At the end of his “March to the Sea”, MG William T. Sherman led Union forces from Georgia to the north through the Carolinas to unite with LTG Ulysses S. Grant in Virginia. By doing so, he believed he would be able to cut Confederate forces General Robert E. Lee’s supply lines. In February 1865, MG Sherman captured Columbia, the state capital of South Carolina. The commander of Confederate forces was LTG Wade Hampton who led the force under the command of General P.G.T Beauregard. MG Sherman succeeded in defeating Confederate on the basis of the principles of mission command. The mission command philosophy helps commanders counter the uncertainty of operations by reducing the amount of certainty needed to act. Commanders can build teams and achieve their final goals through adapting the six principles of mission command to warfighting situation. I analyzed and compared the performance of General Sherman and General Hampton in four of six mission command principles. Build cohesive teams through mutual trust. Mutual trust among commanders, subordinates, and partners is the first key to win the battle. Developing …show more content…
mutual trust within a team takes time, but results in unity of effort. Unity of effort makes cooperation and coordination toward common objectives. LTG Hampton was hand-selected by General Lee to lead the Cavalry Corps of the Confederates, and had been serving in that position for over a year prior to the burning of Columbia. The appointment was justified by his successful leadership in every cavalry command he held. LTG Hampton would prove flawless in victory until he surrendered at the end of the Civil War. LTG Hampton successfully exercised this principle of mission command by building mutual trust between himself and General Lee. General Sherman also built mutual trust between himself and LTG Grant. For example, after Sherman captured Savannah, LTG Grant ordered him to reinforce the Army of the Potomac and the Army of the James in Virginia, where Grant was struggling against Confederate General Lee. However, Sherman persuaded Grant to allow him to march north through the Carolinas instead. There was firm trust between Sherman and Grant, Grant admitted Sherman’s opinion that ultimately brought early end of the war. Create shared understanding. Shared understanding makes commanders, staffs, and action partners share commanders’ intent and consider common goals as the most important value. Through collaboration and dialogue, participants share information and perspectives, question assumptions, and exchange ideas to help create and maintain shared understanding, resolve potential misunderstanding, and assess the progress of operations. When Sherman marched to Columbia, he sent his left wing westward towards Augusta and his right wing eastward towards Charleston to confuse the Confederates. MG Sherman ordered his subordinate commanders to disturb the flanks of Confederate forces of Columbia for the common goal. It forced LTG Hampton’s forces to evacuate from Columbia. In contrast, Hampton failed to create shared understanding with his partners. He didn’t have any plans to defend the city of Columbia against Sherman’s Union forces. Besides, there was no collaboration and dialogue between Hampton and Governor, so they didn’t know what had to be done when General Sherman’s forces arrived the outskirts of Columbia. Provide a clear commander’s intent. Commanders should deliver their intent to staffs and subordinates clearly and concisely to inform them the purpose of the operation they are conducting. Doing this allows subordinate leaders and Soldiers know why they have to fight and achieve the mission. LTG Hampton ordered Confederate soldiers not to loot the civilian property according to the Martial law in Columbia. But his soldiers looted the city during Sherman’s invasion. It was because Hampton failed to provide his intent to his soldiers. Whereas, Sherman’ forces looted Columbia like that they had used to do in Georgia. Although looting was officially forbidden, Sherman allowed his troops to loot the city of Columbia for the Confederacy's strategic, economic, and psychological damage. He could succeed to defeat Confederates by delivering his intent clearly. Use mission orders. Commanders use mission orders to assign tasks, allocate resources, and issue broad guidance. Commanders use mission orders not to supervise subordinates but to provide guidance and direction required to achieve the main objective. General Hampton didn’t use mission orders to assign tasks or allocate resources at all. If he had used mission orders prior to Union force’s appearance, he could have protected the city from Union’s attack. General Sherman, however, made the most of mission orders. On February 16, he issued Special Field Order No. 26, giving instructions for the occupation of Columbia. The terms of this order had probably been discussed by Sherman and General Howard before they reached Columbia. The order provided specified guidance, but allowed Howard freedom in the execution. In conclusion, General Hampton failed to apply the philosophy of mission command except the principle of building cohesive teams through mutual trust and afterwards, he couldn’t help evacuating from Columbia.
