Army Leadership Strengths And Weaknesses

Strengths-Based Army Leadership

The U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, known as ARI, interviewed 41 active duty Army leaders. Most of the Army leaders interviewed acknowledged using strengths-based techniques to some extent, often without obvious knowledge of strengths-based leadership (Key-Roberts, 2014). Nevertheless, several soldiers have found the techniques as being very effective. Army superiors can use strength based leadership to develop juniors by identifying strengths, providing personalized feedback, capitalizing on subordinate strong attributes, building and maintaining a positive atmosphere, caring for subordinates, and empowering the young leaders (Key-Roberts, 2014).

In order to become better leaders, individuals need to identify their strengths and weaknesses. Though individuals can identify strengths and weaknesses through formal processes, they can also use informal means such as self-reflection. The fact that individuals have a tendency to gravitate toward the things they do well, things such as ease of learning, tendency to participate in certain activities, and satisfaction gained from performing specific tasks can provide clear pointers to underlying talents (Key-Roberts, 2014).

The leadership skills of young leaders can be improved by personal feedback.

Response on a soldier’s performance should not be kept for yearly appraisals and mandatory counseling. Instead, comments should be given as often as possible by the senior who oversees the developing leader most. Counseling, mentoring, coaching, teaching, and assessment can be used as tools to provide advice (Key-Roberts, 2014).

Maximizing subordinates strengths and reducing their weaknesses enable leaders to develop emerging leaders and create successful units (Key-Roberts,

2014).
Leaders can create and sustain a positive environment through their willingness to listen to subordinates, emotional control, tolerance of risks and errors, and willingness to accept feedback from all (Key-Roberts, 2014).
By caring for subordinates, leaders create conditions for individual as well as unit success. Building relationship and understanding enables leaders to look after the needs of subordinates, and such yields great rewards. When juniors believe that their superior has an interest in their development, this drives them to perform well. Further, leaders are able to better able to manage soldiers when they maintain a professional relationship with them (Key-Roberts, 2014).
Strength-based leadership develops subordinates and empowers them to be self-sufficient, flexible, and imaginative leaders. A superior can develop confidence, encourage self-sufficiency, and impart a sense of obligation in emerging leaders by delegating tasks to the emerging leader. A good way to test subordinates capabilities and empower them is to assign challenging but manageable tasks to the subordinates (Key-Roberts, 2014).
Although I endorse harnessing the strengths of young leaders, I also believe that an equal amount of interest must be shown in correcting the deficiencies of junior leaders. There is no doubt that capitalizing on immediate strengths yields instant benefits. However, in order for the younger leaders to be most effective, I believe that their weaknesses need to be corrected in a timely manner. As much as I support strength-based Army leadership, I do believe that developing the subordinates’ overall leadership capability will be better. If one is an overall leader, one will not only be effective in certain situations, but one will be effective in all situations. I believe that if we view an initial strength as an area that requires less focus, such will enable us to utilize the time gained from the already developed area to eliminate weaknesses that require greater attention. When we correct a leader’s weakness, we will then have a more productive soldier with strength in all areas.