U.S. Marine Corps Distribution Statement A: approved for public release; distribution is unlimited Headquarters United States Marine Corps Washington, D.C.

20380-0001

## Foreword I. Purpose

Fleet Marine Force Reference Publication (FMFRP) 12-17, Leadership for American Army Leaders, is published to ensure the retention and dissemination of useful information which is not intended to become doctrine or to be published in Fleet Marine Force manuals. FMFRP's in the 12 Series are a special category of publications: reprints of historical works which were published commercially and are no longer in print.

## 2. Scopb

This reference publication was written by a seasoned leader for the purpose of providing a leadership primer for the thousands of newly commissioned officers of the expanding U.S. Army at the beginning of World War II. Although written almost a half century ago, the aspects of leadership discussed and insights presented in this publication are timeless. This publication remains a solid source of imformation for the young company grade officer facing initial assignment to a leadership position.

## -3. Certification

Reviewed and approved this date.

BY DIRECTION OF THE COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS
Major General, U.S. Marine Corps Deputy Commander for Warfighting Marine Corps Combat Development Command Quantico, Virginia

## Contents IiiiisilijIiiii,IsiI$Iouifliiii*Ttt*(Ft4T

OJIAPTflU
PACE
1: Leadership Can Be Learned
.
.
I
2: The Manner of the Leader
.
.
.
6
3: The Language of the Leader
.
9
4: Tactfutness Can Be Acquired
.
16
5:
Cheerfulness Spreads; So Does Gloom
19
6: Courtesy Has No Limits
.
.
.
22
7: The Leader's Decision of Mind.
24
8: Initiative, Too, Can Be Developed
.
.
.
29
9: Loyalty toAnd ofthe Leader.
29
10: Military DutyTlte Leader Must Give
Ills Best
.
.
.
.
.
36
11: The Leader Must Know His Mcn
.
39
12: Complaint and Criticism
.
.
44
13: 1elations of Officer-Lenders and Their Men 5]
14: DisciplineBut Not Through Fear
.
60
15: The Spirit of a Military Unit
.
64
16: DiscontentThe Leader Must Watch for
the First Sign
.
.
.
.
70
17: Training for CombatTue Aim of Leaders hip 74
18: CompetitionThe Principal Game Is War
84
19: Lcadership in Thought as in Action
88

## Foreword0.

The need for a brief, understandable, common sense handbook on leadership became urgent with the initiation oL our present armament program. Before tluit there was time for junior officers and young noncommissioned ollicers to learn how to handle men by the trial-and-error method. Mistakes made resulted in no great harm since experienced senior officers and longservice noncoms were on hand to correct them promptly and put the young shavetail or corporal on the right track. By the time the gold bars turned to silver and the two stripes to three, the wearers had usually learned enough of the essentials to make a favorable showing as leaders.

We cannot alford to train our junior leaders in such leisurely fashion today. Fortunately Colonel Munson has provided a timely and powerful aid to spccding up the process. He has given us just what the doctor ordered in this monograph on leadershipthe most practical, sanely balanced and usable treatise on the subject that is available for those whose business it is to know, train and lead soldiers.

Colonel Munson's book is primarily for junior Icaders but it is more than that. Commanders of all grades
even the highest, if their minds have not taken on a permanent setwill find it useful as a check against time-honored practices that may be outmoded or which may never have been sound.

In 'iew of the imperative need to train and train quickly a great army of subordinate leaders and the usefulness of this book to that end, it is not too much to say that Leadership for American Army Leaders is the most important literary contribution to National Defense that has come off the press since America began to arm. It should be read, re-read and pondered by every soldier in authority over others.

## The Purpose Of This Book

.IIIIH.n.I,fl$HI,,I.Ifl,fl,,,$Os,IHI,,I,S,SUHI..I,, II 17*100111 l,l000I,,tIHhiIl
1l0141
The principles discussed in the following pages arc directed to leaders in general, with appropriate empliasis on the officer-leader where that emphasis sccms applicable. These principles, even though backed with specific facts, are nevertheless expressed in the fewest possible words consistent with the objective of the book.

For that reason it is felt that this is not a book that caii be raced through and then shoved into a bookcase and forgottenthat is, it cannot if anything of real value is to be learned from it. It is the sort of book to be turned back to from time to time as a reference for handling problemspractical problems of leadership-that come again and again to every leader. It is the sort of book that it is hoped will suppLy a mirror for those frequent moments of self-analysis and introspection that arc characteristic of every progressive and successful leader.

in its pages there has been an effort to keep a reasonable balance between what to do and what not to do.

