What does one think of when the subject of military leadership comes up? For me, when I think of military leadership I get images of Full Metal Jacket’s Gunnery Sergeant Hartman (played by R. Lee Ermey) yelling insults at a group of marine recruits. This leadership approach is confrontational, abusive and in the end, doesn’t end too well for Gny. Sgt. Hartman (Kubrick, 1987). For someone who has not been in the military, this type of portrayal has been the typical stereotype of a military leader. However, in doing research, I have learned that this is not necessarily the case; modern military leadership reflects both the style theory of leadership and the situational theory of leadership, depending on where the leader falls in the military hierarchy.
Individuals who study leadership theory might immediately assume that military leadership falls directly under the situational theory of leadership. There is after all a distinct directive behavior common to all branches of the military. This low supportive behavior focuses on achieving goals and doesn’t spend much time considering individual’s needs (Northouse, 2013). For those of higher rank that would be true; higher levels of leadership (rank) have broader missions and cannot always consider the individuals in each squad or platoon as mission tasking is less specific (Waddell III, 1994). Higher ranking individuals delegate mission specifics down to lower ranking individuals which is a low support, low directive style of leadership (Northouse, 2013).
At the unit level it is the lower ranking non-commissioned and commissioned officers who must use a multifaceted approach when it comes to leadership, from boot camp to active war or peace time. Social support is more important for successful and effective leadership at lower ranks than at higher rank. They must foster training and coaching as well as looking for additional subordinate leaders (Yeakley, 2002); this style approach to leadership begins early in boot camp. Drill sergeants not only enforce discipline but also engage in mentoring, coaching and building camaraderie and respect between recruits (Lapidos, 2009). This initiating of tasks, such as obeying orders and defining roles which are combined with the consideration aspect are the defining roles in the style theory of leadership.
Military leadership is full of complexities, especially during a more chaotic war time environment, but when examined using both the style and situational approaches to leadership, it can be better understood. As you can see, higher ranking individuals rely more on the situational approach to leadership while their subordinates rely increasingly on the style approach to leadership.
References
Kubrick, S. (Producer), Hasford, G., Kubrick, S., Herr, M. (Writers), & Kubrick, S. (Director). (1987). Ful Metal Jacket [Motion Picture]. United States: Warner Brothers.
Lapidos, J. (2009, September 22). How Mean Are Drill Sergeants? Retrieved from Slate: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2009/09/how_mean_are_drill_sergeants.html
Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Waddell III, D. E. (1994). A Situational Leadership Model for Military Leaders. Airpower, 3(3).
Yeakley, G. W. (2002). Army Leadership. Washington D.C.: US Government Printing Office .
I understand where you are coming from given that you have never served in the military, but I can say that not everything you see is true. In the case of the movie Full Metal Jacket a lot of the actions by GySgt Hartman (Gunny) are pretty accurate in the way that recruits are treated in boot camp. Having served in the Marin Corps for almost 8 years now I am well aware of how boot camp operates and just why it is so intense. The reason that the Drill Instructors are so “angry” or “intense” is so that when the time come, and it will, the Marines will be able to handle and situation they face.
The best way to think of boot camp Drill Instructors is that you as a new recruit have had the past 17+ years of your life thinking about you and how to make things better or easier for you to get through it. The job of the Drill Instructor is to break you of that thinking and tear down everything that you thought you knew about being a leader or team player. After you have been broken of that, through lots of yelling and hard work, you are lifted up through unit cohesion and leadership training.
In the Marine Corps we have a saying “Every Marine is a rifleman”, I always taught my junior Marines that while that is true “Every Marine is a Leader”. The best way to teach leadership is to be the leader that the look up to most through your own actions.
I think that this is a very adequate assessment of military leadership. I think relating the types of leadership that actually occur with what the media portrays is a valuable comparison in order to promote what it is you are trying to discuss. Where I think we disagree is in how this is actually applied. Being in the military, I find that relationship behaviors tend to be more common among higher level leadership where as task behaviors fall on lower ranked leaders. As a leader in the military myself, I find it interesting that seems to be in contrast to what you have written. On another note, I would like to look more in-depth at how situational approaches could explain the dynamic of leadership at lower levels.