What skills must the most senior military leaders have?

2014-12-22T12:34:10-05:00

A recent discussion about senior leaders from another thread with my good friend and mentor COL Private RallyPoint Member got me thinking. As we consider the most senior executives in the military or corporate America, what skills are most important to have at that level? When considering the service Chiefs or Senior Enlisted Advisors, they may be the best operational leaders ever, but what good does it do the entire force if they don’t have the strategic vision to look 5-10+ years into the horizon to anticipate the needs of the force? Even more importantly, what good is that vision if you can’t sell those ideas to the American public & key leaders such as the SECDEF, POTUS, and Congress in order to fund that vision? As it relates to corporate America, the pedigree of many CEOs is varied from a sales foundation, to engineering, to R&D, accounting, operations or other disciplines. In corporate America, as with many senior military leaders, they typically worry about the outward facing issues of a company while their senior operations folks worry about the day-to-day blocking and tackling (or “top down stuff”).

Given this background, what skills do you think are MOST necessary at the senior levels of the military, and do you think we do a good job of breeding leaders with those skills? Also, food for thought - what leaders do you think did the best job as strategic thinkers, and why?

Comment to vote on one of the following options!:

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2014 12:56 PM

2014-12-22T12:56:02-05:00

Operators. You want people who know what the primary job of the service is, and who have had to execute that mission. Operational experience entails planning, briefing, execution, and debriefing those operations. That is experience you want senior leaders to have before they start making decisions for the entire service.

That said, there is no problem with senior leadership of a support function coming from a support background, or leadership of a training unit to be scholars with civilian education (in fact, I would argue that you want all your senior leaders to be scholars with a wide breadth of education, regardless of background). But when it comes to making over-arching decisions for the service, you want folks who know what it is your service does as the primary goal.

Response by SPC John Cummings made Dec 22 at 2014 1:03 PM

2014-12-22T13:03:38-05:00

Should all have an Antarctic Service Ribbon Why pigeon whole such an important role

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2014 1:27 PM

2014-12-22T13:27:58-05:00

I believe senior leaders need to be able to lead in all situations and positions, a senior leader should be well rounded and have served in a variety of challenging positions.

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2014 1:54 PM

2014-12-22T13:54:19-05:00

I believe that there is no "go to" back ground that would be the best. The best candidate at the time for the situation is the one that should be hired. There will be situations were the best candidate may have little operational experience but the situation at the time demands a skill set that the operators available don't possess.

Response by Maj Wayne Dahlke made Dec 22 at 2014 2:00 PM

2014-12-22T14:00:55-05:00

Since I come out of the operator community, I am biased, however, I think you have to have at least some "time in the mud" to appreciate how the decision making process will affect the end user. Mission accomplishment is the name of the game, and if you do not understand the mission, you can never articulate it to the people who make the funding decisions, most of whom have never served.

"Operators" in this example should not just be pilots (on the Air Force side), but ANY rated officer. We as a service have never had a Non pilot (Navigator/CSO, ABM) as the Chief of Staff, and it is long overdue.

Response by 1SG Frank Boynton made Dec 22 at 2014 2:20 PM

2014-12-22T14:20:37-05:00

I picked former operators, not that I think that's right, but it partially answers the question. I will say this, the one thing a senior leader should not be - political. It's those senior officers who ultimately help destroy the traditions and history of the services. I know of one commander that comes to mind (I will not mention his name) but because of his political agenda, was promoted to a 3rd star, never having commanded a division, and was given command of the V-Corps for 6 months and destroyed the very fabric of our General Defense Plan (DGP), was called back to Washington, promoted to 4 stars and became the youngest Chairman, Joint Chief of Staff in the history of the position. He was not - I repeat NOT a leader.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Dec 22 at 2014 2:36 PM

2014-12-22T14:36:12-05:00

At this stage of the game not only should they have been operator, but they also must have a full knowledge of what makes/takes to keep operators functional. They must also know how to express their selves in such a manner so their ideas and suggestions will be vaulted forward and be taken notice of. They can't be like a horse with blinders and be able to assess all situations with an open mind. One of the most important things they must remember is - where they came from. What it was like when they first joined. What good leadership was, what bad leadership was. They must know the difference of commanding respect and demanding respect. They need to be open to the constant changing of the world and environment around them and be able to adapt to this changing world. If they can't have the vision to look forward then they can't help the military move forward as well. One more thing, they must know the difference between pole vaulting over fly poop and what really matters.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Dec 22 at 2014 3:43 PM

2014-12-22T15:43:34-05:00

The ability to LISTEN. Once you cut off the input from others in your command, you are truly "An Army of One." We all know how short lived that slogan was.