Since most of the material is focused on the problem of smoothing out the rough spots that arise in personal relationships, the superficial reader may jump to the conclusion that application of the principles given would produce a far too gentle and even an emasculated kind of leadership. Nothing is farther from the truth.

It is hoped that as each reader goes through the following pages he will keep one thought constantly in mind: A leader can be consistently hardboiled or consistently considerate and turn out a passing job of handling his outfit. But if he shifts his pattern, mixes his shotsif he is so inconsistent that his men feel insecure in their relationships with himhe is inevitably doomed to failure.

To Brigadier General Edward L. Munson, pioneer in the field of scientilic leadership, is rendered appreciative acknowledgment for the inspiration behind the compilation of this book. 1-us monumental work, The Management of Men, has supplied much oi the framework upon which it has been built. Indeed, there are not only thoughts but paragraphs heLein which, with his cooperation, have been taken bodily from that book, To the staff oi The Infantry Journal is expressed sincere appreciation for its invaluable editorial assistance and for the many ideas which have sprung from its keen perception of the problems of troop-leading.

This book has been submitted, as Army Regulations require of certain writings by active officers, to the War Department, which declared it "unobjectionable"
without suggesting alterations or omissions. The views it contains are purely those of its writer and have no official inspiration or sanction.

E. L. M., Jn.

## Chapter 1 Leadership Can Be Learned

Successful handling of men implies the application of the qualities of intelligent leadership. The goal of leadership is the instant, cheerful, and willing obedience and cooperation of subordinates. Thus, true discipline is concerned with the desires, the mental states, of individuals and groups. "Mental state" falls naturally under the label morale.

Leadership and morale are not synonymous; yet they are as inseparable as the component parts of an electrical circuit. Morale is like the currentthe powerful electromotive forceand leadership is like the conductor that guides and transmits that force to tile motor.

Hence the state or quality of morale produced is directly proportional to the quality of thc conductor or leader.

Thus the theory that leaders are born and not made is the saw of the defeatist, For acquaintance with the things that produce morale is one of the vital elements of leadership that any reasonably intelligent and forceful man can acquire, no matter how inexperienced lie may be or how little he may know to begin with about the practical problems of leading men.

Since morale is a mental state, a psychological state, practical knowledge of the laws that govern human bcbaylor is essential to its successful development and maintenance. Study of the theoretical, nebulous, and
IflI$*II *U,II
.I..uIflI,SIS.I...S.,I.,,..I..flZ
.;
abstract side of psychology is unnecessary, though any training in psychology that a leader may possess through education or reading is to his advantage. But if a leader knows the basic principles that control human behavior, if he grasps the realization that most men react in fixed and definite channels under a given stimulus or influence, if be can apply that knowledge intelligently to individual problems, he will possess the basic tool for managing men.

Some leaders have an instinctive or intuitive know!-
edge f human nature. These are the natural leaders.

'1 o the others but two roads to leadership are available:
experience and study. The trial-and-error, hit-or-miss methodlearning by experienceis costly in time and may well be costly in terms of the lives of men. This method has left a long trail of broken morale, faulty lraining and inept performance behind it. Those who are its successful praducts rarely attain the maximum leadership of which they are actually capable. For since their knowledge is experimental rather than scientific the frequency of their mistakes under shifting situalions is high.

In time of peace the costs of learning by experience are usually not self-evident. For example, if inspection discloses a low standard of training in his unit, the unit commander may receive a verbal lacing, and perhaps even some damning with faint praise upon an efficiency report be is not likely to see for years. But he will Un-

## Leadership Can Be Learned

I
tlI
doubtedly stay right where he is, waiting for further experiences to indicate further additions to his store of practical leadershipand the training of every man in his unit will mark time behind such a leader. For another example, a leader trying to learn the management of men through the trial-and-error method may for years produce a high rate of AWOL's among his Subordinates before he consciously or unconsciously corrects the irritating flaws within himself that have driven so many soldiers over the hill.

