The Leadership Formula

This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected.  Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies.  Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue.  The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.

By Lieutenant Sherman Baldwin, U.S. Navy

Desert Storm strike leaders who brought knowledge and self-assurance to the briefing room boosted the confidence of their followers in ultimate mission success. Knowing your business is a key ingredient of successful leadership.   ^{S a,ent} ot

each strike leader. Some of our strike leaders displayed a thorough knowledge of the mission’s tactics and discussed their plan with complete confidence;

was different. Some days I left the brief­ing room with confidence that our strike would be successful; other days I left carrying the possibility that I might not be coming back to the carrier that night. My feelings of confidence or concern were rooted in the leadership abilities of

Some believe leadership is an innate trait; others argue it can be learned. In fact, both may be true: A leader must have some inherent leadership qualities, yet raw charisma alone will not ensure success.

Bom or bred, the essence of leader­ship is the ability to motivate peo­ple. President Harry S Truman said leadership is “that quality which can make other men do what they do not want to do and like it.”' A leader has his people smiling when they wash an aircraft or wax a deck and screaming a battle cry when they charge an enemy position in combat. How can a naval officer de­velop leadership? The formula is simple; “know your business, know yourself, and know your men.”² Developing an area of expertise is the first step toward becoming an effective leader.³ Strong pro­fessional knowledge—whether it be flying a bombing run, navigating a submarine, or coordinating the bat­tle tactics of a surface vessel—will earn the respect and admiration of both subordinates and seniors. Skilled or knowledgeable individ­uals are always among the first considered for leadership positions.

If subordinates have faith in their officer’s knowledge and abilities, they will follow that officer with great confidence. In combat, troops will be quick to follow the officers they believe can lead them into battle and bring them back safely at the end of the day.

Oftentimes, those officers who are the most tactically proficient are also extremely charismatic leaders, but this is not always true.

It is the combination of proven expertise and strong personality that en­ables a leader to convince his followers of their ability to succeed. During Op­eration Desert Storm, every strike I flew others were less knowledgeable and ex­pressed doubts and uncertainties. Which leader would you want to follow into combat? The choice is clear. Subordi­nates will overlook many shortcomings and follow their leader dutifully if he is able to perform safely and profession­ally during dangerous missions.

The key to performance under pressure is extensive study and in­tensive training. For five months prior to the first night strike against Iraq on 16 January 1991, every U.S- military unit was training and prac­ticing the skills it would need if called to action. On board the USS Midway (CV-41), Carrier Air Wing Five was flying mirror-image prac­tice strikes around the clock. These practice strikes against simulated targets had identical headings and distances to the strikes we would later fly against Iraq. We launched alert jets, practiced in-air refueling, and did dozens of general-quarters drills, preparing everyone on board the carrier for the possibility of enemy attack. By the time the exe­cute order arrived from Washing' ton, we knew exactly what to do and how to do it—and we did it- The greatest test of any officer’s I leadership is combat. It is impossi' j ble to tell how individuals will read in battle until they are in the thick of it, but the quality and intensity of training in the U.S. military today will enable our forces to transition smoothly from training to battle^" as was evident in Operation Desed Storm. The closer training simulate⁵ actual combat, the better prepared our personnel will be. On the fiel® of battle, officers must sho'*' courage or risk losing the respee¹ of their men.⁴

Knowing your business through study and training is a straightforward task j and is expected of any professional'

Proceedings / July

Knowing yourself, in contrast, is a much more difficult and complex part of the leadership formula. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., once said, “If a man hasn’t dis­covered something that he will die for, he isn’t fit to live.”⁵ Such a man is also not fit to lead. If a leader does not have the conviction of his own values, he will never be able to pass those ideals on to his followers. To develop an effective leadership style, which emphasizes his strengths and downplays his weaknesses, a leader must know himself.

