Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Doctrinal Leadership: The United States Army’s Skill-based Approach to Leadership Development

by

The United States (U.S.) Army’s Field Manual [Headquarters Department of the Army (HQDA) FM 22-100] on the topic of leadership, often referred to by its officers and noncommissioned officers as the leadership bible, posits that leadership is not a natural trait. Rather, the doctrine considers leadership to be primarily an ability that can be studied, learned, and perfected through practice (HQDA, 1999, p. 44). Within the organization’s 270-page leadership manual the most often referenced and recommended approach to the art and science of leadership, 470 times in fact, takes a skills-based approach.

While the Skills Model, developed in conjunction with funding from the U.S. Army and Department of Defense, and utilizing a sample of almost two-thousand Army officers in its research, sought to develop a comprehensive theory on organizational leadership, I have based much of my organizational leadership understanding within the U.S. Army to the contents of field manual 22-100 over my years of military service. Both as a point of reference, and in repeated analysis during required professional military education courses. A field manual that acts as a supreme leadership guide and echoes the skill-based approach to leadership fervently, but its most relatable to Katz’s (1955) Three Skills Model. As well, I have honestly never heard reference to the generic skills model until encountered in my undergraduate studies now in my Army career. Therefore, while I do not discount the findings of the Skills Model, and between the U.S. Army’s published doctrine, obviously rooted in Katz’s work, I have chosen to focus on the U.S. Army’s adoption of the skills-based approach to leadership in general, and [perhaps mild adaptation of] Katz’s (1955) Three Skills Model specifically.

None of this is not to say that the U.S. Army does not consider other approaches – despite its initial sentiment on skills over traits it does acknowledge that certain traits are desirable of leaders, the organization merely takes the stance that leaders are forged, not inherently born – and posits most fervently that the forging occurs through skills more so than any other approach and theory. The Army’s field manual even references philosophical considerations such as Mills Utilitarianism (Everyman’s library, 1988, as cited in HQDA, 1999, p. 253) and Kantz’s Categorical imperative (Harper & Row, 1964, as cited in HQDA, 1999, p 253). Moreover, the Army acknowledges the importance of followership, but more so in pointing out the necessity of its nature, as it directly states that “everyone in the Army is a follower or subordinate” (p. 27). Just as it might be said that even a chief executive officer of a corporation or a sole owner of a business inevitably follows the beat of its boards, shareholders, or customers, even the top General in the Army, its Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is subordinate to the Secretary of the Army, Secretary of Defense, and the President of the United States above them. It is indeed important for even the highest-ranking member of the Army to remember that they are subordinate to someone else, and the Army is a promote-from-within organization so no one is hired into the top General Officer spot, so every member has had to follow plenty of leaders as they climbed their way up in the organization throughout their duration in uniform. While the U.S. Army acknowledges and considers several approaches to leadership on both a basic and holistic level, it primarily focuses on the skill-based approach to building and enhancing its leaders.

What makes the skills approach to leadership so desirable and central to the U.S. Army’s leadership approach, as well as any enterprise, is the skills approach “leader-centered perspective focused on the learned and developed competencies of leaders,” (Northouse, 2021, p. 128), with the basic premise that individuals must “possess certain abilities and behaviors that enable them to function well as leaders,” (PSUWC, 2022, L4). Within the skills approach is Katz’s (1955) Three Skills Model, wherein it is suggested that “effective leadership is dependent on three personal skills, including technical, human, and conceptual skills” (as cited in Northouse, 2021, p. 129).

Katz (1955) described technical skills as “knowledge of and proficiency pertaining to a specific occupation or activity, whether specialized, analytical, and or other job specific requirements,” (as cited p. 129). Northouse (2021) notes of the importance of technical skills to leaders, both to be possessed by junior and mid-level leadership, as well as those aspiring or being groomed for leadership roles, as well as to the importance leaders at all levels of having technically skilled followers and subordinate leaders alike (p. 130). The U.S. Army defines technical skills as a learned competency toward employing equipment (HQDA, 1999, p. 21), and has embraced the importance of technical skills in and to leaders so much so that it specifically mentions its merit in chapters pertaining to direct leadership skills, organizational leadership. strategic leadership, strategic leadership, and taking technical skills into combat.

Northouse (2021) defined human skills as possessing “knowledge about and ability to work with people,” whether they be, “superiors, peers, subordinates” (p. 130) or customers. Katz (1955) further defined these human skills as the ability of an individual to be aware of their own perspectives, and the perspectives of others,” (as cited in Northouse, 2021, p. 130) simultaneously. Human skills and the ability of those that possess them to work well with others is important to many employers and industries, no doubt, and is no less important to the functioning of leaders within the U.S. Army, who remarks of leading others, “Regardless of the level, keep in mind one important aspect of leadership: you lead people,” (HQDA, 1999, p. 63) and reiterating the weight it places on human skills within its leaders that to appreciate the dimension of leadership one “must understand direct concepts of leadership, and the people you lead,” (p. 63).