Easier to see are tile results of learning leaclership through experience in battle itself. Back in 1914 the young lieutenants of the First Hundred Thousand led their men into action by walking straight ahead of them toward their enemies, swinging their swagger sticks as they went thus to their deaths. 1-lere was leadership in the best tradition, in its way completely admirablebut in its way a hit-or-miss method, because it killed men by thousands and young leaders themselves at even a faster rate. It established a great tradition, yet it nearly wrecked the British Army. For morale just cannot continue to edst if you kill off tile bulk of your men. Morc recent was tile experience of the Spanish Loyalists, who bad to learn their leadership right in combat itself and under tile added handicap of political interference.

They did, it is true, develop splendid leaders in their lower echelonsbut the cost in men and in potential leaderswas tremendous. No, the method of learning o LEADERSI lIP FOR AMERICAN ARMY LEADERS
.p,l,ttI.,I,,.fl.I,,,p.ISI..IUhItIuS.tSSIIIt.fl$I,I,,.,Iflfl, lead by experience alone, the trial-and-error method, is costly in time and in lives.

With a very few notable exceptions, the available writings on military leadership are based almost solely upon the individual experiences of the authors. Illustrating how successful leaders have handled certain situations, containing the author's personal list of "dos and donts" for young officers, these books are of definite value. But they deal with the results rather than scientific fact; and they fail to recognize that what is one man's meat is another man's poisonthat two situations of war may be almost exactly similar, but that the varying personalities of the individuals involved may make the required courses of action very dissimilar.

The elements of leadership discussed in the following chapters are based upon sound psychological premise. That they exiSt is enough for our purpose;
from whence they spring and why they exist is relatively immaterial. They will be studied from the viewpoint of their results rather than that of their origins, lest their analysis become obscured or entirely hidden in theoretical abstractions.

Successful leaders of troops all possess, to greater or less degree, certain definite qualities of leadership.

Many of these qualities are likewise possessed by the men they lend. Furthermore,, military leadership goes beyond merely personal qualities into the realm of

## Leadership Can Be Learned

I
I
what things to do and how to do them. Thus it is ini possible to draw a dear-cut line between the internal qualities of leadership and the external expression of those qualities through action. The elements of Ieadcrship now to be discussed are too closely interrelated, too interlocking, to permit of complete isolation.

## Ci-Japter 2 The Manner Of The Leader

JIuIIptflhIIPulIltt,IUPSOI,SSISISI,SII$IUSSflI
Manner, usually an accurate clue to the state of mind oi any man, but particularly to that of a leader, has an important influence on the reactions of others. An act itself is often less important than the manner in which it is done. For the mariner may indicate the intent-
and the intent thus shown may cause a strong reaction in the recipients o. the act, This is particularly true of an act of speech, for manner is so closely a part of speech as to be inseparable (a fact that will be particularly emphasized in the following chapter). An injury that is obviously unintended is excused; a calculated slight, even if trivial, is resented. As the hero of Tze Virginian says, "VVhen you call me that, smile?'
What is going on in the minds of men can often be understood without a word being spoken. Look, gestures, and toneand even physical attitude or tensiongive away the thoughts men are thinking. Thus the cuitivation by leaders, and particularly officerleaders, of a calm, controlled manner is essential. The leader needs mastery over facial expression, control over voice and gesture. If, for instance, an officer's words come from an apprehensive mind he will not otherwise readily conceal that fact. A degree of selfcontrol is necessary to keep an unguarded expression or an unexpected change in voice from disclosing that

## The Manner Of Tfie Leader

anxiety at a time when it should e kept hidden. Likewise, a reward conferred in a patronizing manner may lose much of its effect because of the resentment and opposition aroused by the manner of giving it. Similarly, severeness, austerity, strictness of manner balk sympathy and confidence.. Frequent irritation, petulance, uncontrolled shows of temper, and bursts of anger indicate that a leader does not have even himself in hand. Moreover, such lack o control lowers a leader's prestige and may even make him laughable. Donald Duck is funny, anti so may any man be who commonly bursts into tantrums. In sum, the manner of the leader toward his men makes for or against cooperation.

All human beings are imitative, and soldiers of all grades and ranks especially tend to copy and react to the outward expressions of their leaders. Thus not only the tiling to be done but the manner of doing it may bc conveyed by suggestion. All drillmasters realize that their precision and bearing, and the snap and vigor of their commands, is directly reflected in the drill of their units. The same comparison holds between the giving of any order and the way it is carried out.

