Humility has taken its place in the pantheon of critical military leadership qualities in recent years. The highest praise of a senior leader often is that they accomplish great goals through their units – with a sense of humility. Toxic work environments, operational failures, and personal indiscretions all appear to stem, in part, from an underlying lack of leader humility. The challenge for military leaders is that humility exists on a continuum, and too much humility can lead to passivity and indecision. Also, attempts to demonstrate humility through statements and acts can give off an aura of disingenuousness. Given the amorphous and contradictory nature of humility in military leadership, the concept may provide little functional utility for officers. The following narrative attempts to give a brief framework of the factors that allow officers to lead in the optimal zone of humility.

Many – if not all – Field Grade Officers (FGOs) can recall the enormous leap from being a highly proficient tactician to an accomplished strategist at a Joint Command. Up until that point in their career, they had forged reputations based on applying their technical expertise in complex scenarios that left little time for second guessing and debate.  The first day serving at the operational or strategic level can be particularly nerve-racking.  After offering an extensive overview of the mission to a new Major in our Division at Joint Command, he asked how he could best prepare for his new position.  The response was simple; read as much as possible.  Professional developmental reading will always have a place in each officer’s growth, but every officer can benefit from purposeful reading that facilitates a depth of knowledge capable of assessing dynamic complexities across a wide spectrum of problems. 

Town hall meetings across the Army in recent weeks have been filled with similar rhetoric from leaders: “we will be safe where possible, but we still have to train in order to maintain our readiness.”  Stories from social media and the Army Times have detailed the specifics of this guidance.  Large accountability formations, morning physical training in groups, physical fitness tests, Expert Infantryman Badge testing, barracks cleaning parties, units headed to the field to train, the stories of leaders flaunting CDC guidance are almost unending.  All of this is being done in the name of readiness.  Medical readiness is not simply about ensuring a unit is “green” on MEDPROS slides.  Leaders who blindly strive to meet requirements, without understanding or complying with the intent behind them, are missing the point.  Leaders seem to forget that health, perhaps more so than training, is an essential part of readiness.  While disease is an invisible threat, history shows us that ignoring it or treating it as a tangential factor in decision-making is a costly mistake.

U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Tanner D. Lambert. Oct. 25, 2019

The title gives the reader two words: (1) Mission and (2) Command.  For the purpose of this discussion, “Mission” will be referenced as a noun. It is an assumption of the author’s that missions will continually evolve but military forces remain ready to adapt to achieve a successful end state.

“Command” on the other hand will be referenced as a noun and a verb.  “Command” is a position found throughout varying levels of the military.  “Command” is also a verb. For example, “A Lieutenant Colonel commands a battalion.”