assault squad of 8 men and himself, and a fire support squad of the other 11 men. After satisfying himself that all details of his patrol were in order, Lieutenant Chandler--a man both careful and thorough--waved his men forward. The patrol crossed the main line of resistance at 2100. As Chandler led his men forward, the 105-millimeter howitzers of the 64th Field Artillery Battalion fired their usual harassing and interdiction missions. In planning the patrol, the regimental staff had timed the departure to coincide with this evening's fire, hoping the fire would keep the enemy under cover until the patrol was in defilade. About three and a half hours later, the patrol reached the objective. Chandler reported to his battalion commander, Colonel Walker, that the patrol had neither made contact with the enemy nor found any indications that there were enemy soldiers in the area. Walker instructed Chandler to continue with his original mission. ''Get a prisoner if you can,'' Walker told the patrol leader. "If you can't, shoot 'em up. Decide upon the route you are going to take to make contact, move forward a hundred yards, then report again. '' Chandler made his decision and relayed it to Walker who continued to plot the patrol's course. After the patrol moved forward without incident, Walker told Chandler to go another hundred yards and report again. After the second move, the patrol members saw and heard movement in the direction of the enemy's main defensive line. It appeared that enemy soldiers, still some distance away, were coming down toward Noname Ridge. Chandler called for artillery. In a few minutes, thirty-six 105-millimeter shells fell on the enemy movement. The movement stopped, but Chandler and his men could still hear voices from the vicinity of the impact area. Though the patrol had made contact, it had not captured a prisoner. Cautiously, Chandler led his men another hundred yards to a point about fifty yards from the very top of the ridge. He called back over the radio to Company C's observation post. ''We're going on radio silence from here on, so there won't be any chance that the radio will give us away before we're ready." Then he spent some time trying to determine the outline and construction of the enemy's position. From the patrol's location below the crest of the ridge, the men could see a large bunker that would be a little to the left of the patrol's route of approach. Smaller bunkers were on each side. Lieutenant Chandler formed the patrol into two lines facing the enemy's position. There was an automatic rifleman and a man with a carbine on each flank of the assault squad. The other men were close together in the center. Chandler and his South Korean interpreter, Corporal Kim Bae, were out in front. The fire support squad stayed about fifty yards behind the assault squad. The patrol moved quietly ahead. As it neared the enemy's position, a soldier stepped on a booby-trapped concussion grenade. Although he was not seriously injured, the patrol waited several minutes to make certain the North Koreans had ignored the noise. Then Lieutenant Chandler and the assault crew crept forward. As Chandler and Kim Bae approached the large bunker in the center, they came upon a communication trench that joined at least five bunkers. Chandler and Kim Bae jumped into the trench; only a few feet away, a North Korean came out of the big bunker and muttered a few words. Kim Bae answered in Korean. Apparently suspicious, the North Korean raised his gun to the ready position and fired. Several men from the assault squad opened fire at the same time. Six North Koreans came streaming out of the big bunker. The assault squad killed the first five with carbine and automatic rifle fire; the sixth ducked back into the bunker. One of Chandler's men threw two grenades into the big bunker. While no one came out, Chandler's men heard yelling and screaming for several minutes. North Koreans from other bunkers on each side of the large one soon appeared in the communication trench. The riflemen on the flanks either killed them or drove them back into protected positions. Maintaining a heavy rate of fire, the squad managed to hold the initiative. Two North Koreans from the left bunkers attempted to work their way along the communication trench. A rifleman at that end of the line killed them. Chandler's men tossed several grenades into the trench and toward the bunkers. After a few minutes, another of Chandler's men killed three North Koreans trying to get around the right flank. The North Koreans relied mainly on grenades. They preferred to remain in defilade beyond the crest of the hill or around the edge and throw grenades into the patrol. The assault squad was so close to the enemy's position in the trench that most of the grenades the enemy threw passed over the assault squad, falling in the space between the two squads. Still, early in the action, concussion grenades wounded both radio operators and put their radios out of commission. Two others in the fire support squad were also wounded by grenades; of the four casualties, only one was unable to walk. At about 0245, Chandler decided to withdraw. When he asked the radio operators to notify battalion headquarters, he discovered the casualties and damaged radios. He ordered the assault squad and the casualties to start moving toward the rallying point at the foot of the hill in front of friendly front lines. Several men improvised a litter to carry the seriously wounded soldier on. Throughout the firefight, Chandler's men had shouted and yelled. When they started to withdraw, however, the decrease of this noise and the noise of firing was noticed by men watching the action from Company C's observation post on the main line of resistance. The observers could see the firefight moving toward them and realized the patrol was withdrawing. They relayed this information to Colonel Walker. Walker immediately called for artillery and mortar concentrations in the vicinity of Noname Ridge. As Chandler moved back, the commander of Company C gave Colonel Walker the patrol's position, determining it by observing the small-arms fire from the patrol toward the enemy. By the same method, he traced the enemy's location as they pursued the patrol. From this information, battalion headquarters plotted both friendly and enemy positions on a map showing all artillery and mortar concentrations. As the engagement moved toward the main line of resistance, Walker personally shifted the mortar and artillery concentrations to keep the impact area as close as possible to the patrol. He would not shift the responsibility to his subordinate officers for directing the fires since they had no communications with the patrol they were supporting. Just before the patrol reached the rallying point at the foot of the hill, Lieutenant Chandler sent two men ahead to bring back litters and bearers from Company C. On the slippery, snowy slope of the ridge, it took them more than an hour to reach the main line. Once there, they learned that a relief squad was ready to return with them. As the two men led the squad down the ridge, an enemy mortar landed in the group, wounding four men of Company C. Chandler's two men helped take these wounded men back and waited for another relief squad. They finally rejoined the patrol at about 0530. Meantime, after forming a defensive perimeter at the rallying point, Chandler threw an illuminating grenade in the direction of the enemy to guide the supporting mortars. Colonel Walker shifted the mortar fire to protect the patrol from the North Koreans who were following with considerable determination. Besides the