Major Psychological Issues Analysis - Case Study Example

“How Does a Commander Sustain an Ethical Command Climate in War?” “War is much too serious a matter to leave to soldiers,” this very famous statement was made by Georges Clemenceau, the French Prime Minister and leader during World War (Jackson , 228). One cannot help but agree with the seriousness of a war, yet for it to be left to soldiers or not remains a question of one’s opinion. When we refer to the phrase Command Climate, it would be helpful to understand what it encompasses. Command Climate refers to the cumulative feelings which subordinates have regarding their commanders and their unit, the chain of command and leadership style play a pivotal role in shaping the soldiers’ perceptions (Jones , 3). If one were to analyze the toughest leadership situations, leading an army troop in war would definitely be at the top of the list. It is indeed tough to make decisions regarding the life and death of people, to gauge their innocence and the toughest of all is to abandon one’s own sense of judgment and follow the chain of command and orders of the brigadiers who are not present in the battlefield. Such was the situation with Lt. Colonel Nathan Sassaman – commander of the Fourth Infantry Division’s 1-8 Battalions in 2003 – 2004. The chain of command in the Iraq War was flawed to say the least. There was no synchrony of opinion of the battalion’s heads regarding the adequate plan of action that should be taken in order to achieve their objectives. Lt. Colonel Nathan Sassaman was under dual reporting during his time at Iraq; he had to take orders from Raymond T. Odierno, the Commanding General of the US Forces in Iraq and from his immediate supervisor Major General Frederick S. Rudesheim. This dual reporting created much confusion for Nathan Sassaman and his battalion since on the one hand he was asked to be aggressive and passive on the other. To maintain an ethical command climate for his battalion Nathan Sassaman relied on his judgment in situations where he did not agree with the orders given to him. In doing so, at least his battalion felt strongly about Nathan Sassaman’s leadership and felt that as a leader he knew what the situation and his unit required after months of a frustrating routine in Iraq (Filkins , 17 - 19). Another instance where the unhealthy command climate of the troops in Iraq is depicted is through the experiences of Ralph Logan, the soldier who was teased by fellow soldiers for his delicate ways while performing searches. Logan refused to be a party to throwing Marwan and Zaydoon into the river for he saw it as a violation of what the battalion was authorized to do (Filkins , 21). This manifests Logan’s competency of character which has to be inherent in a soldier’s character and cannot be inculcated through training and education. This competency in character of a commander is what can help sustain an ethical command climate in times of war (Doty , 71). Logan’s trust in Sassaman was reflected in his refusal to obey Perkins’ command which comes across as a point towards how Sassaman strengthened the command climate I Iraq. The fact that Sassaman’s men played soccer with the locals of Iraq and he assisted the locals in the repair of the mosques set an example for his soldiers and also increased Sassaman’s respect for them. Adding to the respect was the fact that Sassaman could not tolerate the insult of his men and gave his soldiers the leverage to replicate the enemy’s attack when it infringed on their dignity. Sassaman took a stand for his soldiers in the incident of drowning Marwan and Zaydoon even though he himself believed the act to be wrong, yet he knew the risk he posed to his career while taking the stand for his soldiers but he did what he could find logical grounds for. These qualities of Sassaman made him a respected leader for his battalion and added to sustaining an ethical and healthy command climate amongst his troops. “Explain the Relationship Between Power and Moral Courage. How Can Commanders Influence Levels Of Moral Courage Within an Organization?” “I just hope he crashed on Friday, not Sunday, so I will not have so many bodies to pick up,” were the words of Major Theresa Cochran (Kern , 19). Neither had Major Cochran nor had anyone else in the unit realized that these words would become a reality. The crash killed all abroad, which was a total of four skilled members of the United States Air Force (USAF) crew. If one were to take notice of the crash of the Czar 52 at Fairchild Air Force Base, no doubt Lt. Col. Bud Holland’s name stands out and his attitude in the Air Force years prior to the crash (as testified by his