Self-knowledge is more evident in some individuals than in others. For ex­ample, Dean Acheson once described General George C. Marshall by saying, “Everyone felt his presence. It was a striking and communicated force. His fig­ure conveyed intensity, which his voice, low, staccato, and incisive, reinforced. It compelled respect. It spread a sense of authority, and calm.”⁶ General Marshall Was the Army’s Chief of Staff through­out World War II and was the force be­hind the reconstruction of Europe under The Marshall Plan. Marshall had been tested many times, under stressful and trying conditions, and had triumphed. Be­muse he believed in himself, he pos­sessed an inner strength others could feel. Would-be leaders must find their own strengths and weaknesses so that in times °f crisis they, too, will react with “au­thority and calm.”⁷

Effective leadership requires congru­^ence between ideals and actions—estab­lishing a standard, then setting a credible example. For example, an officer who be­rates his sailors for having sloppy uni­forms when his own uniform is not squared away has no congruence between his ideals and his actions and no chance °f earning the respect of his sailors. Julius G-rving, basketball superstar, once said “I demand more from myself than anybody else could ever expect.”⁸ A leader must ue a model of those ideals and principles he would instill in his followers. If an of­fer’s actions support his ideals, his sub­ordinates will be more likely to follow his lead.

Another example of congruence is Hiding a leadership style that fits your Personality. For example, a good sense of humor is a desired trait in any leader, ut some people simply are not humor- °^Us- “Know yourself’ and your own ^^trengths; do not attempt to be a come- ^lan if it is not your style. You will ap- P^eur awkward and unnatural and will be uable to lead effectively. The officer k ⁰ knows himself is a powerful leader ^ecause he enhances his strengths and

^1Ves to overcome his weaknesses.

An officer may be an expert in his field and have developed a strong sense of self, but, if he does not know his men, he will not be able to motivate them—an essential ingredient in leadership. It is crucial to know what is happening in the lives of the people in your unit—to offer a kind word to the recruit who has an ail­ing family member, or congratulations to the petty officer whose child is graduat­ing from high school. A leader is aware of the give-and-take that is involved in any leader-follower relationship and takes cues from his followers as to the best way to motivate them, both as individuals and as a group.¹'

Because an officer is an appointed, rather than an elected leader, establish­ing a reciprocal relationship with his fol­lowers is both more important and more difficult. In the U.S. civilian sector, a leader is usually elected by people who share or support his ideas. In contrast, a military officer is thrown into a situation with people who may or may not share his ideals and told to lead. He must work to understand and develop a relationship with his followers.

This reciprocal relationship depends on mutual trust. Henry Louis Stimson said, “To make a man trustworthy, you need to trust him.”¹⁰ Delegating work to one’s subordinates is a symbol of mutual trust. Have your chief write all the eval­uations; have your shop supervisors del­egate responsibility and improve the train­ing of younger sailors. It is crucial for an officer to stimulate his people by giving them tasks that challenge their abilities and their intellect. People who are stim­ulated by their work will be happier, bringing high morale to the unit. Because many aspects of military life require great personal sacrifice, there must be a pre­mium on job satisfaction and attention to human motivations if morale is to remain high.

Small, seemingly insignificant things can motivate young sailors or airmen. In my squadron, I started presenting lightning bolt stickers as a reward for an outstanding effort on the flight deck. The deserving individual places the sticker on his flight deck cranial, the same way that college football players proudly display stickers on their hel­mets for great plays on the field. At first they all thought the small stickers were strange, but soon everyone was striving to earn a lightning bolt. There are hun­dreds of creative ways to motivate peo­ple, and it is a leader’s responsibility to discover them.

Many officers are effective managers, in that they get their people to produce the bottom-line results: the squadron op­erations officer who is always ahead of the number of required flights per month, the ship’s captain who logs more days at sea than his peers, or the department head who always meets his budget. These re­sults are unquestionably desirable, but an officer with a bottom-line attitude may lose sight of the bigger picture—the ideals that maintain unity during more stressful times." The armed services rely on rank and a chain of command to bring order to a chaotic operational situation. In a crisis, there must be a leader mak­ing decisions, and that leader is deter­mined by seniority. The chain of com­mand makes military leadership seem mechanical. It is part of the officer’s job to make military leadership compassion­ate and human.