artillery fire, several tanks on the main line fired cannon and heavy machine guns. By this time, it was light enough for the enemy on Noname Ridge to see the patrol perimeter. Lieutenant Chandler, using the radio the relief squad had brought down from Company C, called for smoke. The smoke was effective and protected the patrol from enemy observation. The men returned to friendly lines despite the enemy's attempt to keep them pinned down.4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fight at Ia Drang, Vietnam The mission of the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry, 1st Cavalry Division, was to conduct a search and destroy mission in the Pleiku area of the Republic of Vietnam, for a North Vietnamese Regiment which had been reported in the area. The following actions took place commencing on 14 November 1965. Company B, under the command of Captain John Herren, had been designated the first unit to airmobile into a battalion landing zone. Having secured the LZ without making enemy contact, the battalion commander directed B Company to commence search operations while A Company, which had been inserted earlier, assumed the LZ security mission. The B Company commander moved out with two platoons abreast and one platoon in reserve. Initial contact with North Vietnamese forces was made by 1st Platoon. Lieutenant Herrick, 2d Platoon leader, was directed to maneuver toward the 1st Platoon to provide assistance while moving toward the 1st Platoon, Herrick's platoon received a blistering volley of enemy fire from the right flank, killing the grenadier and pinning down the rest of the squad. Deploying his two M-60 machine guns toward the enemy force, Herrick yelled to the 3d Squad leader, Staff Sergeant Clyde Savage, to pull back under covering fire of the machine guns. As the gunners moved into firing position, Herrick radioed a situation report to his company commander and formed a hasty 25-meter perimeter. In the meantime, under the cover of the M-60s, Savage, carrying the dead grenadier's weapon, managed to withdraw his squad toward the platoon. Amid increasingly heavy fire, including mortars and rockets, Savage's squad reached the main body of that platoon and joined the other men. The North Vietnamese laced the small perimeter with fire so low to the ground that few of Herrick's men were able to employ their entrenching tools to provide themselves cover. Through it all, the men returned the fire, taking a heavy toll of the enemy. Sergeant Savage hit twelve of the enemy with his M-16 during the afternoon. In midafternoon, Herrick was hit by a bullet which entered his hip, coursed through his body, and exited through his right shoulder. Although fatally wounded, he continued to direct his perimeter defense. He gave his signal operation instructions book to Staff Sergeant Palmer, his platoon sergeant, with orders to burn it if capture seemed imminent. He told Palmer to redistribute the ammunition, to call in artillery fire, and, at the first opportunity, to try to make a break for it. Palmer, already slightly wounded, had no sooner taken command than he too was killed. The 2d Squad leader took charge. He rose on his hands and knees and mumbled that he was going to get the platoon out of danger. He had just finished the sentence when a bullet smashed into his head. Killed in the same hail of bullets was the forward observer for the 81-millimeter mortar. The artillery reconnaissance sergeant traveling with the platoon was shot in the neck. Seriously wounded, he became delirious and the men had difficulty keeping him quiet. Sergeant Savage, the 3d Squad leader, took command. Snatching the artilleryman's radio, he began calling in and adjusting field artillery fire. Within minutes he had ringed the perimeter with well-placed concentrations, some as close to the position as 20 meters. The indirect fire did much to discourage enemy attempts to overrun the perimeter, but the platoon was still in danger. Of the 27 men in the platoon, 8 had been killed and 12 wounded. Meanwhile, the enemy attacked the remnants of Savage's platoon with at least a reinforced platoon. Each time, it was turned back by the artillery and the small arms fire of the men in the perimeter, which included those who were wounded. Specialist 5 Lose, the medical aidman moved about the perimeter, exposed to fire while he administered to the wounded. His diligence and ingenuity throughout the day and following night saved at least six lives; having run out of first-aid packets as well as bandages from his own bag, he used C-ration toilet tissue packets to help stop bleeding. Calm, sure, and thoroughly professional, he brought reassurance to the men. Before the second attack, which came at 0345, enemy bugle calls were heard around the entire perimeter. Some sounds seemed to come from within 200 to 400 soldiers muttering softly to one another. He called down a 15-minute artillery barrage to saturate the area and followed it with a tactical air strike on the high ground near his position. Executed under flareship illumination, the two strikes in combination broke up the attack. A third and final enemy attack came over an hour later and was as unsuccessful as the previous two. Savage and his men, isolated but still holding throughout the night, could hear and sometimes see the enemy dragging off its dead and wounded. When the relief force arrived the next morning, each man still had adequate ammunition to continue to fight.5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Operation White Wing, Republic of Vietnam During Operation White Wing near Bong Son, Binh Dinh Province, in February 1966 the 2d Battalion, 5th Cavalry, 1st Cavalry Division, was operating in extremely rugged mountainous terrain against a determined enemy. On 17 February, the battalion reserve force commander was tasked with protecting the battalion command post and conducting local security operations. Captain Tom Fincher, A Company commander, elected to accomplish the assigned mission by employing 3d Platoon and the weapons platoon within the battalion perimeter to protect the battalion CP and to use 1st and 2d Platoons for conducting local patrols. Meanwhile, B Company searched out enemy forces 2,500 meters to the northwest, while C Company did the same due north of the battalion base some 4,200 meters distant. Within an hour of departing the battalion base camp with the platoons conducting local security, Fincher monitored a B Company report of receiving enemy fire from the surrounding hills. After alerting his platoons, Fincher continued patrolling the area around the base camp. Fifteen minutes later B Company's situation worsened. Heavy enemy fire had caused significant casualties including the artillery forward observer. The high volume of fire precluded a maneuver against the foe, the B Company commander reported . Anticipating a change mission to support B Company, Fincher alerted the two platoons back at the battalion base, and directed them to move on order to a rendezvous point 1,500 meters north of the perimeter. He told the weapons platoon to orient its 81-millimeter mortars in B Company's direction if a call for help should come. Finally, he directed the two platoons with him to maneuver north toward the same rendezvous point. Fincher's reaction proved sound, for within twenty minutes, the battalion commander directed him to aid B Company. It took an hour traveling over rocky terrain for the A Company elements to assemble the selected rendezvous point. If he had not anticipated his commander's forthcoming directive, the time required could have been significantly increased. The site selected for