How Does Alexander The Great's Ability To Maintain Effective Military
Alexander the Great’s ability to maintain effective organizational systems and structure and seamlessly communicate and execute strategies were the catalysts of his defeat of Darius’ larger army (Nassar, n.d.). To begin with, Alexander rigorously trained and prepared his troops to fight prior to an actual battle, which enabled him to maintain a small, agile, highly disciplined, and efficient army (History.com, 2009). Furthermore, Alexander’s appointment of commanders to each unit enhanced real time communication and facilitated coordinated disbanding of phalanxes to allow Darius’ cavalry units to pass through the phalanx, where they were attacked by Alexander’s infantry units (Wasson, 2014). Therefore, attacking Darius’s left flank, in conjunction
with Alexander’s cavalry, infantry, and specialized weapons unit flawlessly working in concert to disperse and entrap Darius’ army, mitigated the Persian Army’s strengths and led to a victory for Macedonian Army (Nassar, n.d.).
As a result, modern day organizations and leaders should take note of Alexander’s proclivity for establishing adaptable organizational systems and structure and translating strategy into tangible actions that produce intended and predictable organizational outcomes (Kets de Vries, 2014). Under Alexander’s leadership, the Macedonian Army remained aligned with his vision and maintained its operational discipline, while adapting its strategy and tactics to account for the opponent’s tactics and/or evolving environmental factors (History.com, 2009). Moreover, the clarity, consistency, and compelling manner in which he communicated with his organization, enabled Alexander to maintain a small, agile, and highly efficient army that achieved goals and objectives with minimal effergy (Kets de Vries, 2014).
with Alexander’s cavalry, infantry, and specialized weapons unit flawlessly working in concert to disperse and entrap Darius’ army, mitigated the Persian Army’s strengths and led to a victory for Macedonian Army (Nassar, n.d.).
As a result, modern day organizations and leaders should take note of Alexander’s proclivity for establishing adaptable organizational systems and structure and translating strategy into tangible actions that produce intended and predictable organizational outcomes (Kets de Vries, 2014). Under Alexander’s leadership, the Macedonian Army remained aligned with his vision and maintained its operational discipline, while adapting its strategy and tactics to account for the opponent’s tactics and/or evolving environmental factors (History.com, 2009). Moreover, the clarity, consistency, and compelling manner in which he communicated with his organization, enabled Alexander to maintain a small, agile, and highly efficient army that achieved goals and objectives with minimal effergy (Kets de Vries, 2014).