Military Review English Edition July-August 2016 | Page 120

BROADENING PRIMARY FOCUS: • Takes ownership of own professional development • Places actions within the context of higher level situation • Understands and embraces the Army as a Profession • Thinks and plans for the long term • Develops others and sees subordinates as their “legacy” • Understands and accounts for the effect of his/her actions and words on others TACTICAL SUPPORTING EFFORT: PRIMARY FOCUS: SUPPORTING EFFORT: TECHNICAL THE TROOP “FIGHT” THE SQUADRON “FIGHT” LEADER OUTCOMES: • Well grounded in doctrinal principles/concepts • Effectively employs equipment, weapon systems, and units in combat • Quickly adapts to changing situations (terrain, weather, enemy, • Uses creativity and innovation to assets, constraints, etc.) maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of training • Effective communicator (written, verbal, visual) • Understands capabilities and limitations of weapons, vehicles, units, and other assets • Understands both the “what” and the “why” behind regulations/policies • Understands and effectively utilizes• Effectively maintains self and technical systems (maintenance, equipment under all conditions personnel, supply, etc.) (Graphic courtesy of Lt. Col. Chad R. Foster, U.S. Army) Figure 1. Squadron Leader Development Guidance is the case, the most important question remains: How can these leaders accomplish this responsibility? The Decisive Operation: Leader Development Leaders at all levels face the reality of force and budget reductions, increasing operational requirements, and an ever-changing global situation. Although challenging, this environment provides the ideal conditions to develop the leaders of tomorrow.7 —Gen. Robert B. Abrams The guidance from the highest levels of the Army is clear: commanders must effectively manage personnel turnover, training proficiency, and equipment maintenance in order to remain ready for contingencies. Because there is no way to predict exactly what our forces will be required to do, sustaining the ability to conduct a wide range of military operations at any 118 time is critical.8 No single solution exists to uniformly guide our battalion and company commanders in this effort, but that fact does not remove the responsibility from their shoulders. The top-down driven readiness cycles of the last decade hampered the professional development of our junior- and mid-level leaders. Under ARFORGEN, young officers and NCOs found themselves as merely the executors of directed training plans. Now these same leaders have ascended to more senior positions of responsibility but are now without the luxury of being told exactly how to prepare their units for deployment. The challenges of balancing short-term mission requirements with long-term training readiness remain though the formative experiences of the last decade did not fully prepare our company- and battalion-level leaders to do so. Luckily, the absence of a standardized process for balancing RAF missions with sustainable readiness demands that the Army develop leaders who July-August 2016  MILITARY REVIEW