General Sherman was good at utilizing the principles of mission command at various situations and he achieved his final goal, the Confederate’s surrender. Comparing Sherman’s leadership and Hampton’s leadership, we can find out how mission command principles are important in battlefields. Most of all, I think the substantial purpose of mission command philosophy is to grant subordinates freedom of action and foster creative operational challenges. Under the principles of mission command, commanders can have staffs, subordinates and partners understood their intent as well as accomplish mission more effectively and
efficiently.
General Richard Sherman’s march to the sea has just finished. After successful capturing Atlanta, Georgia, General Sherman directed his Union army to Savannah, Georgia. Along the way, northerners wreaked havoc on Southern cotton mills and destroy train tracks while completely uprooting 20 percent of Georgian plantations. This effectively halted the Confederate’s means of transportation and economic structure subsequently w...
COL Prescott’s role in the Battle of Bunker Hill, or more correctly know as the Battle of Breed’s Hill, is a great example of how to properly execute mission command. An overview from The Cowpens Staff Ride and Battlefield Tour (Moncure) reveals a number of operation and strategic objectives that the American militia had to consider. In this instance, COL Prescott takes charge of 1200 men with instructions to defend against incoming British forces that were seeking to occupy the surrounding hills during the Siege of Boston campaign. COL Prescott utilized a variety of steps in the operations process that contributed to his expert utilization of mission command over his forces. Through various sources from published works by experts on the subject, COL Prescott’s mission command demonstrates its effectiveness in his understanding of the situation against the British, his visualization to create an end state for t...
Mission Command as defined by the United States Army consists six distinct and critical principles. During World War II there were many examples of exemplary mission command that led to stunning victories for the Allies but also many examples of failure. The Battle for Arnhem or Operation Market-Garden was such a failure. Major General Robert Elliot Urquhart, the Commander of the 1st Airborne Division failed in not only in tactics but the ability to lead his division to victory. He did not completely misunderstand the principles of mission command, but four main areas in which he made critical mistakes were; Build a Cohesive Team Through Mutual Trust, Create a Shared Understanding, Accept Prudent Risk, and Exercise Disciplined Initiative.
General William Techumseh Sherman’s March through Georgia and South Carolina was the turning point in the American Civil War. After heavy fighting in Tennessee and Kentucky General Sherman requested permission to take a large force of men on a campaign to the Atlantic Ocean through North and South Carolina, Georgia, then turning North back through the Carolinas and Virginia. The goal of the campaign was to divide the Confederate states by going through the middle of them and destroying anything of military value. General Sherman’s March did achieve its goal from a military standpoint but the manner his army accomplished its goal was ethically improper. Perhaps the most famous portion of Sherman’s March was his campaign from Atlanta to Savannah and then to Colombia, South Carolina.
The purpose of this paper is to perform a mission command analysis of the Battle of Gettysburg, honing in on Pickett’s Charge. The Battle of Gettysburg took place on July 1st through July 3rd in 1863 in the town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. The belligerents were the Army of the Potomac, led by MG George G. Meade and the Army of Northern Virginia, led by GEN Robert E. Lee. The goal is to analyze the decisions of GEN Lee using the six mission command principles described in the Army Doctrine Publication 6-0 and then assess the outcome of those decisions.
... to win war. The Union blockade of Charleston is when the enemy fleet took over the Charleston harbor. Sherman’s march through South Carolina was a path of destruction from ransacking people and homes to burning down buildings. When Sherman set fire to Columbia that marked the end of this gruesome war. After Sherman had set fire to the city, the Confederacy was in such despair over there lost town. This caused the Confederacy to finally surrender to the union. The Civil War was a very dark time in American history. One of the bloodiest wars this country has ever experienced. South Carolina was a big player during this war, from battles to their ports, and then the burning of the capitol. This war was a very traumatic time for Americans but in my opinion I believe that if this war hadn’t happened we wouldn’t be the strong, free willed and brave country we are today.