the rendezvous was approximately 1,000 meters from B Company and placed the enemy force on a hill between the two American companies. In short order, Fincher deployed three platoons on line at the bottom of the enemy-held hill and ordered an assault. Maneuvering aggressively, preceded by mortar fires, Fincher's troops were able to defeat the enemy and relieve their hard-pressed sister company.6 SUMMARY Colonel Chamberlain, Lieutenant Chandler, Staff Sergeant Savage, and Captain Fincher understood the human dimension of warfighting. Each demonstrated his tactical and technical proficiency and used initiative to exploit opportunities for success by taking well-calculated risks within his commander's intent. The orders these men issued were effectively communicated and influenced their subordinates to accomplish the mission by providing purpose, direction, and motivation. The historical records are full of combat actions that cite examples of superb leadership and soldiers rising well above the normal call of duty to accomplish the assigned mission. In each of the accounts selected for this chapter, the leader led by example from the front, not by coercion and fear. We need leaders like the ones who were highlighted and we can develop them in our schools and units. You can become leaders like those discussed, and you can train your subordinates in similar fashion. This is your challenge and responsibility. These accounts of history should have raised many questions in your mind about the human dimension of warfighting. How can you develop yourself as a leader? Why do soldiers fight? What builds cohesion and discipline and motivates soldiers to fight bravely against great odds? What beliefs, values, character, knowledge, and skills must you have to lead soldiers successfully in combat? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1John J. Pullen, The Twentieth Maine, p 111. 2Pullen, p 118. 3Willard M. Wallace, Soul of the Lion, p 103. 4Condensed from Combat Actions in Korea by Russell A. Gugeler, pp 236-45 5Condensed from "Fight at la Drang" by John A. Cash in Seven Firefights by John Albright, et al, pp3-40. 6Condensed from Infantry in Vietnam: Small Unit Action in the Early Days: 1965-1966, edited by Albert N. Garland, pp 306-9.
FM 22-100 CHAPTER 4 What A Leader Must BeAs a leader, you are responsible for understanding and directly transmitting the Army's values to your soldiers. These values are the foundation for service to the nation. Since the Army's purpose is to protect the nation and its values, the Army's ethic must be consistent with national will and values. The oath you took pledged you "to support and defend the Constitution of the United States." Taken without reservation and regardless of personal sacrifice, this oath is formal and public recognition of your commitment to a professional ethic. This chapter describes what a leader must BE by discussing beliefs, values, and norms; character; and the professional Army ethic. It also discusses ethical responsibilities and an ethical decision-making process. BELIEFS, VALUES, AND NORMS Beliefs Beliefs are assumptions or convictions you hold as true about some thing, concept, or person. They can range from the very deep-seated beliefs you hold concerning such things as religion and the fundamentals upon which this country was established to recent experiences which have affected your perception of a particular person, concept, or thing. One soldier may believe that duty simply means putting in time from "8 to 5." Another may believe that duty is selflessly serving your country, your unit, and the soldiers of your unit. You have beliefs about human nature--what makes people tick. We usually cannot prove our beliefs, but we think and feel that they are true. For example, some people believe that a car is simply a means of transportation. Others believe a car is a status symbol. There are leaders who believe that rewards and punishment are the only way to motivate soldiers. In contrast, other leaders believe that rewards and punishment should be used only in exceptional cases. The important point to recognize is that people generally behave in accord with their beliefs. The beliefs of a leader impact directly on the leadership climate, cohesion, discipline, training, and combat effectiveness of a unit. Values Values are attitudes about the worth or importance of people, concepts, or things. Values influence your behavior because you use them to decide between alternatives. For example, you may place value on such things as truth, money, friendships, justice, human rights, or selflessness. Your values will influence your priorities. Strong values are what you put first, defend most, and want least to give up. Individual values can and will conflict at times. If you incorrectly reported a patrol checkpoint, do you have the moral courage to correct the report even if you know your leader will never discover you sent the incorrect report? In this situation, your values on truth and self-interest will collide. What you value the most will guide your actions. In this example, the proper course of action is obvious. There are times, however, when the right course of action is not so clear. The four individual values that all soldiers (leaders and led) are expected to possess are courage, candor, competence, and commitment. These four values are considered essential for building the trust which must exist for a unit to operate at peak efficiency. Courage comes in two forms. Physical courage is overcoming fears of bodily harm and doing your duty. Moral courage is overcoming fears of other than bodily harm while doing what ought to be done. Moral courage is as important as physical courage. It is the courage to stand firm on your values, your moral principles, and your convictions. You show moral courage when you do something based on one of your values or moral principles, knowing that the action may not be in your best interest. It takes special courage to support unpopular decisions and to make it difficult for others to do the wrong thing. Others may encourage you to embrace a "slightly" unethical solution as the easiest or most convenient method. Do not ease the way for others to do wrong; stand up for your beliefs and what you know is right. Do not compromise your professional ethic or your individual values and moral principles. If you believe you are right after sober and considered judgment, hold your position. Candor is being frank, open, honest, and sincere with your soldiers, seniors, and peers. It is an expression of personal integrity. If handled properly, disagreeing with others and presenting your point of view are not wrong. Remember these three important points: (1) select the right time and place to offer your criticism or advice; (2) do not criticize a plan without giving a constructive alternative; (3) recognize that when your leader has made the final decision, you must end your discussion and support legal and proper orders even if you do not personally agree with them. There is often no time in combat to verify reports or to question the accuracy of information. Consequences are too important, and time is too short to communicate anything but the truth. Candor is equally important in peacetime. Demand it from your subordinates and expect it from your peers and superiors. Candor expresses personal integrity. The beliefs of a leader impact directly on the leadership climate, cohesion, discipline, training and combat effectiveness of a unit. Competence is proficiency in required professional knowledge, judgment, and skills. Each leader must have it to train and to develop a cohesive, disciplined