Content area
Full Text
This article examines the effect of the recently updatdd U.S. Army My Field Manual 22-100, Army Leadership, on situational leadership theory. It reviews the development of adaptive leadership models and theory and considers how refinements in situational leadership theory might affect combat leaders in today's contemporary operating environment.
ADAPTIVE LEADERSHIP in today's Army is increasingly important with technological changes and the force-structure downsizing that all military services are experiencing. Adaptive leadership is necessary in today's complex and ambiguous military environment. Technology and the availability and flow of information contribute to a very fluid operational situation.1 US Army Field Manual (FM) 22-100, Army Leadership, has added transactional and transformational leadership styles of directing, participating, and delegating.2 These styles add to the leader's arsenal of leadership styles that can be used to shape behavior, emotions, and the organizational climate.
FM 22-100 stresses that leaders must be able to adjust their leadership style to the situation as well as to the people being led. Leaders are not limited to one style in a given situation and, with the nature of the battlefield today and tomorrow, being able to adapt appropriate styles will influence soldiers' success. Techniques from different styles are used to motivate people and accomplish the mission. A leader's judgment, intelligence, cultural awareness, and self-control "play major roles in helping you choose the proper style and the appropriate techniques for the task at hand."3
The Army has pursued the idea of adaptive leadership since the formation of the Continental Army. Because organization, control, discipline, and teamwork were lacking, General George Washington sought the aid of Baron Frederich von Steuben, a former Prussian staff officer of Frederick the Great, to write drill movements and regulations to instill discipline in "an Army of several thousand half-- starved, wretched men in rags."4 From the beginning of U.S. military psychology almost 100 years ago, there has been a preoccupation with predicting effective military behavior, particularly in leaders. Most of the early military classification and qualification tests sought to predict behavior under the common assumption that certain ideal behavior would inevitably lead to highly desirable performance as a leader.5
Military leaders must make use of the studies and histories of military units and figures, and not repeat mistakes of the past.6...