In military service, human skills might [and hopefully does] mean that a leader can “anticipate their soldier’s reactions to stress,” (p. 68) and how to motivate them around their reaction. While the latter may only be specifically expected of leaders within select occupations, the basic tenets of knowing and understanding subordinates and what it takes to motivate them is germane to all occupations. It is clear that the U.S. Army places a high value on human skills within its ranks, making a stronger case for the relevance of the skills approach and development of leaders; as Northouse (2021) states, “leaders with effective human skills adapt their own ideas to those of others,” and, “create an atmosphere of trust where followers feel comfortable and secure,” as well, they “are sensitive to the needs and motivations of others’ in their planning and decision making,” (p. 130). A sentiment echoed in the paragraphs of the U.S. Army’s field manual on leadership, as well as concepts that have been driven into me as both a young and senior enlisted leader throughout my military career.

The U.S. Army also places high importance on the conceptual skills of its force, and in particular its leaders, which it defines as the “ability to understand and apply doctrine and other ideas to your own job,” (HQDA, 1999, p. 21), and which Northouse (2021) defines as “the ability to work with ideas,” (p. 131). Northouse (2021) elaborates on conceptual skills as primarily necessary for mid-to-senior level and executive management with less necessity or no expectation of conceptual capacity at the worker or junior supervision or management levels in most industries (p. 132). Whereas the U.S. Army values conceptual skills in all its force, though the military has a general disposition toward hoping every member is an aspiring leader, statistics and anecdotal experience prove that these hopes are moot, or at least plausible, as the reality is not every individual possesses leadership skills, or wants to the responsibility inherent, nor are there enough positions available. As my grandfather used to tell me, the world will always need ditch diggers. Nonetheless, the U.S. Army values conceptual skills throughout its force, and in particular its leaders, conceptual skills parlay into being able to put abstract concepts and plans into action and convey such information up and down the chain of command with command over communication to fit the levels abilities to understand the information.

In less than 175 years since its inception the United States Army became the world’s preeminent and most dominant military land force, the largest branch of what is the largest overall organization by employment in the United States [the U.S. Department of Defense], due likely in no small part to the internal leadership that has rose through its ranks, and its adherence to a skills-based approach to leadership development.

The U.S. Army mentions a fourth skill relevant to its profession, tactical skills, which it describes as “the ability to solve tactical problems concerning employment of units in combat,” (HQDA, 1999, p. 59), the ultimate measure of leadership proficiency and value to those within professions of arms.  Toward which its field manual goes on to say that tactical skills are “enhanced when combined with technical skills, interpersonal skills [i.e., human], and conceptual skills,” (p.59).

While there are many approaches and theories regarding what makes a leader, the U.S. Army, like Katz (1955) and Northouse (2021), seems to agree that that effective leadership is dependent on the three basic personal skills comprised of Katz (1955) Three Skills Model: technical skills, human skills, and conceptual skills (as cited in Northouse, 2021, p. 129). It is my opinion, derived from anecdotal experience as a senior noncommissioned officer with 16 years of experience in its force, biased as it may be, that while leadership requires some framework from traits and other approaches leaders are primarily built. Moreover, between Katz, Northouse, and the United States Army, I feel confident in not only saying that, but that the skills approach is probably the most influential means to developing effective leaders.

References

Headquarters Department of the Army (1999). Field Manual 22-100. Army Leadership. Washington, D.C., 31 August 1999

Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice. 9th Edition. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

The Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2022). Psych 485-001, Lesson 4: Skills Approach. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/canvas/sp22/22211–17646/content/05_lesson/printlesson.html

 

The Skills Approach: The Success of Steve Kerr

by

Professional sports is one of the most common professions that people think of when identifying specific great leaders and what they think makes a great leader. One reason for this is because there are so many different sports and sports organizations within each of those sports, as well as, the huge amount of people that are involved in each sports organization. Another reason for this is that there are so many different levels within a sports organization where leaders can be found such as, among the actual players for a organization, among the coaching staff for a specific organization or even the front office of a sports organization.

Among all the different people and leaders in sports one of the best leaders in my opinion would have to be Steve Kerr, the head coach of the NBA organization the Golden State Warriors, for the specific reason that he has been successful within all three levels of a sports organization. When using the skills approach and more specifically the Three-Skill Approach to identify what exactly makes Steve Kerr such a great leader becomes very evident and one can understand why he has been such a successful leader at all three of the different levels of a sports organization.

