Various Dimensions of Military Leadership - Essay Example

? Military Leadership Military Leadership “In the absence of inspired military leadership... the more powerful side wears down the weaker- Bevin Alexander”(Military leadership quotes, n. d). An intelligent military leader can gain victory over enemies even with limited resources whereas an idiotic military leader suffers defeat even if he has access to enough resources. In other words, military leadership is all about judicious usage of the existing resources like manpower and weapons. The military leader should have insights not only about their own capabilities but also about the capabilities and strategies of the enemies. Military leadership is entirely different from other leaderships like organizational leadership or a nation’s leadership. In organizational or national leadership, both autocratic and democratic methods are prevailing whereas in military leadership, the scope for democratic style of functioning is zero. In other words, subordinates in militaries don’t have the authority to question the leadership styles or functioning of their superiors. This paper analyses military leadership and its various dimensions. Various dimensions of military leadership “Military leadership is the process of influencing others to accomplish the mission by providing purpose, direction, and motivation. Command is the authority a person in the military service lawfully exercises over subordinates by virtue of his rank and assignment” (Notes on Military Leadership, n. d). Power is an essential part of military leadership. It should be noted that power and influence are some of the major characteristics of a successful leader in every organization. The above fact is 100% true in the case of military leadership. Even though Adolf Hitler was a controversial leader, he was one of the perfect examples of military leaders who utilized power for effectively to lead their sides to victory. Hitler had not shown any mercy either to the enemies or to his fellow military men. In other words, both the enemies and the friends equally were afraid of Hitler and his power. Hitler was also successful in motivating his soldiers with the help of his oral skills and charismatic way of presenting things. In fact he motivated the entire German nation by saying that Germany had suffered a lot because of the Treaty of Versailles signed at the end of WW1. He educated the soldiers and the public that Germany lost their pride because of the above treaty and it is the duty of every German to work for regaining their lost pride. Hitler taught the soldiers that Germans are the most glorified people in the world and they have the right to rule the entire world. In short, Hitler is an example for how well a military leader can use his power and generate motivation among the subordinates to accomplish military missions. Mentoring is used as a leadership development strategy in many of the current military training colleges. “Conceptually, mentoring is often described as a close, developmental relationship between experienced and less experienced individuals” (Sullivan, 1993). Experienced military leaders may have enormous experience in dealing with different types of difficult situations. Knowledge about such situations is necessary for the upcoming military leaders. Through mentorship, experienced military leaders transfer their knowledge and experience to their juniors so that junior leaders will be benefitted immensely while countering tough situations in future. Compared to other organizations, military produces great leaders more in number because of various reasons. “First, in all services, military leadership qualities are formed in a progressive and sequential series of carefully planned training, educational, and experiential events—far more time-consuming and expensive than similar training in industry or government” (Colonel Kolditz, 2009). It should be noted that military is an organization which is receiving huge funding for the training and development of soldiers. Both theoretical and practical aspects of military leadership are explained extensively in military colleges and therefore soldiers coming out from these colleges may be well equipped to face any type of leadership challenges in future. It should be noted that military training colleges provide opportunities to strengthen physical health along with mental health whereas other leadership training institutions neglect such things while training leaders for the future. “Secondly, military leaders tend to hold high levels of responsibility and authority at low levels of their organizations” (Colonel Kolditz, 2009). Unlike leaders in other organizations, military leaders are holding high level responsibilities even at the entry level. Moreover, accountability of military leadership is more than that in other organizations. Therefore, military leaders may show more vigilance in their activities than other leaders. “Finally, and perhaps most importantly, military leadership is based on a concept of duty, service, and self-sacrifice” (Colonel Kolditz, 2009). It should be noted that leaders in other organizations may not have the same commitment as that of the military leaders. Military leaders are ready to sacrifice their lives for the defense of their country whereas such things cannot be expected from political leaders or organizational leaders. In other words, political leaders and organizational leaders tell more and work less whereas military leaders work more and tell less. The above differences in functioning make military leadership entirely different from political or organizational leadership. The future leadership needs would require fighter leaders at junior levels who would be able to shoulder greater responsibility and are capable of autonomous decision-making at increasingly rapid speed under complex and highly demanding conditions. Hence the need for less and less of ‘‘supervision’’ and greater decision-making by junior officers (Singh, 2004) The challenges facing by the current military leaders are entirely different from the challenges faced by the military leaders in the past. Therefore, it is difficult to employ old military strategies in the present military environment. Science and technology has advanced a lot and as a result of that various kinds of weapons and war strategies were developed by the all countries. Earlier, soldiers waited for instructions from their superiors for doing every activity. However, in rapidly moving present world, it is difficult for them to wait longer periods for receiving instructions from their superiors. Quick actions are required in certain cases and therefore, it is difficult for the subordinates to wait longer periods for the instructions from their superiors. Keeping in mind that, current military training is more focussed on developing problem solving and quick decision making skills. Conclusions Military leadership is entirely different from political organizational leadership. Military leaders are more dedicated to their profession than leaders in other segments of human life. Autocratic leadership styles are prevailing in military whereas in politics and organizations, leadership functions both in autocratic and democratic ways. Military leaders hold more power and influence than other leaders. References Colonel Kolditz T (2009). Why the Military Produces Great Leaders. Retrieved from http://blogs.hbr.org/frontline-leadership/2009/02/why-the-military-produces-grea.html Military leadership quotes (n. d.). Retrieved from http://www.military-quotes.com/leadership-quotes.htm Singh J (2004). Leadership for the 21st-century military. Retrieved from http://www.indianexpress.com/oldStory/48442/ Sullivan MM (1993). Mentoring in the military: a preliminary study of gender differences. Retrieved from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/mentor/mentors.htm Read More