Military Review English Edition March-April 2014 | Page 7
STRENGTHS-BASED LEADERSHIP
To develop junior leaders, higher-level leaders
need a full understanding of the strengths and
weaknesses of those within their chain of command.
Leaders who are aware of subordinates’ strengths
are more likely to place soldiers in positions that
play to their abilities, creating the conditions for
individual and unit success.
Army Doctrine and StrengthsBased Leadership
Doctrine is consistent with a strengths-based
approach to leadership. According to Gretchen
Spreitzer, the assumption underlying a strengthsbased approach is that nurturing strengths, as
opposed to focusing exclusively on correcting
deficiencies, creates subordinate leaders who are
able to recognize and realize their full potential.1
In keeping with strengths-based leadership theory,
Army leaders who focus on subordinates’ strengths
and potential will be better equipped to manage and
grow existing talent within their units. At the same
time, they can build subordinates’ capabilities for
future leadership roles. Leaders who understand
subordinates’ strengths and weaknesses are not
only in a better position to affect individual soldiers
positively, but also they are in a better position to
influence unit and organizational effectiveness
through team and task assignments.
Performance vs. Leader
Development
When asked about ways to assess subordinates’
strengths and areas for growth, soldiers frequently
reference the Army’s Evaluation Reporting System.
The officer and noncommissioned officer efficiency
reporting processes—with their very real impact on
career progression—have some bearing on subordinate development. However, these processes are
designed primarily to report on performance rather
than promote leader development. Alone, officer
and noncommissioned officer evaluation reports
contribute little to the development of subordinates.
Likely, no formal, structured system of coaching
or mentoring will succeed as well as an informal
approach employed by astute leaders interacting
with subordinates one and two echelons below
them. Unfortunately, the demands of modern leadership make it a challenge to find time for dedicated
subordinate development activities. In the Military
MILITARY REVIEW
March-April 2014
Review article “Reassessing Army Leadership in
the 21st Century,” author Jason M. Pape describes
how making time for subordinate development—
considered a thing that should be done—tends to
give way to requirements regarded as things that
must be done.2
Considering the tension between time available
and typical workloads, this article suggests concrete
ways leaders can enhance subordinate development
in the course of their day-to-day activities. The goal
is to help leaders conduct developmental activities
during daily business without adding time-consuming tasks to a leader’s load. These suggestions will
also help leaders build a climate conducive to their
subordinates’ development.
Research-Based Strategies
The suggestions for leader development presented in this paper summarize themes that
emerged from research exploring the application
of strengths-based leadership in a military context.
As part of this research, the U.S. Army Research
Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences,
known as ARI, conducted interviews with 41 active
duty Army leaders.3 The majority of Army leaders
interviewed by ARI reported using strengths-based
techniques to some extent, often without an explicit
knowledge of strengths-based leadership theory.
Nevertheless, many soldiers reported finding the
techniques successful. This article describes six
ways Army leaders can develop subordinates,
consistent with strengths-based leadership theory:
● Identifying strengths.
● Providing individualized feedback.
● Utilizing subordinate strengths.
● Building and maintaining a positive climate.
● Caring for subordinates.
● Empowering subordinates.
Identifying Strengths
To develop a strength, individuals must first
identify what they do well and what they need
to improve on. Although individuals can identify
strengths and weaknesses through formal processes, they also can use informal methods such
as self-reflection. Because people tend to gravitate
toward what they do well, such things as rate of
learning, desire to participate in certain activities,
and satisfaction gained from specific tasks can
5