Army's Definition Of Mission Command

The Army’s definition of leadership can be universally accepted and applied to civilian and military leaders alike. The difference between the two leaders is that Army leaders can never be anything less than the best. Army leaders are entrusted with planning and executing decisions that have far-reaching consequences. During his visit to IUP, Major General Piatt stressed how complex today’s battlefield is and that the Army needs leaders who are well-rounded. ADRP 6-22 states that the “ideal Army leader has strong intellect, physical presence, professional competence, moral character and serves as a role model” (p. v, 2012).
While I agree with the Army’s definition of an ideal leader, I would add that the finest leaders take care of their subordinates
Today’s conflicts are multifaceted, and leaders must be ready for the inevitable: missions will go wrong. In the civilian world and in the military training I have had thus far, no plan has ever been executed without some dilemma requiring the plan to be altered. This is why good leaders have to understand mission command. ADP 6-0 defines mission command as, “the exercise of authority and direction by the commander using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations” (p. 1, 2012). Leaders will be more effective and have stronger teams by acknowledging uncontrollable variables exist and using the six principles of mission
A successful leader needs to be a positive member of three “teams.” The three “teams” include subordinates, peers, and superiors. ADRP 6-22 explains this concept in similar terms that focus more on a leader’s area of control. The direct level is “face-to-face or first-line leadership,” usually involving dozens of people (ADRP 6-22, p. 2-4, 2012). Organizational level leadership is one step up and the leader’s influence covers hundreds to thousands of people. The strategic level focuses on the force structure, joint operations, and impact global politics (ADRP 6-22, p. 2-5, 2012). Maintaining positive relationships with these “teams” and fulfilling your responsibilities that come with each one are essential to being an Army leader.
So far, I have described a good Army leader as someone that protects their soldiers and is capable of adjusting to the complexities of conflict. The last aspect I believe describes an excellent leader is someone that has a balance of character, presence, and intellect. An unbalanced leader is no leader at all. While everyone has different strengths and weaknesses, a good Army leader can identify these traits in their soldiers and themselves. Everyone, but a leader in particular, must continually strive to develop their weaknesses in an effort to achieve well-rounded