I & I (L Leadership Transformation - Marine Corps

Ideas & Issues (LeadershIp)The leadership culture currently within the Marine Corps is dominated by thetransactional leadership approach thatstifles an individual’s full performancepotential. Yet, in order to continue todevelop and empower junior enlistedand junior officers to make decisions inthe absence of senior leaders acting onlyon intent, transformational leadershipwill need to become the hallmark ofMarine Corps leadership culture.Transactional versus TransformationalLeadershipTransactional leadership is the mostcommon style of leadership within theMarine Corps and is also the first stylepresented to all new Marines once theybegin the process of transformation.The classic scenes from the 1987 movieFull Metal Jacket, of GySgt Hartman instituting punishment in forms of remediation for recruits’ failure to perform toa set standard, is a common depictionof leadership within the Marine Corps.Although the theatrical illustration ofMarine Corps boot camp is embellished, the application of leadership iscorrectly transactional. The shortcomings with transactional leadership arethe failure to foster innovation and create an environment in which individualscan flourish to their fullest potential.In a transactional leadership approach,development of subordinates is not thepriority; accomplishing the mission ortask is the focus.There are three components of transactional leadership: contingent reward,management by exception, and laissezfaire leadership.7 Contingent reward isthe foundational framework for transactional leadership. Contingent rewardis a practice through which the leaderassigns a specified task and comes toan agreement on the end state withthe subordinate; upon completion, areward is presented based on satisfactory accomplishment.8 The other sideof this component is the use of punishment as a direct result of unsatisfactoryperformance.9 Contingent reward issuperficial leadership that can be effective in environments of unchangingcharacteristics.The process of non-judicial punishment (NJP) is a tool for commanders8www.mca-marines.org/gazetteto use in order to maintain good orderand discipline within a unit, but unless the infraction is malicious, intentional, immoral, unethical, or illegal,then NJP should not be used as the firstresource. Another tool for commandersis the process of a competency reviewboard, a process used to evaluate thetechnical and professional competenceThere are three components of transactionalleadership .of a Marine at his rank and billet. Theboard measures his effectiveness acrossa plethora of established standards. NJPand the competency review board process are very effective tools; however,these should not be used as punishmentsolely for failure but for sustained subparperformance after all other leadershiptools have been exhausted. Employingtransactional leadership, specifically, thecomponent of contingent reward, goesagainst Marine Corps doctrine. The fearof punishment suffocates innovativeness. MCDP 1 stresses the importanceof eliminating the perceived culturerelating to the “zero defect” mentalitythroughout the Marine Corps:The Marine Corps style of warfarerequires intelligent leaders with apenchant for boldness and initiativedown to the lowest levels. Boldnessis an essential moral trait in a leaderfor it generates combat power beyondphysical means at hand. Initiative, thewillingness to act on one’s own judgment, is a prerequisite for boldness.These traits carried to excess can leadto rashness, but we must realize thaterrors by junior leaders stemming fromover boldness are a necessary part oflearning. We should deal with sucherrors leniently; there must be no‘zero defects’ mentality. Abolishing‘zero defects’ means that we do notstifle boldness or initiative throughthe threat of punishment. It does notmean that commanders do not counselsubordinates on mistakes; constructivecriticism is an important element inlearning.10Management by exception, whichis less effective, is the second component of the transactional leadership approach and can be applied actively orpassively.11 When a leader is activelyemploying the management by exception method, he regularly evaluates afollower’s progress throughout assignedtasks and interjects with corrective action before completion.12 The passiveform of management by exception is themore detrimental of the two because theleader will not engage with the followeruntil an error has occurred.13 Withinthe Marine Corps, mistakes or errorscan have terrible consequences, and thecost of passive leadership could be human lives. A catastrophic example ofthis approach was very likely the leadingfactor in the death of LCpl Jason Rotheron 31 August 1988. LCpl Rother’s deathwas caused by a series of events in whichthe leadership at multiple levels failedto practice engaged, transformationalleadership. Management by exceptionwas the dominating application of leadership during this unfortunate incident;leaders applied a transactional approachwith limited engagement. Prior toRother being assigned to a road guarddetail, he was treated numerous timesat the battalion aide station for multipleproblems: dehydration, back pain, andheat exhaustion. Additionally, he wasprescribed Motrin and aspirin for hissymptoms just days prior to his death.14The corpsman attached to his platoonadvised the platoon commander, 1stLtAllen Lawson, that the Marines werenot being provided enough water inorder to sustain the mission.15 The platoon commander disregarded the corpsman’s recommendation and proceededwith the mission, assigning Rother tothe road guard platoon—which fell under another chain of command. Therewas no turnover between the platooncommanders regarding Rother’s pastmedical issues, nor was there a clearestablishment of accountability. Shortlyafter Rother assumed his post alonewith only “minimal water, no map, nocompass, an 80-pound pack, weapons,and ammunition,” 1stLt Lawson wasreminded by LCpl Adamson of the“two-man pairing policy” within thebattalion.16 1stLt Lawson respondedMarine Corps Gazette July 2019

Ideas & Issues (LeadershIp)Transactional or transformational leadership? Is a change in style required? (Photo by Cpl CristianRicardo.)with, “I’m the lieutenant and you are thelance corporal.”17 Lawson’s handling ofthe lance corporal’s criticism in regardto his clear disregard for the battalion’sSOP was a clear violation of the trustbetween a leader and a follower and,furthermore, displayed a positionalleader’s approach using billet and rankas authority.The following morning, upon conclusion of the exercise, the road guardsbegan to be picked up. There was nopre-established pick-up plan for theroad guards, and units were entangledthroughout the training field because ofmultiple movements the night before.18LCpl Rother’s company leadership assumed he was retrieved by an adjacentunit and did not immediately followup. The failure of leaders to inspectwhat they expected from subordinatesfostered a culture within 3d Battalion,2d Marines, that allowed proper accountability and established SOPs to beviolated repeatedly, and that eventuallybecame an accepted practice. If leadersonly inject when or after an error occurs, it could be too late. Establishedprocedures can be ignored, and if leaders are not engaged, the practice canbe accepted as the new norm. Sometimes there will be no visible infractionor negative effect to this behavior. IfRother’s leadership followed lity procedures, there is apossibility that his death could havebeen avoided. On 1 September 1988,LCpl Rother’s company commanderheld a company formation and received100 percent accountability by all platoon sergeants. It was not until 1730that night that a discrepancy in theweapons inventory showed Rother’sweapon as unaccounted for.19 If properpersonnel and weapons accountabilityhad occurred—as assumed by higherheadquarters leadership—immediatelyfollowing the exercise, Rother’s absencewould have been discovered instantly.The search for Rother came to a devastating conclusion when his remainswere discovered two miles away from ahighway.20 An investigation into LCplRother’s death showed a failure of engaged leadership through all levels ofhis chain of command.21 The failureof the company’s leadership to holdthe platoon leadership responsible incontinuing to perform scheduled accountability and checks directly resultedin false reporting and actions down tothe fire team level failing to account forits Marines. Within the Marine Corps,leaders do not have the luxury to be parttime.The laissez-faire component of thetransactional leadership style is the“avoidance or absence” of a leader,and research has shown this elementto be the least effective of all within thetransactional leadership style.22 Thisapproach, much like the passive tactic within management by exception,is ineffective to follower developmentbecause the presence of the leader isscarce or completely absent.23 Laissezfaire leaders only insert their presencewhen infractions occur and do notform relationships through constantinteraction. This style can create atoxic culture within any organizationbecause junior Marines can perceivethe contact as negative if the interactionis only present to address deficiencies.Laissez-faire leaders become figureheadsof a positional leadership platform thatholds only the influential power of itsbillet or assignment. Leaders are notrespected for who they are but becauseof their authority. Interaction betweenleaders and followers must be constant,as this allows for the development of therelationship between the two.Transactional leadership can beeffective if used in combination withtransformational leadership as a toolto reward for outstanding performanceand punish sparingly in order to maintain good order and discipline. If transactional leadership is the dominatingstyle within an organization, followersperform tasks to avoid punishment orbe rewarded and not because they have ashared commitment and desire into theend state of the task or mission. Transformational leadership encompasses adynamic approach to developing persons to reach their fullest potential whileimproving efficiency.Bruce Avolio and Bernard Bass writein their book, Developing Potential Acrossa Full Range of Leadership, that researchstudies conducted showed “transformational leadership was higher amongMarine Corps commanders of morehighly effective helicopter squadronsthan those of less effective squadrons.”24Individuals can make the argument thatother factors attributed to the overwhelming success of the more effectivesquadrons, but undoubtedly leadershiplays the foundation of culture withinany organization. The transformationalleadership approach still allows for someprinciples of the transactional leadershipMarine Corps Gazette July 2019

