U.S. Army Photo
I’ve noticed many organizations have shown ambitions for leader development but struggled to implement it in any meaningful way. Professional development programs are commonplace among Army units – whether we refer to them as “officer professional development,” “noncommissioned officer professional development,” or rank-immaterial “leader professional development” (OPD, NCOPD, or LPD respectively; I acknowledge there are different intended audiences but for the sake of brevity, I will simply use “LPD” throughout this article). I submit two fundamental flaws with this traditional design: first, when you reduce professional development to a formal “program” to be resourced and scheduled and block-checked, you’ve already failed; second, what most units consider “professional development” is actually just a risk mitigation strategy.
My practical teaching experience was as a small group instructor at Army Logistics University. I taught for over two years and humbly considered myself good at it. I may have exhibited some natural talent and predilection toward adult education, although I was nowhere close to mastering my craft. Apart from the university’s excellent faculty development program and some occasional suggestions from my peers, at the time I felt there was relatively little to prepare me as an instructor. I was ignorant of the variety of books and resources that were available on the topic of adult education. Perhaps on an unconscious level I recognized adults and children learn differently, but I was unfamiliar with the concepts of andragogy and pedagogy. I simply thought “teaching is teaching” and did the best job I could with what I knew at the time.
LPDs Must Acknowledge Adult Learning and Motivation
In 1961 Cyril Houle, a prominent figure in the field of adult education, posited three primary sources of motivation for adult learners: learning-oriented,goal-oriented, and activity-oriented. When your motivation is learning-oriented, it comes from curiosity and fascination with the material being presented. When your motivation is goal-oriented, it comes from desire to acquire a vocational skill, complete a degree or certification, or otherwise make yourself appear more marketable. When your motivation is activity-oriented, it comes from a desire to socialize and seek general self-improvement or to simply have something to do.
Adult learners – our Soldiers, in this instance – will demonstrate different preferences informed by their personal characteristics and sources of motivation. Our audience will learn more effectively when they can expand those preferences. That expansion will happen faster when students are sufficiently motivated. Adult learners generally need to know the reason to learn something and want to be sure this commitment of their time will be worthwhile. Otherwise, they may exhibit low motivation or become disengaged from the learning experience altogether. Apart from an instructional plan, instructors should have a motivational plan. It is presumptuous to think student motivation will automatically happen (“mandatory attendance” at the event notwithstanding).
Putting it all together: when your LPD consists of a recycled slideshow on the topic of your choice, how excited will your audience be about attending?
Risk Mitigation 101
You might have been taken aback when I referred to unit LPDs as a risk mitigation strategy, but hear me out. Obviously, I can’t speak for every unit in the Army, but I’ve seen a variety of organizations practice LPDs that were incredibly foundational and simplistic: “Writing awards 101,” “How to run a zero and qualification range 101,” “Counseling 101,” “Property accountability 101,” or “OERs and NCOERs 101.” Without sounding facetious, I truly believe these simplistic blocks of instruction are a unit’s attempt at mitigating risk by ensuring their leaders are brought up to a basic, common standard (or, in some instances, down to a common standard).
Of course, we have to start somewhere, and we can’t simply assume such topics were addressed at leaders’ previous military training and education sources (commissioning source, BOLC, BLC, SLC, or whatever the case might be; training and education are two different things, by the way). Rest assured there is goodness in “101-level” classes for leaders across the formation. By all means, we must be proficient at the fundamentals. The problem is we seldom progress beyond that level.
Many of these 101-level LPDs focus on technical or tactical skills, rather than the far more nuanced art and science of leadership itself. (I’ve heard arguments that “leader development” and “leadership development” are two different things, and I don’t disagree.) An inherently difficult and complex subject such as leadership cannot be mastered by a slideshow, but must be progressively taught and learned – perhaps through the use of “instructional scaffolding” that was originally proposed by the psychologist Lev Vygotsky. Scaffolding is reminiscent of eventually removing the training wheels from a bicycle; in other words, learners require less and less assistance as they become more proficient at a task, and their confidence rises at a commensurate rate. Scholars have argued leadership is not one skill, but a collection of critical skills such as negotiating, influencing, and coaching, and a leader’s performance is measured more by the commitment of other people than it is by his or her personal competence and capability. Each of these topics should be provided in safe-fail environments that allow our junior leaders to make mistakes and learn valuable lessons.
