Military Review English Edition September-October 2013

Character Development of U.S. Army Leaders Leadership is a potent combination of strategy and character. But if you must be without one, be without the strategy.1 — General H. Norman Schwarzkopf Jr. The Laissez-Faire Approach Col. Brian M. Michelson, U.S. Army T Col. Brian M. Michelson is the garrison commander for White Sands Missile Range, White Sands, N.M. He holds a B.S. from the United States Military Academy, an MBA from Webster University, and an MSS from the U.S. Army War College. His previous assignments include tours of duty in South Korea, Laos, Afghanistan, and Iraq. PHOTO: U.S. Army Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf, commander of U.S. Central Command, emerges from a camouflaged trench in the desert while visiting with troops from other countries during Operation Desert Shield, 1 April 1992. (DOD) HE DESIGN, GENERATION, support, and ethical application of landpower often presents military leaders with moral dilemmas that are unique to the profession of arms. In this morally and ethically volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous environment, the quality of a leader’s character, who they are morally and ethically as a person, has a direct impact on their ability to make the correct discretionary judgments required by the profession. As the Army moves toward full implementation of the doctrines of both mission command and The Army Profession, the Army will require even more from its leaders at all levels, especially its junior ones.2 These requirements fall in two primary areas: first, the Army will grant its leaders additional autonomy in order to “enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent,” and second, the Army will expect leaders to display an even higher level of character in the use of this autonomy.3 Given the importance that the Army places on the character of its leaders, an important question quickly emerges: Will the Army’s current approach to developing the personal character of its leaders meet this challenge of its increased expectations? To examine this question, we must consider how the Army defines character, how it develops it, and whether or not its current methods are meeting the challenges facing the Army both today and in the future. We will begin by looking at how the Army approaches character in its current leadership doctrine. The Army’s Doctrinal View of Character: An Institutional Overview The Army currently defines leadership as “the process of influencing people by providing purpose, direction, and motivation to accomplish the mission and improve the organization.”4 An Army Leader is simply “anyone who by virtue of assumed role or assigned responsibility inspires and influences people to accomplish organizational goals.”5 The Army uses September-October 2013 ? MILITARY REVIEW 30

Military Review English Edition September-October 2013 | Page 32