unit with all the required individual and collective skills to win on the battlefield. Competence builds confidence in one's self and one's unit; both are crucial elements of morale, courage, and, ultimately, success on the battlefield. Commitment means the dedication to carry out all unit missions and to serve the values of the country, the Army, and the unit. This is shown by doing your best to contribute to the Army, to train and develop your unit, and to help your soldiers develop professionally and personally. Norms Norms are the rules or laws normally based on agreed-upon beliefs and values that members of a group follow to live in harmony. Norms can fall into one of two categories. Formal norms are official standards or laws that govern behavior. Traffic signals, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and the Geneva Conventions are formal norms that direct the behavior of American soldiers. They dictate what actions are required or forbidden. Uniform regulations, safety codes, and unit SOPs are also formal norms. Informal norms are unwritten rules or standards that govern the behavior of group members. In the Korean Combat Patrol account, Lieutenant Chandler stressed the informal norm that casualties were never left by the rest of the patrol. At the root of this norm was a shared value about the importance of caring for each other. The soldiers found comfort in knowing they would be cared for if they became casualties. Importance of Beliefs, Values, and Norms Beliefs, values, and norms guide the actions of individuals and groups. They are like a traffic control system; they are signals giving direction, meaning, and purpose to our lives. Examples abound of soldiers throughout history who sacrificed their lives to save friends or help their unit accomplish a mission. These brave, selfless actions include blocking exploding grenades, personally taking out enemy fighting positions, and manning key positions to protect a withdrawal. Beliefs and values motivate this kind of heroic self-sacrifice. The motivating force may be the soldier's belief in the importance of retaining his personal honor, of saving a buddy, of helping the unit, of serving a cause, or a combination of these. Your soldiers will fight for you if they believe that the best chance for survival for themselves and their buddies is to do their job as part of a team. They will be more effective if they believe in themselves, in the unit, in you, and in the cause they are fighting for. Individual values, beliefs, and attitudes are shaped by past experiences involving such things as family, school, work, and social relationships. Leaders must understand the importance of nurturing and shaping beliefs and values in their subordinates because they are fundamental motivating factors. Influencing Beliefs, Values, and Norms As a leader, you have the power to influence the beliefs and values of your soldiers by setting the example; by recognizing behavior that supports professional beliefs, values, and norms; and by planning, executing, and assessing tough, realistic individual and collective training. Tough training does not mean training in which leaders haze or yell at troops in an effort to cause artificial stress. This merely creates an antagonistic atmosphere of "us against them." This kind of leadership does not succeed in combat, so why practice bad habits. Tough training occurs when leaders and soldiers mutually experience realistic, exhausting conditions that prepare both, as a team, for the stress of combat. Captain Herren, B Company commander, was concerned about the operation in the Ia Drang Valley because his men had gone without sleep the night before while performing another mission. He could only trust that the training his unit had received would enable them to overcome the lack of rest and that their fatigue would have little effect on their fighting ability. Training that simulates such conditions is tough. During a field exercise, you could plan for an all night road march, a few hours rest, then a simulated battle that is demanding on leaders and soldiers. This kind of training builds cohesion--positive respect and trust among soldiers and between leaders and soldiers. It builds a feeling of shared hardships and teamwork. It contributes to the respect and comradeship that help you influence beliefs and values of soldiers. Tough training conducted to standards will teach your soldiers to do things as individuals and as a team that they did not believe possible. It will give your soldiers confidence in themselves, in each other, and in you. If properly explained, it will help each soldier understand the linkage and the importance of his ability to perform individual tasks properly in support of the unit's collective mission. As a leader, you must respect your soldiers and must earn their respect if you are to influence their beliefs and values. Subordinates will always respect your rank, but they will base their genuine respect on your demonstrated character, knowledge, and professional skills. Once your soldiers respect you and want your approval, you can guide them to demonstrate unselfish concern for the unit and for other soldiers. They will become concerned with excellence in everything that relates to combat readiness if this is the value you demonstrate. If your soldiers respect and admire you, they want to be like you, and they naturally tend to adopt your professional beliefs and values as their own. You can reinforce this behavior with positive feedback and by praising them for things they do that support duty, cohesiveness, discipline, good training, and good maintenance. Praise, however, can be cheapened, either by overuse or when it is not sincere. CHARACTER Character describes a person's inner strength and is the link between values and behaviors. A soldier of character does what he believes right, regardless of the danger or circumstances. A soldier's behavior shows his character. In tough situations, leadership takes self-discipline, determination, initiative, compassion, and courage. There is no simple formula for success in all the situations you may face. The key is to remain flexible and attempt to gather as many facts as the circumstances will allow before you must make a decision. When dealing with others, every situation has two sides; listen to both. The way you handle problems depends on the interaction of the factors of leadership (the led, the leader, the situation, and communications). Character can be strong or weak. A person with strong character recognizes what he wants and has the drive, energy, self-discipline, willpower, and courage to get it. A person with weak character does not know what is needed and lacks purpose, willpower, self-discipline, and courage. A person who can admit when he is wrong is exhibiting strong character. Some believe that apologizing is a sign of weakness and causes a leader to lose power. Quite the contrary, admitting when you have made a mistake takes humility and moral courage. We are all human and make mistakes. Although placing blame on someone or something else when a mistake is made may be tempting, it indicates weak character, which your soldiers will readily recognize. We need leaders of strong and honorable character who support the values of loyalty to the nation, the Army, and the unit; duty; selfless service; and integrity. In this manual a soldier of character means a person with strong and honorable character. Importance of Character Your soldiers assess your character as they watch your day-to-day actions. They know if you are open and honest with them. They see whether you are indecisive, lazy, or selfish. They will quickly determine whether you know and enforce the Army standards. Your soldiers' perceptions of your actions combine to form a continuing assessment of your character. Soldiers want to be led by leaders who provide strength, inspiration, and guidance and will help them become winners. Whether or not they are willing to trust their lives to a leader depends on their assessment of that leader's courage, competence, and commitment. Future wars will be won by leaders with strong and honorable character. When mentally preparing for the stress of combat, it is good to know that ordinary people in past wars have shown that kind of character. An inspiring example of such a soldier follows. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sergeant York Alvin C. York was born to a poor family in the mountains of Tennessee. As a youth, York was known as a wild hellraiser with a particular hankering for alcohol, fighting, and gambling until he fell in love with a church-going girl who refused to date him unless he changed his ways. He started reading the Bible and adopted its fundamental teachings as his values. He changed his beliefs, values, and behavior and even became a respected leader in his church. When he was 30, World War I broke out. He was inducted into the Army and assigned to Captain Danforth's Company G, 328th Infantry Regiment, at Camp Gordon, Georgia. York told Danforth that he would do his duty, but that he did not want to fight and did not believe in killing enemy soldiers. Captain Danforth was troubled by York's beliefs and feelings. As training progressed, he could see that York was potentially the best soldier in the company. York's mountain life had made him a tough, hard-muscled, clear-thinking man. His body and mind were conditioned by years of hunting, plowing, and blacksmithing. He had been an expert shot since boyhood. Captain Danforth would have made York a sergeant except for his reservations about killing. Captain Danforth tried to convince York that killing enemy soldiers in a just war is not against the Word of God. York wouldn't budge. Captain Danforth then discussed York with the battalion commander, Major Buxton, a deeply religious man who knew the Bible as well as York. After talking to York, Major Buxton sent him home on leave. ''To York he said, 'That will give you time to do some thinking and praying. If you can then find it in your heart to return with a free conscience, we will take you with us. If you cannot . . . I will see that you are let out." 1 York went home for two weeks. Finally, on the last day of his leave, after searching the deepest regions of his mind and soul, he decided that for him, the highest moral good was to go to war with Company G. "He rejoined his company and told Captain Danforth that he had become convinced that he could fight for his country without violating the precepts of his faith. From that day on York marched in the ranks with a light heart and clear mind." 2 York changed his own belief about the ''moral rightness" of war. Respected leaders can influence the beliefs, values, and character of subordinates. York's decision had great consequences when he accomplished an almost unbelievable exploit that displayed his courage and initiative. "The essence of Alvin York's life was compressed into four hours of October 8,1918, in the mud and blood of the Argonne Forest [in France].... At 6:10 a.m., York's Company was ordered to . . . seize a German-held rail point. Hidden in woods overlooking a valley, a German machine gun battalion opened up on the company, killed most of its forward ranks." 3 York, the only surviving noncom, was left in command. He called for the others to move forward. They advanced and succeeded in overcoming the first machine gun nest and taking its crew prisoner. York told someone to see to getting the prisoners to the rear; then he moved out in advance of his tiny command to see what lay ahead of them. He had gone forward only a few yards when a line of 35 machine guns opened up and pinned him down. "The Tennessean found himself trapped and under fire within 25 yards of the enemy's machine gun pits. He began firing into the nearest enemy positioned, aware that the Germans would have to expose themselves to get an aimed shot at him. And every time a German head showed over the parapet, York drilled a bullet into it! "After he had shot down more than a dozen enemy gunners in this fashion, he was charged by six German soldiers who came at him with fixed bayonets. "York . . . drew a bead on the sixth man, and then on the fifth. He worked his way down the line, and practically before he knew it, the first man in line was charging the eagleeyed American sharpshooter all by himself. York dropped him with a dead-center shot. "York again turned his attention on the machine gun pits. Every time he fired, another enemy soldier fell. . . . In between shots York called for the Germans to surrender. At first it may have seemed funny to the well-entrenched enemy; but the joke had become rather hollow by the time the Tennessean his killed his twenty-second victim. Shortly afterward a German officer advanced under a white flag and offered to surrender if York would stop shooting at his men. "York demanded--and received!--the surrender of the remaining Germans. Having taken a total of 132 prisoners, and knocked 35 machine guns out of action, York finally returned to his regiment's lines. He left the prisoners . . . and headed back to his own outfit. "Intelligence officers questioned the prisoners and learned from their testimony the incredible story of how a fighting battalion was destroyed by one determined soldier armed only with a rifle and pistol. "What's more, it was learned that York had destroyed this battalion at a moment when it was supposed to support a German counterattack against the Americans." 4 His strong and honorable character enabled him to destroy the morale and effectiveness of an entire enemy machine gun battalion. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1Bruce Jacobs, Heroes of the Army, p 67. 2Jacobs, p 67. 3"Heroes: One Day's Work," p 26. 4Jacobs, pp 68-71. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ If we go to war again, many of our soldiers and units may find themselves in situations similar to York's. How will they behave? Will they rise to the occasion as York did? Will they have the necessary character and skills? The answers to these questions will depend on whether leaders have developed in their soldiers the required beliefs, values, character, knowledge, and skills. Today's soldiers have as much potential as Sergeant York did. They too can serve courageously under stressful circumstances if they are trained and led properly. Base your training program on building the motivation, confidence, and competence your subordinates will need on the battlefield. Character Building Building character demands the honesty to determine your own character weaknesses. Have you demonstrated the self-discipline and will on which strong and honorable character is based? How have you handled the tough situations? Sometimes you are the best judge of your strengths and weaknesses. Other times you may have blind spots that keep you from seeing your own weaknesses. You must be open to feedback and advice. However, you must take the responsibility for continually building and strengthening your character. Others can help, but they cannot do it for you. To build strong and honorable character, you should- •Assess the present strength of your values and character. •Determine what values you want to promote. •Seek out missions