Mission command is the commander's use of authority and direction to empower adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations. It helps subordinates exercise disciplined initiative when operating within their commander’s intent. To facilitate effective mission command, commanders must accomplish four consecutive stages of the operations process. They must thoroughly understand the problem, visualize a solution that achieves a desired end state, and then accurately describe this visualization in order to direct the organization. Commanders continually lead and assess their organizations and provide input and influence to their subordinates and staff.
In order to receive a victory in the Battle of the Bulge, General Patton used Mission Command Analysis in order to understand how he can be successful for this mission. The first thing of understanding t...
Commanders must be able to describe their operation visualization to staffs and subordinates. It fosters a working relationship and a shared understanding of the situation, mission and intent. Without description of mission command from the commander, a unit may not be able to accomplish their task or mission.
... by the war and fight more viciously. Lincoln was very careful not to underestimate his enemies in the South and sternly advised the American public not to get overconfident, “Let us not be over-sanguine of a speedy final triumph. Let us diligently apply the means, never doubting that just God, in His good time, will us the right result.” The siege of Vicksburg was in many ways the hardest blow to the South, because they lost their control of the river there, and lost communication with their western territories. In many respects, this was the day that I believe most of the southern soldiers believed the war had ended, and with Sherman making his march, the psychological impact was devastating. Without their beliefs, their way of life taken away, they had no reason to fight, and no reason to continue fighting because if Old Dixie could fall, so could anyone else.
As our forefathers before us stated, ‘‘No one is more professional than I. I am a Noncommissioned Officer, a leader of soldiers. As a Noncommissioned Officer, I realize that I am a member of a time honored corps, which is known as “The Backbone of the Army (“The NCO Creed writing by SFC Earle Brigham and Jimmie Jakes Sr”). These words to Noncommissioned Officer should inspire us to the fullest with pride, honor, and integrity. The NCO creed should mean much more than just words whenever we attend a NCO’s school. For most of us this is what our creed has become because we learn to narrate or recite. The military from the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard has an overabundance of NCOs who fall under their pay grade of E-5, E-6 and etc. Yet somehow there still not enough leaders. I believe that the largest problem afflicting the military today is our lack of competent leaders, ineffective leader development, and how we influence our subordinates under us who are becoming leaders.
The Battle of Antietam could have been a devastating and fatal blow to the Confederate Army if Gen. McClellan acted decisively, took calculated risks, and veered away from his cautious approach to war. There are many instances leading up to the battle and during the battle in which he lacks the necessary offensive initiative to effectively cripple and ultimately win the war. This paper is intended to articulate the failure of Mission Command by GEN McClellan by pointing out how he failed to understand, visualize, describe and direct the battlefield to his benefit.
The most effective commanders through their leadership build cohesive teams. Mutual trust, shared understanding, and accepting prudent risk serve as just a few principles for mission command. Mutual trust is the foundation of any successful professional relationship that a commander shares with his staff and subordinates. The shared understanding of an operational environment functions, as the basis for the commander to effectively accomplish the mission. While my advice for the commander on what prudent risks to take may create more opportunities rather than accepting defeat. Incorporating the principles of mission command by building cohesive teams through mutual trust, fostering an environment of shared understanding, and accepting prudent risk will make me an effective adviser to the commander, aid the staff during the operations process, and provide an example for Soldiers to emulate.
To support this statement, this paper will highlight events in his time as the United States Central Command Commander validated his visionary leadership skills. Next, it will address the events that demonstrate the decisions General Schwarzkopf made that clearly validate those of an ethical leader. Finally, this paper will discuss the relevance of why it is important for a Combatant Commander of such a wide area of responsibility to possess both of these traits. Let us begin by highlighting events in his military career that establish his visionary leader characteristics.
''Teamwork is a fundamental lesson in the military. At basic training, you learn about being a member of a unit. You do not focus on the first person to cross the finish line. You do not focus on the last person to cross the finish line. What matters most — what matters entirely — is that every unit member understands that everyone crosses the finish line"(mydd.com)