Can you be a great leader without technical expertise?

Capt Brandon Charters — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 09:18:30 -0500

I’ve seen different schools of thought here. Some say you just need to surround yourself with the right people, while others point out that the most effective leaders have strong technical ability to fully understand problems facing their team. Curious to hear everyone’s thoughts.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 16 at 2017 9:24 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 09:24:06 -0500

It depends on the situation. You cannot lead technical people without having some technical expertise.

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made Nov 16 at 2017 9:26 AM

Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 09:26:35 -0500

In my opinion, I don't think you have to be technically sound to be a leader. Leadership is about giving your folks the best training and equipment possible, giving them expectations and holding them accountable for results. Building relationships with your folks letting them know they are the experts and you expect them to be the experts and get the job done. I do think it is important that you have a big picture understand and that they are required to ensure electricity flows through the lines but I don't think you need to know the grade of copper in the wires as long as the electricity is flowing. As a leader you don't need to know how to build a watch, you need your people to be able to tell you what time it is.

Response by SPC Dave Loeffler made Nov 16 at 2017 9:35 AM

SPC Dave Loeffler — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 09:35:15 -0500

I has been my experience that those I consider great leaders had outstanding technical knowledge along with their leadership skills. I was told early on if you have employees allow them to do the job even if they falter, step in and correct then get out of the way again.

Response by SFC Eric Williams made Nov 16 at 2017 9:36 AM

SFC Eric Williams — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 09:36:44 -0500

Leadership is transendable. Technical Knowledge can be acquired while on the job. The better the leadership, the more productive the team becomes and in like, when the team is most productive the leader has the greater opportunity to learn the skill.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Nov 16 at 2017 10:05 AM

SGM Erik Marquez — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 10:05:11 -0500

Capt Brandon Charters "Can you be a great leader without technical expertise?"
the question is not that simple, so the answer is, it depends.
At the lowest and mid levels, no, you can not, you can be a good leader, but not a great one if you do not understand the specifics , have the technical expertise of those you are trying to lead.
At the higher levels of leadership where planning, guidance, leadership is not in the weeds with "how to do it" yes you can be a great leader without the technical expertise of the systems, methods your units may be employing. You have SMEs that can provide insight, advise. You have lower level leaders that write the specifics of a particular part of a plan, guidance, or policy who have that technical expertise.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 16 at 2017 10:26 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 10:26:01 -0500

It depends on your business, There are technical fields like engineering, if you don't have an engineering foundation you simply cannot lead, you can serve as a figurehead with a competent deputy, who makes your decisions for you, but you cannot transform an organization without a technical foundation related to that organization. This is true because as the leader you need to make the technical decisions as part of your leadership responsibility, IT, software coding, doctors, all the professional fields where you need to be sure you are right before you start. Problem is good technical without interpersonal will get you the job, but you'll fail miserably, and hate the job.

For most organizations interpersonal skills are far more important that technical skills, the Army is a good example of this type of organization, you don't need to be a technical expert you just need to instill enough confidence that people want to follow you. You still need to be competent, but do not need specific expertise.

Most importantly you need to be balanced, too much technical without interpersonal and you'll fail everywhere, only people skills with no technical competence and you'll also fail everywhere.

Response by CSM Richard StCyr made Nov 16 at 2017 10:56 AM

CSM Richard StCyr — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 10:56:18 -0500

In my opinion: No
In my youth I lived through a Squad Leader that was absolutely clueless technically and tactically. Their ineptitude caused many issues and had a negative impact on the squad. That said the NCO was not without merit; their strong point was ensuring we had the basic things we needed like chow and our admin stuff , and they did well at PT. We suffered in that we basically taught ourselves our MOS and field craft and were constantly under scrutiny.
She was placed into the engineers as a SSG from admin because she had exceptional math skills when the construction MOS's were integrated with female Soldiers. She went on to be the first female to be a CSM in the Engineers and while I did not like her as a Squad Leader because of her lack of knowledge we all tried to make her successful. I later served as a 1SG under her and later replaced her as CSM of the 62nd by that time she had figured out what rite looked like and the work experience was much better. We remained friends until her death by suicide.
So no, I think to be a great or even a good leader you must be well rounded and both tactically and technically proficient, otherwise how can you adequately evaluate the soundness of opinions and options presented by those around you.