Response by SSG Everett Wilson made Dec 22 at 2014 4:14 PM

2014-12-22T16:14:35-05:00

No matter what our backgrounds are, we learn from different situations of our MOS' and Service. Its how we apply what we have learned. Some scholars will have book smarts, others will have street smarts. Its how we apply what we learned

Response by SFC Dr. Joseph Finck, BS, MA, DSS made Dec 22 at 2014 7:24 PM

2014-12-22T19:24:36-05:00

While there is a need for Senior Level Commanders to be well rounded, they need a combat arms or other operational leadership experience.

I think we do a good job in most cases of selecting and promoting these leaders. There are always exceptions.

A large consideration is the ability to factor in what Senior Enlisted (Sergeant Major of the Army, Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, and Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard) have to say and that must be coupled with what the Senior Warrant Officer Community presents as well.

Political considerations should be devoid from the thinking, planning, and execution of strategy. While this is at least somewhat naïve, the Service Secretary is the person with political interests in mind.

General Anthony Zinni, USMC Retired was a superb strategic thinker who was later a special envoy in the development of peace in the Middle East. General Dwight D. Eisenhower was also a superb strategic thinker who fashioned a coalition and gained the support of our allies in World War II. Finally, General Collin Powell was a superb strategic thinker who was later appointed Secretary of State. All of these General Officers have at least one trait in common, the knowledge and ability to work with others both internal and external to the United States Military.

Response by SFC Michael Jackson, MBA made Dec 22 at 2014 10:13 PM

2014-12-22T22:13:26-05:00

Senior Leaders must have cleared defined vision, be mission or action-oriented, and understand the significant impact/effects of their decisions. Speaking of decisions, they absolutely MUST be DECISIVE!

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2014 2:36 AM

2014-12-23T02:36:57-05:00

in a perfect world, i feel they should all be LDOs in there respected field. its very rare you get a leader who has once been the guy in the dirt, but when you do have the honor of serving under a prior enlisted, you know what that they are asking from is something they have most likely experienced. prior Es know what tasks are bullshit and what are more probable. this is just my opinion. i have also meet many junior officers who had a great head on there shoulders and will become something great, but 9 out of 10 times a mustang in the platoon will gain more respect from above and below.

Response by 1SG Michael Blount made Dec 23 at 2014 3:57 AM

2014-12-23T03:57:59-05:00

Who knows better about pounding ground or field operations than somebody who's been there?

Response by SGT Kristin Wiley made Dec 23 at 2014 1:17 PM

2014-12-23T13:17:54-05:00

Their job skills are irrelevant to their leadership skills. As for leadership skills, these should not change for any rank, but senior level leadership need to be held to a higher standard. There is less room for mistakes especially when it comes to character flaws.

Response by BG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 24 at 2014 2:47 PM

2014-12-24T14:47:32-05:00

The most important aspect in my view is a leader who can look forward including 2nd and 3rd order effects of a policy or decision. Now, I am former enlisted and a combat engineer, but with the exception of knowing what it is like to be an E-3, I need to put that in the past and let company and battalion commanders worry about the tactical level stuff. Otherwise, we get to the old syndrome of the general who hovers above the battlefield directing platoon firefights.
A senior leader rarely gets there without going through all the leadership steps successfully and gets an advanced education through one of the War Colleges at a minimum and typically has got another Masters on their own. However, it is the ability to take all the tactical and operational background and apply that to strategic problems in order for the senior leader to be effective.
Should we forward deploy troops to a theater to be ready and demonstrate commitment or keep them CONUS based to apply them to any problem? Should the military participate in humanitarian operations in order to expand their skillsets beyond warfighting or keep training at NTC/ Red Flag in order to master kinetic skills? How do we balance men vs. machines in budgets? Those are the hard questions that you need a senior leader who can see across their entire service and even the entire joint interagency environment to create the right solution. Remember that few senior leaders will be around long enough to actually see the fruits of their decisions so they must be done with the most altruistic intent.

Response by PO2 Corey Ferretti made Dec 24 at 2014 7:44 PM

2014-12-24T19:44:29-05:00

There is no cookie cutter type to lead. You need to be right for the job and because you have Trident with 15 combat deployments, 2 Silver Stars, Combat Action Ribbon, and 12 Navy Achievement Medals does not mean you can lead in any job. I dont think that person would like to lead in a office environment. So the person just needs the skills to lead for the job at hand. We all know leaders that failed in one capacity but when moved around they leadership was spot on.