The night of our first strike against Iraq, Admiral Dan P. March gave a speech on the Midway. The admiral had flown many strikes during Vietnam and knew from personal experience what we were feeling: the nervous excitement, the adrenalin, and the fear. He addressed all of these concerns in a compassionate speech that touched everyone’s thoughts. Admiral March inspired us with his con­fidence in our abilities and our training. He assured us we could be confident in both. The stress of a crisis situation needs to be met with organization that is me­chanically sound and leadership that is human. Understanding the need for com­passionate leadership is an important part of knowing your men.

Management’s bottom-line attitude has proven destructive in U.S. industry—fa­mous for the tension that exists between labor and management. The Navy must be careful not to fall into the trap of en­couraging its officers to be managers. A naval officer must never lose sight of the fact that someday he may need to lead his people into battle; it is crucial for him to instill a sense of pride and commit­ment that will make all hands eager to fulfill their duty. Instilling such ideals is the job of a leader, not a manager.

Having experienced combat, I know the importance of a leader instilling ideals in his men. During times of stress and fear people need a higher principle or ideal to help them rise above seemingly insurmountable obstacles. Throughout Desert Storm, we had confidence in our training, our equipment, our leaders, our­selves, and, most importantly, in our cause. The leadership on the Midway in­stilled in everyone—from the junior air­man recruits to the squadron comman­ders—the belief that we were fighting for a noble and just cause. With such belief, we could only be victorious. If a leader can instill a sense of duty, a love of coun­try, and a feeling of honor in his people,

85

^“seeding* / July 1992

Reprints Available

Low-cost, high-quality reprints of material published in Proceedings and Naval History are available. For more information, please write:

Production Manager Proceedings/Naval History U.S. Naval Institute 118 Maryland Avenue Annapolis, MD 21402-5035

or call

(410) 268-6110

he will have a unit that is ready for com­bat. All the training in the world will never make up for a shortage of belief in noble ideals.

Not all officers will find the blend of

expertise, sense of self, and knowledge of their people that creates effective lead­ership. On the day I graduated from Avi­ation Officer Candidate School, Master Gunnery Sergeant D.W. Bearup, U.S. Marine Corps, challenged me to find that blend by saying:

“You can divide naval officers into two classes: Pretenders and Con­tenders. The Pretenders are the ones who never sacrifice themselves. They will never know the meaning of ‘total dedication,’ therefore, they will never taste the glory. The Contenders are the ones who demand of themselves the absolute maximum limit and are will­ing to pay that price. They will be able to catch the glory.

“Life is that way. There are Pre­tenders and there are Contenders. The question is . . . which one are you?”¹²

True leadership is within the reach of a contender because he believes in total dedication and complete personal sacri­fice. Every day, the contender refines his expertise, challenges his personal ideals, and learns new ways to motivate his peo­ple. The contender is a true leader, for he is able to grasp the lofty ideals of lead­ership and integrate them in the reality of day-to-day life.

'Karel Montor, et al., Naval Leadership: Voices of Experience, (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1987), p.l.

^:Malcolm E. Wolfe, Naval Leadership, 2nd Ed. (An­napolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1959), p. 12. ’Armed Forces Information Service, The Armed Forces Officer, (U.S. Government Printing Office, Rev. 1975), p. 59.

⁴Ibid., p. 57.

'Anthony Robbins, Unlimited Power, (New York: Ballantine Books, 1986), p. 357.

''Walter Isaacson and Evan Thomas, The Wise Men, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1986), p. 390. ⁷Montor, p. 78.

"Robbins, p. 413.

"James G. Hunt and John D. Blair, Leadership on the Future Battlefield, (Washington, London, New York, Oxford, Toronto, Sydney, Frankfurt: Pergamon- Brassey International Defense Publishers, 1985), p. 82.

‘“Isaacson, p. 181.

"Montor, p. 13.

^l2Bearup, D.W., 15 January 1988.

Lieutenant Baldwin, a naval aviator and 1986 grad­uate of Yale University, served throughout Desert Shield and Desert Storm on board the USS Midway (CV-41), flying 33 combat missions. Assigned to VAQ-136, he currently is deployed in the Indian Ocean/Persian Gulf/Red Sea operating areas.