and situations that support developing such character. •Select a role model who demonstrates the values and character you are trying to develop. You build strong and honorable character by hard work, study, and challenging experiences. You must develop habits that force you to continually develop your mind and character. The better you understand yourself, the easier it is to exercise your will and self-discipline, and the more you strengthen your character. The character you want to instill in your soldiers, and should attempt to exhibit in the daily example you set, should be consistent with the values of courage, candor, competence, and commitment. For this reason, leading and training soldiers well must begin with their induction into the service. When they begin their Army training, individuals are prepared for change, and since most want to do well, they are willing to adopt the stressed Army values. All leaders need a good program for integrating new soldiers into their unit. As a leader, you must teach and demonstrate the right values and norms of working, training, and living. Changing Character of Problem Soldiers How much can you change the character of a problem soldier? What if a soldier comes from an environment where the parents themselves set a bad example or the soldier received little education? What about a soldier from a neighborhood where accepted conduct is lying and stealing. These norms became instilled as values while he was growing up. Lying to authority, "getting over," "shamming," and taking advantage of "the system" are normal behavior to this soldier. He is undependable and irresponsible; he lacks self-discipline. Can this soldier change? What is your responsibility to this soldier? You must understand human nature. There is good and bad in everyone. A leader must bring out the good in each soldier. You may be able to eliminate counterproductive beliefs, values, and behaviors and help a soldier develop character if he wants to change. Many soldiers want to improve, but they need discipline, organization, a good role model, and a positive set of beliefs, values, and habits to pattern themselves after. You, as a leader, must both demonstrate by example and assist in establishing the conditions for that individual which will encourage the change. You will not be able to influence the beliefs, values, and character of all your soldiers, but you can influence most soldiers. Your job is to make good soldiers out of all the people in your unit, even the problem soldiers. Gaining the respect of soldiers is important. A respected leader influences soldiers by teaching, coaching, counseling, training, disciplining, and setting a good example. If a soldier does not adopt soldierly values and behavior after you and the rest of the chain of command have done your best, eliminate him from the Army so that he cannot disrupt discipline and cohesion in your unit. Respected and successful leaders create a leadership climate that causes most soldiers to develop the right professional values and character. Leaders can often change soldiers' motivation from self-interest to selfless service to their unit and nation. You have another major responsibility in developing character. You must give your soldiers confidence that they can develop their character. Convince your soldiers that you are on their side, helping them. Their belief that you sincerely care about them and want them to develop the correct values and behavior (because that is right for them) helps give them confidence to become able soldiers with strong and honorable character. THE PROFESSIONAL ARMY ETHIC The doctrinal statement of the professional Army ethic is in FM 100-1. The ethic sets the moral context for service to the nation and inspires the sense of purpose necessary to preserve the nation, even by using military force. From the ideals of the Constitution to the harsh realities of the battlefield, the four elements of the professional Army ethic contain the values that guide the way you must lead. Loyalty to the Nation, the Army, and the Unit The oath every soldier takes requires loyalty to the nation and involves an obligation to support and defend the Constitution. Loyalty to the Army means supporting the military and civilian chain of command. Loyalty to unit expresses both the obligation between those who lead and the led and the shared commitment among soldiers for one another. American military professionals do not fight to force our political system on others or to gain power or wealth. Professional soldiers are protectors of the ideals of America, willing to fight for these ideals so that others can live in a free and just society. To do this, they must be experts at leading soldiers in battle. The military leader who deeply values loyalty to the nation sees himself as a person who will always do his best to defend American ideals. Your unit is your piece of the Army's action, your day-to-day part of the Army. By contributing to your unit's mission and combat readiness, you contribute to the defense of the nation. The unit is your family, your team. Loyalty to the unit means that you place the unit's needs and goals ahead of your own. Lieutenant Herrick demonstrated his total dedication and loyalty to his nation, Army, and unit as he continued to direct his perimeter defense in the Ia Drang Valley until he died of his wounds. Similarly, Staff Sergeant Savage, in this same engagement, continued to place his soldiers' needs ahead of his personal safety as he called in supporting fires and directed the perimeter defense until friendly relief was able to link up. Duty A duty is a legal or moral obligation to do what should be done without being told to do it. Duty means accomplishing all assigned tasks to the fullest of your ability. Duty requires willingness to accept full responsibility for your actions and for your soldiers' performance. It also requires a leader to take the initiative and anticipate requirements based on the situation. Captain Fincher superbly demonstrated these qualities when he alerted his platoons in anticipation of a new mission and provided timely guidance on actions to be taken. As a professional, your responsibility is to do your duty to the best of your ability. If you lie or tell a half-truth to make your unit look good, you may think you are doing your duty and being loyal to your leader and unit. In fact, you are being dishonorable and unethical, neglecting your duty to the Army and the nation. A leader cannot truly do his duty without being honorable. Selfless Service You may have to put the nation's welfare and mission accomplishment ahead of the personal safety of you and your troops. You must resist the temptation to put self-gain, personal advantage and self-interests ahead of what is best for the nation, the Army, or your unit. Selfless service is necessary to develop teamwork, and military service demands the willingness to sacrifice. FOUR ELEMENTS OF THE PROFESSIONAL ARMY ETHICS •Loyalty. •Duty. •Selfless service. •Integrity. As a leader, you must be the greatest servant in your unit. Your rank and position are not personal rewards. You earn them so that you can serve your subordinates, your unit, and your nation. Lieutenant Chandler and the men selected for the combat patrol in Korea recognized the inherent dangers in the mission they were about to undertake. His soldiers were ready to be led into combat by him because he had earned their confidence in earlier actions. He prepared a detailed plan, ensured the tasks were understood, and personally supervised preparation. Throughout the conduct of the patrol, he put the mission and welfare of his soldiers ahead of his personal safety. Integrity Integrity is woven through the fabric of the professional Army ethic. It means being honest and upright, avoiding deception, and living the values you suggest for your subordinates. Integrity demands that you act according to the other values of the Army ethic. You must be absolutely sincere, honest, and candid and avoid deceptive behavior. Integrity is the basis for the trust and confidence that must exist among members of the Army. Further, you must demonstrate integrity in your personal life. If you compromise your personal integrity, you break the bonds of trust between you, your soldiers, and your leaders. ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES Ethics are principles or standards that guide professionals to do the moral or right thing-- what ought to be done. As a leader, you have three general ethical responsibilities. First, you must be a good role model. Second, you must develop your subordinates ethically. Finally, you must lead in such a way that you avoid putting your subordinates into ethical dilemmas. Be A Role Model Whether you like it or not, you are on display at all times. Your actions say much more than your words. Subordinates will watch you carefully and imitate your behavior. You must accept the obligation to be a worthy role model and you cannot ignore the effect your behavior has on others. You must be willing to do what you require of your soldiers and share the dangers and hardships. Colonel Chamberlain was a respected role model who inspired his soldiers. His selflessness, kindness, compassion, and respect for others were evident in the way he led. Develop Your Subordinates Ethically You must shape the values and beliefs of your soldiers to support the values of the nation, the Army, and the unit. You develop your subordinates by personal contact and by teaching them how to reason clearly about ethical matters. You need to be honest with them and talk through possible solutions to difficult problems. When you make a decision that has an ethical component, share your thought process with your subordinates when time permits. They will respect you for caring enough to discuss your personal thoughts with them, and they will learn from you. Being sensitive to the ethical elements of soldiering is a big part of developing your soldiers. Your goal is to develop a shared ethical perspective so that your soldiers will act properly in the confusion and uncertainty of combat. Unless they have learned how to think clearly through ethical situations, they may not have the moral strength to do what is right. Avoid Creating Ethical Dilemmas for Your Subordinates Since your soldiers will want to please you, do not ask them to do things that will cause them to behave unethically to please you. Here are some examples that can get you in trouble: •I don't care how you get it done--just do it! •There is no excuse for failure! •Can do! •Zero Defects. •Covering up errors to look good. •Telling superiors what they want to hear. •Making reports say what your leader wants to see. •Setting goals that are impossible to reach (missions without resources). •Loyalty up--not down. These examples may seem as though they would never be a problem for you. Do not assume this is true for others. Learn to give orders and lead without creating these kinds of dilemmas for your soldiers. AN ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING PROCESS Regardless of the source of pressure to act unethically, you usually know in your heart the right thing to do. The real question is whether you have the character to live by sound professional values when under pressure. If you have the right beliefs and values, the thing to do in most situations will be clear and you will do it. Sometimes you will find yourself in complex situations where the right ethical choice is unclear. True ethical dilemmas exist when two or more deeply held values collide. In such situations, using a decision-making process can help you identify the course of action that will result in the greatest moral good. NOTE: The Geneva Conventions prohibit captors from using enemy prisoners of war or civilians under military control as hostages. You must not violate this prohibition even though doing so might ensure the immediate safety of yourself and your troops or ease accomplishing your mission. By signing and ratifying the Geneva Conventions, the United States declared that it is never acceptable to hold a hostage, regardless of what may happen as a result. Following are the steps of an ethical decision-making process to help you think through ethical dilemmas: Step 1. Interpret the situation. What is the ethical dilemma? Step 2. Analyze all the factors and forces that relate to the dilemma. Step 3. Choose the course of action you believe will best serve the nation. Step 4. Implement the course of action you have chosen. The ethical decision-making process starts when you confront a problem and continues until you develop and implement a solution. The process helps you analyze the problem, identify influencing forces, develop possible courses of action, assess them, and decide on a course of action. Forces That Influence Decision Making A variety of forces influence the ethical decision-making process. The factors and forces you should consider will depend on the dilemma. Here are some probable ones: •Laws, orders, and regulations--formal standards contained in laws, policies regulations, and legal and proper orders that guide behavior and decision making. •Basic national values--values established in documents, such as the Constitution and Declaration of Independence, and in traditions that provide the foundation for required behavior of all Americans. •Traditional Army values--values the Army establishes as standards of required behavior for all soldiers. They are loyalty to the nation, the Army, and the unit; duty; selfless service; integrity; courage; competence; candor; and commitment. •Unit operating values--values actually functioning in your unit that produce the standards governing day-to-day behavior. Unit operating values are often the same as traditional Army values. There are times, however, when they are not. Consider situations involving careerism, altered training and maintenance records, equipment borrowed from another unit for an inspection, or "eyewash" instead of truth. •Your values--your ideas and beliefs that influence your behavior. •Institutional pressures--elements of Army policies, procedures, and operations, and other aspects which influence your behavior. These six forces may not be the only important forces that you should identify and consider. Since ethics is a part of leadership, your decision-making process should also consider the four factors of leadership (the led, the leader, the situation, and communications). The ethical decision-making process can help you think through an ethical dilemma and arrive at a course of action. Once you have analyzed all the factors and forces involved, look at the values in conflict and determine the course of action that seems best for the nation. Complex Ethical Dilemmas It may seem that the ethical decision-making process is too mechanical. You may think you do not need it if you have strong will and moral courage. Normally, the "right" alternative is clear. The ethical decision-making process is for the complex dilemmas that haunt leaders when no clear best choice is evident. Here is an example of one leader's ethical dilemma in combat. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ethical Dilemma in Combat Not long after I was commissioned, I found myself in a combat unit in Vietnam. I also found that combat generated many ethical dilemmas. Applying the guidelines for conduct as I understood them often did not produce obviously "right" answers. The infantry company I commanded was participating in patrolling operations as part of an antiguerrilla patrol campaign. We operated in an area that small guerrilla raiding forces had been moving through for some time Our daily patrolling routine went on for about six weeks Casualties in the company were high. Most casualties occurred in one sector within our patrol area designated as Bravo 7. Every time our patrols moved into the sector, they were ambushed or encountered booby traps. Because of other mission requirements, I could not leave a force permanently in Bravo 7. I talked to the village chief in the small village located in Bravo 7, but he was trying to remain neutral. He hoped to accommodate us and the VC. Although he would not help us I was sure he and the villagers knew where every booby trap in the area was located. Every time our patrols went into Bravo 7, soldiers were killed or injured. The resulting morale problem was so severe that I started going on the patrols myself. One night a booby trap exploded, killing two men and wounding a third, even though we had taken extensive precautions in our approach to the area. We were unable to locate enemy soldiers or VC in Bravo 7, yet time after time we were ordered to continue sending the patrols. The mission did not seem to justify the casualties we were receiving. I had a serious problem. I appealed to my battalion commander, but he stressed accomplishing our security mission and following orders. What should I do? The continued loss of soldiers for no apparent gain seemed intolerable. I could have reported sending the patrols out and sent none, but I could not accept that alternative. Simply lying to my superiors would have been discovered soon in any case. Restrictions on the use of artillery eliminated the idea of destroying the booby traps by thoroughly bombarding the area. After trying to sort it all out, it seemed to me that I had only two choices. I could either refuse to obey orders or continue sending men to death and injury for no understandable purpose. If I disobeyed orders, I knew I would be replaced and my successor would have to face the same problem. Other possibilities existed, of course. We could have forced villagers to lead patrols into the area although it was against law. No civilian casualties occurred from booby traps, indicating they knew the booby trap areas. We could have put pressure on the Bravo 7 villagers and forced them to give us information about the location of booby traps. My military background, with its emphasis on completing the mission despite obstacles, prompted me to consider such alternatives. As it turned out, events made my final choice unnecessary. We were shifted many miles to the west in a big operation on the Cambodian border an never returned to Bravo 7. I still wonder what I would have done if I had stayed. No logic or training I had received gave me a clear right answer. Obedience to orders demanded one course. Responsibility to my soldiers appeared to demand another. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This situation was a true ethical dilemma for this leader. He felt bound to be loyal to both his leaders and his followers. There is no "right" answer or "school solution" to this situation. Different leaders would come to different conclusions after analyzing all the factors and forces that relate to the situation. The important point is that using the ethical decision-making process can help you identify all the options and then eliminate ones that will not serve the nation well. If you ever find yourself in an ethical dilemma, think through the ethical decision-making process and the concept of the highest moral good. Tough leadership decisions do not always have happy endings. Some may praise your decision while others find fault with your logic. You may not always be rewarded for integrity and candor. The point is that you have to live with yourself. Before you can gain the respect of others, you must respect yourself. You gain honor and keep it by doing your duty in an ethical way, having the character to act by the professional Army ethic. SUMMARY Your ability to lead flows from your individual beliefs, values, and character. Your ability to inspire soldiers to do the brave and right thing-- things they may not think they are capable of performing--is influenced by the example you set. Beliefs, values, and norms have great motivating power. Respected leaders of strong and honorable character are able to influence the beliefs, values, and norms of their soldiers. As a professional, you are sworn to use your power for the good of the country, the Army, and those you lead. The professional Army ethic contains the values that guide the way leaders should carry out their professional responsibilities. The elements of the professional Army ethic are loyalty to the nation, the Army, and the unit; duty; selfless service; and integrity. As a leader, you have ethical responsibilities. You must be a worthy role model, develop subordinates ethically, and avoid creating ethical dilemmas for subordinates. When faced with a situation where the right ethical choice is unclear, consider all the forces and factors that relate to the situation and then select a course of action that best serves the ideals of the nation. The ethical decision-making process is a way to resolve those dilemmas. Fundamental to what leaders must BE are the moral strength and courage necessary to make hard decisions and to give soldiers the will to fight and the ability to win. As a Leader, You Must:Examples:Be a person of strong and honorable character. •Determination •Compassion •Self-discipline •Role Modeling •Initiative •Flexibility •Consistency Be committed to the professional Army ethic. •Loyalty to the nation, the Army, and the unit. •Selfless service. •Integrity. •Duty. Be an example of individual values. •Courage. •Candor. •Competence. •Commitment. Be able to resolve complex ethical dilemmas. •Interpret the situation. •Analyze all the factors and forces that apply. •Choose a course of action that seems best for the nation.
FM 22-100 CHAPTER 5 CHAPTER 5 What A Leader Must KnowA leader must learn before he leads. You need to KNOW (understand) standards, yourself, human nature, your job, and your unit to be an effective leader. This knowledge will give you a strong foundation for what you must BE and what you must DO. Keep in mind as you read this chapter that knowledge is far more than memorizing information. Knowledge is the understanding of information. KNOW STANDARDS You will need to meet and enforce the standards of behavior you expect from your soldiers. The Army has already established standards in many areas. Regulations, laws, ARTEP mission training plans, soldier training publications, field and training manuals, general defense plans, and SOPs all contain standards. Your role is often to take existing standards and translate them into goals that your soldiers understand and believe in. Standards define acceptable performance, control behavior, and influence actions. You must communicate standards clearly and ensure they are understood and attained. You must set and enforce high standards in all areas that relate to specific training missions and tasks critical to wartime mission accomplishment. Here is a word of caution, however. Sometimes leaders have a particular area of interest or expertise into which they put so much of the unit's energ