meganjantos1309

By Richard L. Farnell II

Honest feedback is the breakfast of champions: it allows those who seek and incorporate it to identify their blind spots, increase self-awareness, and become a better version of themselves. Unfortunately, some leaders skip this important “meal” to stay comfortable and avoid criticism that may compromise their psychological well-being. 

Failing to receive honest feedback can stunt the growth of leaders and organizations.  Honest feedback enables transparency, in contrast to feedback that is only open to compliments or praises.  Consider a person who never gets physical checkups or ignores symptoms of ailments. This type of behavior could potentially create long-term irreversible effects.  Similarly, leaders who ignore honest feedback from their employees can hinder performance levels and put organizations at risk, leaving employees unable to trust them.   

There is a myriad of reasons some leaders struggle to receive feedback, but a few are especially worth mentioning. First, seeking and enabling feedback requires a willingness to be vulnerable that some leaders lack. Leaders look for trusted employees when eliciting feedback. This process works well if the leaders have a variety of minds to draw from and the feedback loop stays transparent. However, this is often not the case, so it is important for leaders to seek feedback from multiple sources—particularly those they feel can give them unexpected, perhaps even unwanted perspectives.                                                                                                                                      

By Joshua Trimble

Leadership traits are taught and leaders evolve in some of the most unsuspected places. Consider that U.S. Army training centers are built and designed to put units through rigorous and realistic training to evaluate their preparedness for fighting our nation’s wars. Most people would understandably assume training centers are more about preparing units than leaders. The Observer, Coach, Trainers (OCTs) are an integral part of these training centers and often evolve as some of the best leaders – learning and teaching leadership traits to those they observe.

Serving as an OCT at a training center is not without its own unique challenges. The OCT is often trapped between wanting to unnecessarily help the rotational training unit avoid disaster and watching them fail. The training units predictably expect the OCTs to be experts, and OCTs want to help lead the unit to learn through their own experiences of mistakes and successes. For the OCT, knowing when to say something to the unit or a Soldier, as well as what to say, is an art developed from self-observed and practiced experiences that translate to effective leadership traits. It is a practice of understanding the appropriate situations to lead in a more passive role to develop individuals, teams, and units and knowing when to take an active leadership role when it is most necessary to coach and train. OCTs are leaders on the battlefield, and they understand the following traits that can apply in any type of organization.

By Scotty Autin

In 2015, a new generation of lieutenants arrived at Army units. They arrived unannounced with no notice to their receiving commands. These officers are technology-based, possess an innate ability to find information, and are closely aware of the geopolitical environment. While this surge of new thoughts and ideas could be invigorating to the organization, it is more likely that these generational differences will create personality conflicts between senior leaders and these new officers. Some senior officers may not recognize their inherent strengths and only highlight their reliance on social networking and lack of concrete experience.

While academic research continues to explore the impact of differences between the societal generations, it is possible to understand how generational divides have influenced the Army’s officer corps. Due to the strict hierarchical structure of the Army and “time-in-grade” requirements for promotions, the officer corps naturally segregates along generational lines. These prerequisites produce officer cohorts that often share similar societal experiences and may develop similar personality traits.

Currently, there are four generations operating in the Army, individually banded to a specific set of ranks. Each of these generations has different and specific perspectives shaped by their generational experiences. For example, some current general officers tend to strongly value organizational loyalty, colonels and lieutenant colonels prefer to empower junior officers and NCOs, majors and captains are comfortable with change, and the new lieutenants have vast digital networks that help them gain context within the strategic environment.

Acknowledging that there are fundamental personality differences within the entire chain of command is important to create an atmosphere that enables trust and growth. In order to optimize effectiveness, officers must accept that generational differences exist in the Army, understand how those differences currently influence officer interactions and recognize how to leverage the strengths of each generation of officers.

(U.S. Army photo by Spc. Devron Bost)

By Richard Farnell

We all understand the importance of running an organization both effectively and efficiently.  However, it is important to realize organizational goals have the potential to be jeopardized when leaders lose sight of how they are winning.

To win the right way, leaders must routinely instill the right ethics, values, and practices for long-term success. Moreover, they must foster a productive and fruitful culture that nurtures individual contributions and encourages one to perform at their highest potential. For example, in a football game, it is possible to achieve a touchdown and players not perform at their highest potential. This can be misleading for those that do not understand the long-term effects of poor cohesion, integrity and shared understanding of the overall mission. In this example, the touchdown may have been executed, but it does not mean the team is winning the right way. The next time the team members need each other for a particular play, they might fail due to a lack of trust and dysfunction. This is not surprising, but winning the right way starts with people, as they are the nucleus of the success of the organization. 

However, well-intentioned people can be either stifled or nurtured by culture, making it essential to have people and culture aligned for success. Think about it. If you have the right people but the culture is toxic, those people will become de-energized, frustrated, and ultimately underutilized.