colleagues) seems ample reason for the occurrence of the crash. It is said that the power one experiences when one reaches the sky is unexplainable and automatically one feels an urge to take more risks and feels in control of a situation he actually is not, something similar used to happen with the Colonel when he used to be in the aircraft (Hayward , 3). Yet nothing happens in isolation, there were many people higher up in the hierarchy than Lt. Col. Holland but none took any notice of the complains of the junior crew members against Lt. Col. Holland. There is a fine distinction between position power and personal power, where the former is related to the authority one has relative to the post one is at and the latter pertains to the power one possess as a result of one’s personality and character traits. An amalgamation of both these dimensions of power if channelized properly can help in increasing moral courage amongst the organization. To demonstrate this, an example of United States Air Force Squadron Commander Mark McGeehan can be taken. Mark McGeehan was known to have tried to make an effort to get Lt. Col. “Bud” Holland ‘grounded,’ but because of the laid back attitude of the top management, no action was taken. If Mr. McGeehan could also have been as complacent as the rest of the management and not paid any heed to the pleas of his subordinates. As it is, the junior pilots and fellow crewmembers had lost faith in the supervision of the management and any hope that action would be taken. Yet Mr. McGeehan tried all he could to take the matter up to the higher authorities and when the verdict resulted to be in favor of Lt. Col. “Bud” Holland, he decided to accompany the colonel on every flight because Mr. McGeehan felt that the Col. Was not safe to be on a flight with for his crewmembers. It is actions and leaders like these who can inculcate strong moral values and moral courage in their subordinates. Mr. McGeehan did possess position power, but more than that he influenced his organization with his strength of character and what is normally termed as ‘personal power.’ It is true that Mr. McGeehan’s efforts went in vain but he served as a profound example of moral courage for his subordinates. The relationship between power and courage in directly proportional, however the point discussed here is not just courage rather moral courage. Abraham Lincoln once said “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.” These words carry deep meanings because in reality power accompanies with it the courage to do many negative acts, the reason being the increase in power is coupled by a decrease in moral courage. Lt. Col. Holland considered himself the master inside the aircraft and this sense of power numbed his sense of reality that after all he was a human, completely capable of making a mistake. It was this overconfidence of his that led him to exceed the bank and pitch limits and thus the loss of 4 USAF members (Wiegmann and Shappell , 352) Another example that can be quoted here is of Capt. Eric Jones who during the incident of the Yakima Bombing Range had to fake an illness in order to ensure that the altitude at which the aircraft was flying was increased and that the Colonel was off the pilot’s seat for the rest of the cruise (Kern , 15). In this case, Capt. Jones did not possess any power as compared to Lt. Col. Holland, consequently he could not blatantly disobey the Colonel so he lied to Lt. Col. Holland but for a better cause, therefore moral courage took precedence over blindly following orders of the powerful higher authority. “Explain How A BCT Commander Can Assess the Developmental Needs of Subordinate Commanders” It is but a fact that the path to leadership of a commander is not easy; it requires the stress and the struggle of a valiant soldier for him to be transformed into a seasoned army commander. Similar was the case with Lieutenant Colonel Harold Gregory “Hal” Moore, more commonly known as Hal Moore. Col. Hal Moore was the Lieutenant Colonel of the 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regiment, in the Vietnam War in 1965 at the Battle of Ia Drang. Lieutenant Colonel Moore was much respected by his subordinates, in the words of Mel Gibson, the famous Hollywood Actor who played Lieutenant Colonel Moore’s character in the Hollywood film “We Were Soldiers Once…and Young:” “…They would do anything he asked and they would follow him into the mouth of hell because he truly loved them. And that is Leadership (Sobel , 55).” Such idolization can be the result of true devotion and strength of character of a commander, who is loved by his soldiers because he has won their trust. Lieutenant