After-Action Reviews
After-action reviews (AARs) can be an incredibly powerful tool for building and developing both individuals and teams. (Observer-Controllers at the combat training centers are usually great at facilitating them.) But too often, we take a canned, check-the-block approach. Let me know if you’ve heard something like this before: “Troopers, give me a ‘sustain’ from this field problem before we all go home.” “Motivation!” “Now, give me an ‘improve’.” “Communication!”
Regarding AARs, one of my battalion commanders often said, “It’s not a lesson learned until it creates a change in behavior.” Translation: lessons learned are usually only lessons identified. If your organization continues to make the same mistakes and struggle with the same problems, you haven’t learned your lesson – and you probably haven’t been developing leaders! I cannot overstate the importance of reflection and meaning-making to support adult learning, development, and growth. We are quick to expose our Soldiers to an event, an assignment, or an experience, but I think it is a mistake to move on from those events too quickly. We should ensure our personnel take the time to consider what they have experienced and really ponder what lessons they can draw upon and build from that experience. I’d argue we historically struggle to implement worthwhile leader development programs because we neglect reflection and meaning-making. Many of our junior leaders have the best intentions, but they simply lack the judgment, maturity, and perspective to reflect upon their experiences unless we deliberately coach them through it.
Learning can be planned and structured, but it can also be spontaneous. Learning opportunities are everywhere. You can explore this further by reading FM 6-22 (Leader Development). According to FM 6-22, the four fundamentals of development are: setting conditions, providing feedback, enhancing learning, and creating opportunities (p. 3-1). We must set the conditions for development by creating environments of psychological safety and underwriting honest mistakes to encourage learning. During stressful training events, feedback should be frequent and interactive. (For example, leaders will be asked what happened and how they think they and their sections performed, before constructing a plan for the way forward.) Current and future leaders should be coached through the art of reflection and meaning-making, so all lessons learned can lead to appropriate changes in behavior rather than being forgotten and discarded.
We can enhance learning by getting people out of their comfort zones and acknowledging the Pygmalion effect. Once a degree of trust is earned and competence is demonstrated, young officers and NCOs should be given responsibility for enormous real-world projects and taskings, and they must be empowered as they take ownership of their increased responsibilities. We will trust them to get these jobs done; to support this, we must push authority down to their level while pulling the assumption of risk up to our level. Finally, we will make the crucial distinction of recognizing learning opportunities and turning them into learning events. Skilled leaders can find learning opportunities even in mundane daily activities, and many more opportunities can be found in stressful situations. If the Army is a genuine learning organization, we need to find ways to embed learning events into everything we do.
Leader professional development can take almost any form. It need not be a formal block of instruction in a classroom setting. Staff rides, reading lists, escape rooms, and counseling are all methods of developing leaders. In my current position, almost every conversation that I have is an opportunity to develop somebody – and to develop myself. There is much we can all learn from one another, regardless of rank.
One of my former brigade commanders often said, “Our legacy is our lieutenants and sergeants.” Leaders at every level are obligated to shape the future by developing the next generation of leaders. Many attempts at leader development fail when they are considered “programs” and are reduced to PowerPoint presentations that are plotted on the training calendar like a “flavor of the week.” Planned and structured events and classes are valuable and can develop leaders, but if leader development is truly integrated into everything an organization does, then leader development should be both constant and progressive.
Conclusion
One of my firmest beliefs is that leadership means serving others, and not being served. To me, teaching and leadership come hand in hand. Teachers should not teach, and leaders should not lead, with the expectation of receiving praise, awards, and accolades. The reward is the privilege of being entrusted to lead great people every day and help them find ways to make their lives better.
Major Ryan Cornell-d’Echert is an Army logistics officer with 3 combat deployments and over 11 years of active duty experience. He has previously been stationed at Fort Bliss, Fort Drum, and Fort Lee. He currently serves as the primary sustainment officer for 71st Ordnance Group (Explosive Ordnance Disposal) at Fort Carson, Colorado. He has an MS in Adult Learning and Leadership from Kansas State University, and a BA in English from the University of Delaware. After commanding an infantry forward support company, he taught at Army Logistics University, where he ultimately received the Distinguished Instructor Award and Instructor of the Year honors. He enjoys spending time with his wife, good beer, cruel and unusual workouts, first-person shooters, and film theory and criticism.