This holds good even more broadly of an appearance of calmness on the leader's part, particularly when everything seems to be going wrong. Few things can keep up time morale of troops better than the realization that their leader, with full knowledge of the chifTiculties of a situation, neither looks nor acts as worried as per-

I
                            Ill, ifth,It,
                                                                                    SI,
                                                                                                             ii
                                                                                                                          SSliiSSIII*ISSuSiI,SiI
                                                                                                                                                                                  ,S,ISliSI,I,uIi

haps he has a right to be. Many think that Papa Jothe's
refusal to get excited when the French armies of 1914
were retreating day alter day toward Paris was by far
the most unportant element in the eventual stemming
of that earlier German tide. Again, we know from
George \Vashinton's confidential letters to Congress
how nearly desperate he often was over the situation in
his army. But so Far as we can tell from the descriptions
of his manner, written by those who were with him in
those times of stress, he sddoin betrayed even to the
iricmbcrs of hIS stall or to his aRkS in the course of daily
associalioii any degree ot the worry ai d general disturb-
ance of mind apparent in his confidential letters. in-
stead, his almost lofty calmness held his troops together,
as we know, through the most desperate situations.
  At the same time, it is possible to carry an outward
appearance of calmness and disregard too far. A coin-
pictely phlegmatic manner in times of great stress may
help others to stay calm, but it will not inspire them to
a maximum effort. Thus the manner of a leader in a
tight situation may well be touched with contagious
excitement so long as it is an excitement not of appre-
hension but of effort.

## C1Iapthr 3 Tf1E Language Of Tile Leai)Eb I.S,,,Mii,Ifl,

Latiguage, a component of maniicr, is anothc-r of the outward marks by which a leader can be judged. What he says and the lomis o[ expression lie uses give nmcli infrnmation of his mental state or the attitude behind it.

The words tile leader uses to his men should largely be chosen for the thought or purpose he wants to cxpress. Particularly when he wants to put suiiielliii g
(WCt emphatically should his words be short, clear in their nicailuPig, and iinkrstandahle to tin: tim:I,; lie is nI-
dressing.

I ughhung, tendollar words or technical language arc nicaningless to the mmd oi a man who may never have heard time words. This (lOCS not mean, Iiowevcr, that a Ieade must speak iii words oJ one syllable. hi the army of today lie will seldom Ind uncultivated minds so lacking in ordinary comprehension that he will be jusulicti in using time Ianguagc lie would use, in effect, to children. All he needs to do is to speak plainly and simply, and if lie must use fcnns which he thinks the iiian he is talking to mimay not clearly understand, then he should iiiake sure the meaning of these terms is understood, even if the terms demand a full and patiently given exJ)lflhlatiOfl.

An oflicer should never make the mistake of sumoping
-to the vulgar or the illiterate, even if such speech is (lie normal talk o the particular men be is directing. But

this does not mean that he must make any effort to
"talk like a book," or that lie should avoid good, plain, colloquial speech. In fact, this kind of speech will usually put his meaning ove.r much better than stiffer and more formal speech. It is astonishing how men of even considerable intelligence have difficulty in understanding speech not put in ordinary terms. There is, at the same time, 110 need to be ungrammatical or to make much use of slang except where a word of slang may convey the meaning more concisely and vividly than any other term. This is particularly true if within the leader's unit some slang term or nickname is in constant use. What particular good does it do to speak of "weapons-carriers" if they are known to every man as "jeeps"?

And what term puts over die idea better to troops than the word "chow"? Indeed, for some terms of slang in constant use there are no adequate substitutes.

Sentences should be short, uninvolved, and incisive.

They should be positive and direct, not uncertain, in-
1
.

.

1
447k conclusive, or negative. i o say, ror example, i m sure you can do it," "You're just the man to do it,t '1There must be a wayI know you can find it," produces confidence, self-reliance, and determination. But such language as, "Maybe you can do it," "See if you can't do it," "I doubt if you can d0 itbut go ahead and try,"
brings doubt and wavering.

Cursing and profanity have always been common in armies. Whether this is caused by excess energy pent up
(10]

## The Language Of The Leader ,..,Ifl,.,,,,,I,,,,,Iflhi,,,,,,Fl,,Fl,,$Lfl

by military restrictions, by the absence of the tempering influence of women, or by the mistaken idea that it is the sign of a he-man is immaterial. Ignoring purely ethical reasons, immoderate language habitually used toward subordinates almost always produces unfavorable results both in the individual and the unit.

