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