The Three-Skill Approach can help explain why Steve Kerr has been such a great and successful leader throughout his career because of the way the model is set up and how it is broken up into three different levels. As a result, we can use Steve Kerr’s professional career of working at all three levels in sports organizations, which can be directly compared to this Model. When looking at the Three-Skill Approach the three levels it is broken down into are Supervisory Management, Middle Management and Top Management. Within each of these levels the skills needed for each level are broken up into the same three skills, technical skills, human skills, and conceptual skills. The difference between each is the amount of these different skills is needed. Technical skills are most important for someone to have at the Supervisory and Middle Management levels, conceptual skills are most important for the Top and Middle Management levels, and human Skills are important at all three levels of management according to the Three-Skill Approach (Northouse, 2016, p. 44-46).

When comparing his career to this approach we can compare the Supervisory Management level to the part of his career as a player in the NBA while playing for three different teams. After his playing career he moved straight to the Top Management level and this can be directly compared to the portion of his career where he worked in the Phoenix Suns front office as a consultant then the Organization’s General Manager. From there he moved back down a level to the Middle Management level which, can be compared to Steve Kerr’s career as the head coach for the Golden State Warriors.

As a player at the Supervisory Management level, Steve Kerr played in the NBA for 15 years and over that span he played for the Chicago Bulls, San Antonio Spurs, and Portland Trailblazers. Also, during his 15-year career he was apart of 5 teams that won NBA Championship. When he retired he retired with the highest three point shooting percentage in a career as well as the highest three point shooting percentage in a season for a player. All of these things show that he had and still has the technical skills required for basketball. When he was brought into the Phoenix Suns front office he worked as a consultant at initially and learned the different aspects of the higher front office jobs. After working as a consultant for a couple years he was hired by the Suns again to work as their general manger showing that he had acquired the conceptual skills and developed more of his human skills that he learned and picked up from being a player. After working as the GM for the Phoenix Suns he was hired as the Golden State Warriors Head Coach and has become one of the most successful NBA coaches in recent history. This title can be contributed to the fact that he worked both the supervisory management level and top management level before working in the middle management level, which places equal importance on all three skills unlike the other two levels that emphasize importance on just two of the three skills (USA today, 2017).

References

Northouse, P.G. (2016).  Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

The assassination of Steve Kerr’s father and the unlikely story of a champion. (2017, April 23). Retrieved June 01, 2017, from http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/06/the-assassination-of-steve-kerrs-father-and-the-unlikely-story-of-a-champion

Captain Sully’s Hero Skills

by

On February 8, 2009, Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger sat with Katie Couric for an episode of 60 minutes (CBS, 2009). He was there to discuss his miraculous landing of U.S. Airways Flight 1549 onto the Hudson River in New York City, New York. The airplane had only been in flight for 90 seconds when Captain Sully noticed that birds were hitting the windscreen and being sucked into the engines (CBS, 2009). Within three and a half minutes, Captain Sully knew he had to make an emergency landing(CBS, 209). With the lives of 150 passengers and the plane’s crew members in his hands, Captain Sully made some quick decisions that led to a safe landing on NYC’s Hudson River.

In the short video above, Captain Sully explains his thought process while managing this life treating emergency. The CBS interview reveals the skills Captain Sully employed while making his landing. He conducted a rapid troubleshoot of all mechanical alternatives and quickly discovered none were available; he had to manually take control of the aircraft. Captain Sully then had to find a place to land the plane, figure out how to conduct multiple simultaneous operations, and keep himself calm enough to execute the procedures within seconds. His skill in manually flying and landing the plane, quick problem solving, and technical accuracy demonstrate Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, et al.’s (2000, as cited in Northouse, 2012) “skills model [which] contends that leadership outcomes are the direct result of a leader’s competencies in problem-solving skills, social judgment skills, and knowledge.”

Captain Sully has the individual attributes of  general cognitive ability, or intelligence, as demonstrated in his rapid perceptual processing of the problem the birds were causing as they flew into the plane’s engine; reasoning skills that led him to troubleshoot for mechanical alternatives; and creative and divergent thinking capacities and memory skills that enabled him to quickly find a place to land and recall the protocol for such a landing (Northouse, 2012). General cognitive ability is a biological skill, but crystalized cognitive ability explains his acquired skills. His ability to problem solve so effectively is because he acquired intellectual ability over time (Northouse, 2012). His motivation to land the plane safely came from the third attribute in the model which requires a leader to “be willing to tackle complex organizational problems” (Northouse, 2012). Captain Sully appears to have the fourth attribute of personality that contributed to his successful landing. His management of the emergency demonstrates “openness, tolerance for ambiguity, and curiosity may affect a leader’s motivation to try to solve some organizational problem. Or, in conflict situations, personality traits such as confidence and adaptability may be beneficial to a leader’s performance” (Northouse, 2012).

