Different Leadership Styles In The United States Army

As a Soldier in the United States Army, your leadership style began at a very young age. Your style is influenced by the things you value, your deep rooted beliefs and the life experiences you have had along the way. I want you to think about your own personal experiences as your learn to understand these two dominate styles of leadership. The Army provides us a clear definition of leadership in ADRP 6-22, which states “Leadership is influencing people by providing purpose, directions and motivation to accomplish the mission and improve the organization”. This definition provides a clear foundation to draw upon when we begin to understand the broader elements which are key in any leadership style. Transactional leadership adds the elements of reward and punishment into the leadership style. Conversely, transformational leadership provides inspiration and leading by example to accomplish a set task. While both styles can be seen as different they can each provide elements that when used together can have positive results. In order to influence people you must know those people. There are careful considerations that must take place. For instance, consider their experience and their individual motivating factors. What gets one person up
and moving may not be important enough to get another member of the team on board and working as well. Taking the time to get to know your subordinates will also shine light into what each of them values and what motivates them on an individual level. The biggest downfall I have seen when leaders are introduced to this element is they don’t want to build personal relationships with subordinates. The leader must remain mature when getting to know their subordinates. It is important to exhibit the fact that they too are human and displaying some emotional feelings will not hinder their ability to lead. Subordinates want to know that their leadership cares about them. When you take the time to get to know your subordinates you have the perfect opportunity to show them that you are a human and have personal values as well. Through the elements of purpose and direction the leader must again rely on what they know about subordinates in order to cause them to act in the manner appropriate to accomplish the mission. There are times when a task must be directed without an explanation. The task may require a quick response and taking the time to talk about it just isn’t an option. However, a leader must take the time to provide further guidance by providing purpose and specific direction at every chance. Purpose will give the subordinate reason to act in a manner that works towards accomplishing a task. Clear directions can help subordinates understand the intended end result. In these two elements the leader should open up for feedback. Sometimes when we clearly define our end results as leaders, our subordinates provide creative insight and offer better alternatives. During my time serving as a recruiter I have observed many different styles of leadership.
Of course anyone who has been in any organization for an extended period of time may observe patterns as well. After my own time growing and developing in both institutional training and self-development I learned that the two styles I have most observed have functional names. When studied further, these styles can offer a great deal of insight and have a profound effect when applied intentionally. The two styles of course are transactional leadership and transformational leadership. Although it could be thought that any leadership can transform organizations and people for the better, transformational leadership is a single style of its
own. Transactional leadership is a style in which the leader relies on rewards and punishments to motivate subordinates. For example, during my time in recruiting I have observed a “time” reward / punishment system. Many leaders inform their subordinates that if they do what they need to do during the work day, say make “x” amount of appointments, then they can go home early. Conversely, if prospecting goals are not reached, the leader states they will have to prospect on the weekends; taking away from what would otherwise be their personal time. This style of leadership does not always provide the best way to provide a subordinate with purpose and motivation to complete a task. It simply informs them what the two expected forms of outcomes may be as a result of their work habits. With no other means of influence, transactional leadership in itself fails to provide a clearer understanding to the subordinate. This style of leadership often times finds itself to have low results and low morale amongst those working under this style. Although a rewards system for successful work ethics can prove to be positive in the work place, set punishments will not. Accountability should always remain paramount, and letting others know what you want accomplished and what you expect shouldn’t go undone. When a leader places specific punishments before actions are executed it may hinder the subordinate to act accordingly. It can set a level of fear in the culture of the work place. Each situation where a standard was not met should be addressed individually and handled accordingly. This will allow the leader to “transact” rewards for best behaviors and withhold punishment (accountability) on a case by case basis. In transactional leadership, the leader depends on enforcing his power in order to control the subordinates and continue to push for the desired results. This creates a contract relationship between the subordinate and the leader and can also hinder the leader’s ability to address concerns in innovative ways. Once the standards are in place the subordinate expects his failures to be handled a certain way, the leader is in a difficult position to do otherwise. Transformational leadership can and most often does include a reward system. However, the motivating factor for a transformational leader is to inspire his subordinates to do their best, to grow and develop themselves. These leaders do not instill a fear of specific punishment. They allow their presence to depict an attitude that failure is just not accepted, but they put more focus on obtaining a goal or completing a project successfully. From my experience in recruiting, those leaders who have worked alongside their recruiters and encouraged them on a daily basis to perform their best have often times achieved the greatest results. Again, this style of leadership (or any for matter of argument sake) does not exclude accountability all together. The leader simply motivates their subordinates through inspiring example and expectations. Although transformational leadership is most often executed at the strategic levels in the Army and civilian work force, its impacts are can be even greater at lower levels. One reason I believe we see it more at the strategic levels (Battalion command or higher) is because of leadership experience. We can all develop ourselves with a deeper knowledge of leadership to help us influence others without a certain experience. Experience in most cases will cause strengthen learning, but studying or taking classes on leadership have far wider implications for young leaders to grow. My experience as a leader in USAREC has taught me that most leaders fall into one of these two styles of leadership. With an understanding of how to influence people and a greater understanding of why we are in the positions we are in we can grow to achieve far better results. I am firm believer that a leader who has been trusted to lead others should also have the ability to learn from those under him. As I stated earlier, our leadership style and ability to influence others started the day we first put on the uniform. Anyone, regardless of their position or level can help influence others to act appropriately. Get to know each other, take the time to care for each other as human beings and set the right example.