Colonel Moore had two key principles of leadership: training and experience as recalled by Earnie Savage (a member of the “Lost Platoon” during the battle of the Ia Drang who also had to command it once the commanders lost their lives). During an interview Earnie Savage stated that a good leader would extraneously train his soldiers and to ensure that they make the most of their training and moments in which their bravery and valor is much required, sends them in the battlefield to utilize their training and make their mark for their country (Sobel , 56). Such was the character of Lieutenant Col. Moore who sought to develop his soldiers into future leaders and it was this training of his that allowed Ernie Savage to take command of the lost platoon, which was unanticipated by the young soldier but his training was such that he managed to lead the “Lost Platoon” out of the attack of the North Vietnamese Forces (Ayres Jr. , 2). For a leader to be able to assess the needs of his subordinates, it is important that he takes into account the opinion of his juniors before taking important decisions. This serves a two-pronged purpose; one, it allows a diversity of ideas which increases the alternatives available to the battalion and it also allows the leader to get a feel of the perspective of the lines on which his subordinates are thinking which obviously helps him understand his battalion more. With Lieutenant Col. Moore, Sergeant Major Plumley and Captain Mat Dillon were two of his very loyal combatants with whom he shared his ideas and whose advice he used to seek before making a decision in the Battle if the Ia Drang, this helped Lieutenant Col. Moore understand his battalion more than he ordinarily would have during the battle (Sobel , 51). At the Battle of the Ia Drang, the purpose of the North Vietnamese Forces was to somehow drag the American forces into battle. The reason behind this was that the Vietnamese Army wanted to experience how the Americans made use of the sophisticated ammunition and the technology they had and what made them into the daring warriors that they were. In trying to accomplish this mission, General Man (the General of the North Vietnamese Army) did not care how many casualties were inflicted on his men let alone the enemy, and that is what made all the difference in the leaders of the two opposing sides, since on the other side there was Lieutenant Col. Moore whose prime concern was to keep the casualties as low as possible (Moore and Galloway , 15). Where on the one hand General Man had ordered his battalion to open aimless fire on the American troops, Lieutenant Col. Moore, on the other hand had instructed his battalion to exercise discipline while using ammunition which is evident by the fact that Sergeant Erwin Savage’s “Lost Platoon” came out of the Vietnamese attack with excess ammunition (since the American soldiers exercised care while using ammunition) which was utilized later during the Battle of the Ia Drang (Ayres Jr. , 2). Lieutenant Col. Moore knew that increased casualties would only serve to demoralize his battalion and the difference in character of the leaders of the two armies was also evident in the fate of the Battle of the Ia Drang. Works Cited Ayres Jr., B. Drummond. "Veterans' Journal; Back to a Valley of Death, With Love." New York Times. 10 November 1992: 2. Print. 26 August 2011. Doty, Colonel Joe. "Competency Versus Character? It Must be Both!" Military Review (November - December 2009): 71. Print. 22 August 2011. Filkins, Dexter. "The Fall of the Warrior King." New York Times 23 October 2005: 17 - 19. Web. 22 August 2011. Hayward, Brent. "Culture, CRM and Aviation Safety." Asia Pacific Regional Air Safety' Seminar. Brisbane , 1997. 3. Print. 23 August 2011. Jackson, John Hampden. "Clemenceau and the Third Republic." London: Hodder & Stoughton Limited, 1946. Print. 22 August 2011. Jones, Steven M. "Improving Accountability For Effective Command Climate: A Strategic Imperative." Security Strategy Paper. Pennsylvania: Strategic Studies Institute, September 2003. Print. 22 August 2011. Kern, Anthony Tony. "Darker Shades of Blue." 1995. Web. 23 August 2011. . Moore, Lt. Gen. Harold G. and Joseph L. Galloway. "We Were Soldiers Once...and Young." New York: Random House, 1992. Print. 26 August 2011. Sobel, Brian M. "Battlefield Leader, Hal G. Moore: The Legacy and Lessons of an Amrerical Warrior." Armchair General (September 2004): 46 - 57. Print. 26 August 2011. Wiegmann, Douglas A. and Scott A. Shappell. "Human error Perspectives in Aviation." The International Journal of Aviation Psychology (September 2000): Volume 11, Issue 4, 341-357. Print. 23 August 2011. Read More