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Nov 16 at 2017 10:58 AM

Lt Col Jim Coe — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 10:58:17 -0500

No. You must have technical expertise in your career field. If you are placed in a leadership position outside of your original career field, then you must acquire technical proficiency appropriate for your job and rank as quickly as possible. Air Force Example: 2 LT completes pilot training and advanced flying training to qualify as a copilot in a transport aircraft. No real leadership responsibilities. Over the next 4 years she upgrades to Aircraft Commander and is qualified for more challenging missions, such as High Altitude airdrop and airdrop flight leader. On her second operational assignment with more experience and training she is qualified as an instructor pilot. After 8 years in the cockpit, she accepts an assignment as an aircraft maintenance officer. To hold credibility in a maintenance squadron, the senior captain pilot needs to complete maintenance officer training and gain a general understanding of maintenance and of the specific aircraft her unit maintains. To lead the enlisted force in her squadron, possibly as a Squadron Maintenance Operations Officer, she must have enough technical knowledge to know what she doesn't know, know how to find information, and to make decisions managing the resources and leading the people. If she's fortunate she will have senior leadership who will mentor her instead of resenting her, and NCOs who will guide her, provide her accurate and timely information, and generally try to keep her out of trouble.

Response by SSgt Boyd Herrst made Nov 16 at 2017 12:24 PM

SSgt Boyd Herrst — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 12:24:58 -0500

I agree with LCOL S. Shuttleworth mostly.. I think what matters is what level of leadership a person is. The higher-up a
Person is they need just enough tech knowledge because they have the support team to advise them.. Thosr in the middle are the ones that need to know what makes the gears mesh and keep them operational so they are not hampered by undue interference.. whatever that may be(only qualified
Persons to maintain/repair).. I worked in a Airman Dining facility(what Army would call garrison mess)..I k ewenough about equipment to give repair tech an idea of what I thoughg happened( tech; did it go
Chinka-chinka-chunk or chunka-chunka-chink... or... ). The new Hobart stuff we had was tough built but thesettings were touchy.. just be cause it’s built tough you can let the oven door slam.. treat it like you paid for it out of your pocket.. be a responsible Steward of Uncle Sam’s equipment. We had a Baker stove that was getting junked basically because it was old(Scrap)We hauled it out on back dock and I and some Airmen cleaned it up real good, inside and out. It worked good
. It’s repair costs exceeded it’s value. When the scrap truck came I got him out of there. I called property office and they came. Looked at it and brought another truck and took it to the property warehouse.. I found out later That a restaurant bid on it for $1,500 and got it.
Scrap value was $40 and change.. Our Food Service budget was credited and the money went back into base account. It took elbow grease, vinegar, baking soda, Scour pads.. wiping rags.. determination..
People are took quick to determine the fate of government equipment. W/o research of what can be saved..and how much work is needed.. yes s’things Are better to get rid of. And s’things are worth recycling!... thete’s More I could tell about but that was an example.. Maybe if more care were taken along the way, maybe the repair costs would not be as high.. I hold the previous Stewards responsible for that(before I came along).
I’d only been there a couple months..

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 16 at 2017 1:01 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 13:01:09 -0500

No. One has to at least have a basic level of expertise to be able to separate fact from fiction. Example: You are the leader and 2 equal generals come to you with different opinions and reasons for taking an action that conflict with one another. Both look you straight in the eye and sound like they know what they’re talking about. What do you do? Without having a certain level of expertise, I respectively submit in this situation you will be wrong half the time, and that’s not acceptable.

Response by SPC David S. made Nov 16 at 2017 1:56 PM

SPC David S. — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 13:56:56 -0500

In my experience, highly technically skilled people do not fare well when they need to manage others. The development of leadership skills seems to takes a back seat in highly technical demanding jobs. When it comes to leadership a balance needs to found between the functional and leadership skills as such good leaders will more than likely be masters of any functional skills needed - all part in knowing one's strengths and weaknesses - however their primary focus is on leadership - big picture stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TP1-qEwdZtY

Leadership Skills vs. Technical Skills

So many executives spend much of their time improving their technical skills at the cost of their leadership skills. What do I mean by this? Technical skills...

Response by SSG Diane R. made Nov 16 at 2017 4:52 PM

SSG Diane R. — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 16:52:28 -0500

In my humble opinion one needs to have a basic understanding of the technology underpinnings of their endeavor or you leave yourself open to being bamboozled.

While it is important to have good tech people to manage the details you must be able to translate your business needs into something the techs can understand and vice versa.

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made Nov 16 at 2017 5:12 PM

SMSgt Thor Merich — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 17:12:25 -0500

It depends on how high you are on the leadership chain. The higher up you are, the less you need to know exactly how they do their jobs. In the business world, it happens all the time. CEO’s change industries often. They get paid for their management skills.

Being a good leader is about managing people. If you can manage folks, knowing the technical aspect of their job is not important.