style to be utilized. Rewarding achievements and punishing shortfalls havetheir benefits, but within the transformational leadership style, these actionsare only tools and not the extent of theapproach.25 Transformational leadersinspire followers to achieve results abovethe normal standard and many timesexceed the followers’ expectations.26Leaders who adopt a transformationalleadership style establish more challenging expectations and foster a climate ofinnovation and creativity. Furthermore,they encourage followers to explore newmethods in order to accomplish the objective.There are four vital componentsthat set this style apart from transactional leadership: idealized leadership,inspirational motivation, intellectualstimulation, and individualized consideration.27 The first component oftransformational leadership, idealizedleadership, is the crucial frameworkwhich allows this style to truly flourishamong any group of individuals. Leaders who apply this style of leadershipare “respected, admired, and trusted,”not only among those they have theprivilege to lead but also among thosethey have an opportunity to influence.28Simply stated, transformational leadersset the example.On 3 January 1995, Gen Carl Mundy, Jr., the 30th Commandant of theMarine Corps, published FMFM 1-0,Leading Marines. The manual discussesthe Marine Corps ethos, foundations,and challenges within leadership. InChapter Two of Leading Marines, aquote begins the segment of settingthe example:Leadership is a heritage, which haspassed from Marine to Marine sincethe founding of our Corps . mainlyacquired by observation, experience, and emulation. Working withother Marines is the Marine Leader’sSchool.29Setting the example is the hallmark of atrue leader, but this takes transparencyand the ability to overcome insecurities.The Marine Corps has eleven leadershipprinciples that are rooted in the mindsof all Marines from the beginning oftheir careers. “Know yourself and seekself-improvement” is one principleMarine Corps Gazette July 2019that must be evaluated daily by leaders in order to set the “right” examplefor those around them.30 Within thiscomponent, leaders must be countedon to “demonstrate high standards ofethical and moral conduct.”31 There isno place for authoritarian leaders withinan effective organization that expectsfollowers to act a certain way regardless of their own conduct and actions.“Leaders eat last” is a common expectation throughout the Marine Corps, andwith a deeper perspective, it means a lotmore than just allowing junior ranks toget food before those senior. It falls inline with transformational leadership,where leaders put the interest of theirsubordinates before their own and sharetheir risks, failures, and achievementswith their followers.32Inspirational motivation is a criticalbehavior of transformational leaders.Inspirational motivation takes morethan just charisma; it is the genuinedisplay and ability of a leader to demonstrate clear communication to followers.Clear communication is the ability ofa leader to deliver his intent and guidance to subordinates effectively, allowing them to grasp the objective withoutconfusion and uncertainty. Motivationand inspiration are fostered through aleader’s ability to challenge and placemeaning underneath the assigned tasks.Offering the “why” behind given objectsand inviting subordinates to partakein the development of plans creates a“buy-in” and shared commitment for allinvolved. This sense of purpose fuels thesubordinates’ determination to excel.As the Marine Corps continues todevelop and train for future conflictsthroughout the globe, innovation andfostering creativity will be essentialto the continued success expected onthe battlefield. Gen James L. Conway,the 34th Commandant of the MarineCorps, expressed the need for innovation in future battles in his vision statement found in a message to the MarineCorps, titled Vision 2025:The Marine Corps of 2025 will fightand win our Nation’s battles withmulti-capable MAGTFs, either fromthe sea or in sustained operationsashore. Our unique role as the Nation’s force in readiness, along withour values, enduring ethos, and corecompetencies, will ensure we remainhighly responsive to the needs of combatant commanders in an uncertainenvironment and against irregularthreats. Our future Corps will beincreasingly reliant on naval deployment, preventative in approach, leanerin equipment, versatile in capabilities,and innovative in mindset. In an evolving and complex world, we will excelas the Nation’s expeditionary ‘forceof choice.’33Transformational leaders will be instrumental in order to achieve Vision 2025as they promote intellectual stimulation. Leaders who encourage followersto question the way things