Military Review English Edition March-April 2014 | Page 67

OPERATIONAL LEADER DEVELOPMENT individual leaders taking the time to develop their individual subordinates. The Center for Army Leadership (CAL), the Army’s lead for leadership doctrine and leadership development, provides tools to support leader development activities. For example, the CAL website, in the Virtual Improvement Center, offers a lesson on developing leaders through challenging job assignments. Unit leaders can task subordinate leaders to teach a class, give a presentation, or perform a task, but this type of development activity must be joined with counseling, coaching, and mentoring. As the Commander’s Handbook for Unit Leader Development, produced by CAL, states, “Your ability to provide feedback to your subordinate leaders will significantly contribute to their development. It will enhance and accelerate learning from the day-to-day work experience—the most valued and effective environment for leader development.”8 Simply placing a subordinate in a position of increased responsibility or assigning a task without ensuring feedback will be marginally effective. Only when the ranking leader provides individualized feedback can subordinates achieve their full leadership potential. The Self-Development Domain The self-development domain, including activities such as attending college courses or obtaining a professional license, is distinct in that it puts the primary responsibility on the individual being developed. ADRP 6-22 states, “To prepare for increasingly more demanding operational environments, Army leaders must invest more time on self-study and self-development than before.”9 This is not to say leaders do not have some responsibility to assist their subordinates in self-study. In the operational domain, a leader can assess leadership shortcomings of subordinates and then can counsel and support them to conduct self-studies. Self-development activities have never been more robust than in this age of technology. Individuals can complete college courses during a permanent change of station and even while deployed. Whereas many had to withdraw from college classes when deployed in support of Operation Desert Storm, completing college courses while deployed now has become common. Among the numerous online tools available is the Multi-Source Assessment and Feedback Program, which leaders throughout the Department of Defense can use to assess their strengths and weaknesses. Through this program, leaders can take advantage of numerous leader development resources, including coaching to help build an individual development plan. In conclusion, the Army needs to focus attention on improving leader development in the operational domain. The institutional domain functions well, with few issues. Soldiers and civilians routinely take advantage of the plentiful opportunities in the self-development domain. However, because of operational requirements over the past 12 or 13 years, individuals have not received sufficient leader development in the operational domain. Operational experience has provided some leader development, but unit leaders have not had enough time to invest in properly developing others. Higher-level leaders must not only develop their subordinates through counseling, coaching, and mentoring, but also ensure subordinate leaders do the same. This means providing unit leaders sufficient time, tools, education, and training for conducting leader development properly so they can prepare the next generation of Army leaders. MR NOTES 1. Army Doctrine Reference Publication (ADRP) 7-0, Training Units and Developing Leaders (Washington, DC, Government Printing Offi ce [GPO], 2012), 1-2, found at . 2. Army Leader Development Strategy 2013, 8, found at . 3. Lance Bacon, “Sergeant Major: 12 Changes to Expect in ’12,” Army Times (29 January 2012), found at . 4. Army Leader Development Strategy 2013, 9. MILITARY REVIEW March-April 2014 5. 2012 CAL Annual Survey of Army Leadership (CASAL): Main Findings, Technical Report 2013-1 (April 2013): 9, found at . 6. Army Leader Development Strategy 2013, 9. 7. ADRP 6-22, Army Leadership (Washington, DC, GPO, 2012), paragraph 7-59, found at . 8. Combined Arms Center, Center for Army Leadership, Commander’s Handbook for Unit Leader Development, 16, found at . 9. ADRP 6-22, para. 7-32. 65