However, part of being a good leader is being a teacher. So knowing the job of your subordinates is important especially at the lower levels of leadership.

Response by SGT Tony Clifford made Nov 16 at 2017 5:34 PM

SGT Tony Clifford — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 17:34:16 -0500

I would say that it depends on the level of leadership. Company commander and below need to be both tactically and technically proficient. At higher levels it isn't as necessary to be technically skilled as you have subordinates to do the more technically demanding work. That being said, senior leadership should still try to be technically proficient. I was in a BSTB in Korea and our CSM was intelligence. As a combat engineer it shocked me when I saw the senior NCO for our battalion unable to breakdown an M2. We were doing something similar to a spur ride and the BC made all battalion leadership participate. I got the junior enlisted away from her as quickly as I could, so they wouldn't know she couldn't do a common soldier skill. The point is that even though it might not be necessary to know all the technical skills once you reach a high level of leadership, it can hurt your credibility if you're unable to do those things.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 16 at 2017 5:56 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 17:56:17 -0500

As a Junior NCO I'd just like to point out one thing, and it's a very small thing that many leaders seem to overlook.

This applies especially if you were or are in the Army and are an NCO.
2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence.

"I will strive to remain technically and tactically proficient."
~ The Creed of the Noncommissioned Officer ~

If you live and operate by the words of the NCO Creed, as every NCO should, then you have your answer. Every leader should strive to be THE example of a great leader. As a Leader you are the one setting the example, if you know you are not technically proficient at your job, and you are not actively seeking self improvement you're wrong. Plain and simple.

How can you expect those you lead to strive to better themselves, and become technically proficient at their jobs if you are not, or are not diligently seeking that self improvement. It is up to YOU no one else to improve, great leaders understand this, they promoted self realization and self reflection. So that those they lead can grow both mentally and professionally.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Nov 16 at 2017 6:44 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 18:44:30 -0500

Yes! I was a prince at faking it. Once in a while I found my butt hanging out but I usually found someone who knew what I was supposed to be doing

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 16 at 2017 8:10 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 20:10:14 -0500

A good leader is a mentor. A great leader can make mentors of his charges while being mentored by those same charges.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Nov 16 at 2017 9:51 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 21:51:43 -0500

Sure, but you're going to be continually dependent on other people to tell you what to do...

Response by MAJ Byron Oyler made Nov 16 at 2017 11:03 PM

MAJ Byron Oyler — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 23:03:48 -0500

No plan survives initial contact and while you can plan to be a leader and have SME, if you plan to lead from the front you best be able to roll up your sleeves. If you loose your SME at first contact, what do you do if you do not have the technical expertise? I am a critical care/ ER nurse, skydiver, and a pilot and my plan B almost always has a plan C. Additionally it is always said to know the person's job directly superior to you and for the person directly subordinate to you be able to do your job. Corporate America you can be a CEO and not know all the aspects of the job. Our job as soldiers is to win our nation's wars and that means at any given time you could loose all your SMEs and you as a leader better be prepared to get dirty.

Response by SSG James Behnke made Nov 16 at 2017 11:31 PM

SSG James Behnke — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 23:31:19 -0500

I think the short answer is Yes, but it depends. Warrant Officers, for example, are the SME's of their respective fields. If they are not Technical Experts then they can not be effective leaders. A First Sergeant, however is a perfect example of a leadership position that may not be a technical expert in every field of every soldier underneath him.

Response by SGT Dave Tracy made Nov 17 at 2017 9:55 AM

SGT Dave Tracy — Fri, 17 Nov 2017 09:55:00 -0500

The basic expectations of soldiering (speaking from an Army perspective) should be known from E1 all the way up to the top of the service. But just how technically knowledgeable would you expect a battalion, brigade, division commander or above to be? Do they need to know how to load crypto or program radios to be a good leader? Do they need to know how to PMCS and work all positions in a Bradley or Abrams or MAXX-Pro to be effective leaders? Leadership at levels closer to the technology in question might need to be technically knowledgeable to a "functionality" degree, but the further removed one is from the systems in question is a different matter.

I would contend leadership needs to know what the systems and personal at their command are CAPABLE of in order to make the tactical and strategic decisions they need to, but technical knowledge of everything under their command is not reasonable...or possible.

Response by CPT Paul Weiss made Feb 10 at 2018 2:03 PM

CPT Paul Weiss — Sat, 10 Feb 2018 14:03:55 -0500

As others have posted, it varies by area and level of command. In the Infantry, it's almost a truism that a leader must be "tactically and technically competent". It's difficult to imagine being a successful leader without that basic competency.