have alwaysbeen done and inspire them to reframethe original problems and restructureprocesses accomplish intellectual stimulation.34 This approach might be hardfor some leaders because their own ideaswill be challenged and questioned; leaders must show self-confidence in this approach because they will be challengedto accept ideas from followers that couldhave greater potential than their own. Inorder for this approach to be successful,a shift in culture is needed. Creatinga culture where public criticism is notaccepted stimulates a climate for followers to try and fail without humiliation.The senior leaders within the MarineCorps have shown a commitment toinspire Marines of all ranks to innovateand have created competitions in order to recognize these individuals. GenRobert B. Neller, current Commandantof the Marine Corps, in his messageto the force titled Message to the Force2018: Execute, expressed the need forall Marines to continue to improve andlook for innovative ways to develop asa Corps, “We are making key changesin all aspects I am willing to adjustcourse if there is a better way.”35The final component of transformational leadership is individualizedconsideration, which personifies eachindividual’s need for achieving success.36 This component epitomizes“teach, coach, and mentor.” Consistently evaluating subordinates’ performanceand providing them constructive andindividualized feedback will enhancetheir daily performance. Throughoutwww.mca-marines.org/gazette11

Ideas & Issues (LeadershIp)the Marine Corps, this policy is taught,practiced, and expected at all levelsthrough the Marine Corps LeadershipDevelopment Program; however, suchan approach can become a checklistfor inspections rather than the genuine development of others. Counselingrecords for individual Marines are onlykept and maintained at their presentunit and are not passed onto the nextduty station; this can very well stifle thesustained transformation of a Marine.Individualized consideration encouragesleaders to explore new ways of teaching and interacting with each person.Enhancing the relationship betweenleaders and junior Marines is fosteredthrough effective leader and memberexchange, which is increased throughthe genuine understanding of the junior Marines’ needs highlighted by theleaders’ consideration of an individual’sdifferences in an organization.Understanding the differencesbetween transactional and transformational leadership is essential tofostering an environment that invitescreativity but, more importantly, isnecessary to create a culture that fosters the development of all members ofan organization. Transactional leadersfail to develop a follower’s true potential, while transformational leaders willcontinue to improve efficiency outcomeand develop those around them to bemore resilient when faced with obstacles. The following stories highlightthe potential positive and negativeconsequences of the transactional andtransformational leadership approachesdiscussed previously. Both stories arefactually based, yet fictionalized to expound on the possible advantages anddisadvantages the two approaches onleadership can offer.LCpl JohnsonAt 0615, a roar echoes through thewalls of a barracks, “Fall in!” Marinesbegin to move with urgency to get information as the first sergeant anxiouslyawaits all movement and sound to cease.The first sergeant, without hesitation,immediately following the display ofobedience, yells “Report!” As the platoon sergeants begin giving their report,an intensified, ire expression begins to12www.mca-marines.org/gazetteRegardless of circumstances, their leaders must be able to ensure their motivation and effectiveness are consistent. (Photo by LCpl Quinn Hurt.)paint the face of the first sergeant asthe platoon sergeant from third platoonresponds with, “One Marine UA!” Following the ceremonial aspects of theformation, the company forms forphysical training, and as they begin tostep off for a brisk Monday morningrun, LCpl Johnson comes running fromthe parking lot. His face is mixed withfear, uncertainty, and exhaustion, butthe shades quickly transition to failure once his squad leader greeted himwith, “Johnson, fall in, and we will talklater!” Later that day, LCpl Johnson ishanded a counseling sheet and directedto sign it. The counseling depicts hisshortcomings and is placed inside of hiscounseling jacket. This same sequencehappens twice over the next few weeks,and he quickly finds himself in front ofhis company commander for NJP.During the NJP proceedings, heis asked to explain his actions, and hestates that he had no excuse for beinglate. LCpl Johnson has been a Marinefor just under six months and now hasan NJP on his record. His career is notheading in the direction he envisioned itjust eight months ago when, filled withexcitement, he approached the recruiterat his school and said he wanted to bea Marine. Johnson was quickly labeledas a dirt bag. Although at the NJP procee

assignments include 3d Supply Bn, 2d Transportation Support Bn; Kilo Co, 3d Recruit Training Bn, Parris Island, SC; 1st Light Armored Regiment, SNCOA Camp Pendleton; 2d Bn, 4th Marines, TBS; 1st Bn, 12th Marines; 3d Bn, 3d Marines, and