Leadership, responsibility, citizenship, self-interest are all connected around a circle. However, there is a difference in the way Wallace and Dempsey see individual effort in “The Pale King” and “Mission Command”. Wallace in “The Pale King” focuses on the negative side of self-effort where everyone is busy upholding their own goals, leaving the interest of the country behind. On the contrary, Dempsey in “Mission Command” believes individual effort is necessary to achieve the goals in a war. He sees individual effort as a positive means that would help in achieving the goals of a mission. “The Pale King” by Wallace talks about individualism and the duties of a citizen in the greater interest of the nation. “Mission Command” talks about how
…show more content…
This reflects promoting leadership from the very base to all spheres of people. Dempsey holds that, “Complexity and competitiveness will require freedom of action to develop the situation and rapidly exploit opportunities” (Dempsey 299). He believes, according to this new theory, individual initiative is necessary to achieve the goal in today’s diversified world. It is very difficult to keep pace with the modern warfare tactics following the old customs and traditions of command and control. The rising situations are complex and diverse that requires commanders with experience, intent and soldiers with trust and ability. To meet the demands of these changing circumstances, commanders encourage individual leadership in the operations. We call it empowerment at lower levels. If the commander allows the people at lower ranks to exercise power in a complex battle scenario, they will become more enthusiastic and dedicated to their work. They will feel the urge to work for the team, for the nation to achieve the common goal. The introduction of the new military command system brought a radical change in the order structure. Facing the challenges of the decentralized enemy calls for a decentralized Army, where soldiers and commanders can exercise power at any levels to complete the operations. Empowering people ensures personal freedom that gives …show more content…
“Between hierarchal and lateral echelons of command, decentralized and distributed formations result in decentralized decision making throughout the force, leading implicitly to the opportunity to gain advantageous operational tempo: ability to operate at the speed of the problem,” Dempsey explains (Dempsey 300). A soldier waited for his commander’s order in every situation of the mission. With the introduction of “Mission Command” the soldiers have flexibility in doing their duty. Now, they have the privilege to take decisions under crucial situation on the battlefield. There might not be a leader every time on the battlefield. The commander may die at any time. So, with the changing circumstances of operational situations the “Mission Command” policy comes with a different procedure that allows the soldier with the freedom to take initiatives and decisions. Decentralization guarantees “competitive ability and tempo advantages” that help the soldiers to take fast decisions and complete execution in composite situations. “Mission Command” changed the prevalent idea of centralized ordering to an application of “understanding, intent and trust” (Dempsey
This reflects promoting leadership from the very base to all spheres of people. Dempsey holds that, “Complexity and competitiveness will require freedom of action to develop the situation and rapidly exploit opportunities” (Dempsey 299). He believes, according to this new theory, individual initiative is necessary to achieve the goal in today’s diversified world. It is very difficult to keep pace with the modern warfare tactics following the old customs and traditions of command and control. The rising situations are complex and diverse that requires commanders with experience, intent and soldiers with trust and ability. To meet the demands of these changing circumstances, commanders encourage individual leadership in the operations. We call it empowerment at lower levels. If the commander allows the people at lower ranks to exercise power in a complex battle scenario, they will become more enthusiastic and dedicated to their work. They will feel the urge to work for the team, for the nation to achieve the common goal. The introduction of the new military command system brought a radical change in the order structure. Facing the challenges of the decentralized enemy calls for a decentralized Army, where soldiers and commanders can exercise power at any levels to complete the operations. Empowering people ensures personal freedom that gives …show more content…
“Between hierarchal and lateral echelons of command, decentralized and distributed formations result in decentralized decision making throughout the force, leading implicitly to the opportunity to gain advantageous operational tempo: ability to operate at the speed of the problem,” Dempsey explains (Dempsey 300). A soldier waited for his commander’s order in every situation of the mission. With the introduction of “Mission Command” the soldiers have flexibility in doing their duty. Now, they have the privilege to take decisions under crucial situation on the battlefield. There might not be a leader every time on the battlefield. The commander may die at any time. So, with the changing circumstances of operational situations the “Mission Command” policy comes with a different procedure that allows the soldier with the freedom to take initiatives and decisions. Decentralization guarantees “competitive ability and tempo advantages” that help the soldiers to take fast decisions and complete execution in composite situations. “Mission Command” changed the prevalent idea of centralized ordering to an application of “understanding, intent and trust” (Dempsey