Why A Soldier Should Not Be In A Leadership Position

Army leadership is defined as “the process of influencing people by providing purpose, direction, and motivation while operating to accomplish the mission and improve the organization” (FM 6-22). According to FM 6-22 there is a definitive definition to what a leader should be in the Army. There is an ongoing concern through the military about whether a Soldier in a leadership position should have a profile or not. Under what regulation does it state that if you are on a profile you cannot be in a leadership position? Should there be restrictions on leadership positions with a profile? A profile should not determine whether or not a Soldier can become a leader, nor should it affect their leadership abilities, but others may disagree. The
Soldiers see everything you do, and expect nothing but the best from you. Your goal as a leader is to set the standard, and while on a profile you may not be able to uphold that standard. Take the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) see appendix, for example. The Army standard is to get sixty percent in all three events of the APFT: push-ups, sit-ups, and 2-mile run. If you have a profile for your shoulder and are unable to compete in the push up event, the soldiers may take this as a weakness. This may hinder a Soldier’s motivation to compete in the APFT events, or strive for excellence because their leader is unable to do the
Having nearly ten percent of the military force on non-deployable status really puts a strain on our military. This number is not just from profiles, and it’s not all leadership, but the Army is really starting to pay attention to those that are in leadership positions with a non-deployable status. It should never come down to replacing leadership because they are on a profile and cannot deploy, which is why the Army’s answer is to push these non-deployable leaders out of the military and promote those who are