The outcome of Captain Sully’s leadership skills was a safe landing. The skills model describes leadership outcomes such as effective problem solving and performance. It is clear that Captain Sully effectively resolved the problem and performed well. He managed to land the plane without injuring any of the passengers or crew members. In fact, in my research of this incident I was unable to find evidence that he caused any additional damage to the plane in his landing.

Captain Sully had 30 years of experience as a pilot. In his interview he said that he thinks all of his work and training up to the point of the flight were to prepare him for that moment (CBS, 2009). He didn’t doubt himself once; he was certain he could land the plane safely. When his body wanted to physiologically react to the situation, he focused on the task and kept calm. He said it was easy to keep calm (CBS, 2009). He was self confident and demonstrated a great deal of technical and conceptual knowledge during his interview. Northouse describes this high level of proficiency in our textbook, “Career experience helps leaders to improve their skills and knowledge over time. Leaders learn and develop higher levels of conceptual capacity if the kinds of problems they confront are progressively more complex and more long term as they ascend the organizational hierarchy (Mumford, Zaccaro, Connelly, et al., 2000 as cited in Northouse, 2012).

The external environmental influence of the failed engine event “provide[d] a unique challenge” (Northouse, 2012). This is a fact that is part of the skills model but out of the leader’s control (Northouse, 2012). Instead of allowing the challenge to negatively impact him, he recruited his skills and valiantly brought the plane to a safe landing against all odds. Captain Sully is a hero and a great leader. His handling of U.S. Airways Flight 1549 is a great example of how leaders use the skills approach to solve problems and lead effectively.

CBS (2009, February 8). I was sure I could do it Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZ5HnyEQg7M

Northouse, P. G. G. (2012). Leadership: Theory and practice, 6th Edtion (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

A Mirrored Image: Marine Corps Values and The 3 Skills Approach

by

            The United States Marine Corps is considered to be the toughest and meanest branch within the military’s structure. This is partly due to the long, prestigious reputation that they have continued to establish since their birth 10 November 1775. The Marine Corps is fueled and powered by its Marine Corps values which are Honor, Courage, and Commitment.  According to the Marine Corps honor is defined as a code of personal integrity, honor guides those who do the right thing when no one is looking. It is not only a duty, but also a distinction, as those who possess honor are held in honor; courage is the guardian of all other values. It is there when times are toughest, when difficult decisions have to be made. It takes the form of mental, physical and ethical strength, and is found in the backbone of every Marine; and commitment is the spirit of determination found in every Marine. It is what compels Marines to serve our nation and the Corps, and to continue on when others quit. It measures and proves one’s desire, dedication and faithfulness (United States Marine Corps, 2012).

            Behind the Marine Corps values, each Marine or leader is expected to exhibit all the leadership traits which are: Judgment, Justice, Dependability, Integrity, Decisiveness, Tact, Initiative, Enthusiasm, Bearing, Unselfishness, Courage, Knowledge, and Endurance. Without good leadership traits, leader’s abilities would be flawed. How is this related to the three skill approach? Well, first you would need to know the focus of the approach itself. The skills approach shifts thinking from the focus on personality characteristics (traits) to an emphasis on skills and abilities that can be learned and developed. Under this approach leadership is also defined as the ability to use one’s knowledge and competencies to accomplish a set of goals or objectives. (Northouse, 2013). According to the text, a summary of the 3 skills approach is that it includes technical, human, and conceptual skill (p. 44-46).

            Technical skill is knowledge about and proficiency in a specific type of work activity; human skill is knowledge abut and ability to work with people; and conceptual skill is the ability to work with ideas (Northouse, 2013).Looking at the definition listed, is this not the schematic of war and service? Marines are designated a specific Marine Occupational Specialty (MOS) based off their Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) scores. Within this test, each individual are asked several questions in 3 categories for line scores: Electronics Repair, Missile Repair, Electronics & Communications (EL), General Maintenance, Construction, Utility and Chemical Maintenance (MM), and General Technical, Special and Officer Programs (GT). Based off the current knowledge you possess, your line scores determine the job that you will have and your technical capabilities within the military.

            Knowledge, technical, and conceptual skill aren’t just visible in the initial process but will be visible through your career despite your MOS. Marines are taught to lead with confidence, knowledge, and humility. This requires that one know about the past and present accomplishments of the branch. If one does not know what past failures were, how can they be bettered in the future? Obtaining and having the knowledge to lead is not enough, one must know how to develop ideas of war and technically, tactfully, and proficiently implore them.  

Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

United States Marine Corps. (2012). Retrieved from USMC website: http://www.marines.com/history-heritage/principles-values

Skip to toolbar