One of George Washington's first general orders was an effort to curb loose language. Such language should certainly he kept governed, at least to the extent of not allowing it in the presence of officers. For if a leader lets his men run wild in this respect-if he permits the use of any language, however obscene-a lack of general control is apt to become taken for granted.

Yet, here too judgment is required. A leader can overdo the thing and thus detract from his Icaclership if he harps continually on the subject and draws the line of niceness in language too closely. There are many situations in such an uncertain activity of man as vafare that bear strongly upon the emotions. A leader may well overlook the blowing-off of steam whenever the occasion seems to warrant it. And it often may seem to in actual war. After all, a soldier is first of all things a man who lights, and if there is a traditional language of war he can be expected to use it at times. George Washington did, despite his first general order.

To curse any man himself is usually to affront him through his realization of the intent to insult. Sonictimes such intent is modified or shown to be absent by
[II]
u,,.,,.,.,.l.,,u,,, manner. Then, too, there are men whose use of profanity is so habitual that it is recognized as entirely impersonal. But these are the exceptions. To permit loose language by subordinate leaders is to risk friction, resentment, quarrelingeven insubordination.

Swearing at men by their superiors is bitterly resentcd. They are not only affronted, they are humiliated; for their self-respect has been impaired unless they retaliate. Since in the military service retaliation is impossible, they feel, and righcly so, that tile superior iis taken an unfair advantage of his authority. They may brood over the insult, alone or with friends. If hottempered, they may commit the serious offenses of disobedience or assault. At the least, the superior produces sullenness and animosity among his subordinates. And often he also produces a state of mind in which the only escape from a scemingly intolerable situation appears to be absence without leave or desertion.

The same tiling applies to any immoderate language.

It does not necessarily have to be actual cursing at men to arouse their antagonism and lose in great measure their esteem and admiration for their leader.. An actual case in point is that of a company commander who, dissatisEied with the appearance of his company at Saturday inspection, drew them up in front of bartac!cs and proceeded to inform them in no uncertain terms, without, however, using actual profanity, that the whole company was lousy" in appearance. To add

                                                      IIIlSIIflPI,t,Ifl*ilt,,.
             THE LANCUAGE OF THE LEADER
,fl.,,,,,,,O4flftI
                ,Umfl,,,,,I,,Ifll,II
                                               PItfl
                                                      t
                                                                 10*

emphasis, this commander went on to say in his ha-.

rangue, "And any man who won't properly dean Ui)
fot.Saturday inspection is a yellow-bellied Bolshevik."
Even though the company had often heard similar language from this particular commander, the words he used this time were taken as a direct insult by practically every man in the company, although they not actually meant as such but were simply spoken in haste and ill-temper. The result was that certain rcsponsibie noncommissioned officers of the company were so disturbed over the state of affairs that they went to the regimental commander and reported the matter, and it naturally took all time tact in the world on the part of the regimental commander to straighten the situation outa thing he managed to succeed in doing without particular injury to what was left of the leadership of the company commander.

This example brings out another important point about language used toward subordinates. It is not likely that there will ever be a unit in our army or any other which will deserve a wholesale reprimand. In the company referred to above, only some fifteen or sixteen men out of sixty-odd were picked up at the inspection as not having properly prepared for it. Yet the whole unit was subjected to the ranting of its commander.

There were plenty of fine men in that unit, none of whom deserved criticism or blame. There is nothing better calculated to reduce the state of morale than just

such wholesale criticism and wholesale punishments following it.

Nothing creates resentment so readily.

Likewise, the "bawling out" of a man or men is resented as being a personal attack. It is in fact more often an expression of anger that a correction. The more or less impersonal point at issue is lost, and the matter becomes a mental clash between individuals.

Again, to reprimand a subordinate leader before his men lowers his prestige and correspondingly increases his resentment, It is hard to imagine any circumstances, excepting in combat when lives are at stake, when such treatment is justifiable.

Indeed, if violent language ever has any basis for use that use should be reserved for extreme emergency
the emergency of extreme danger, of the battlefield.

A tongue-lashing may then have a stimulating and steadying effect wkich is lost if such speech is habitual.

Sarcasm or Irony does not neces
y convey an insult, for the manner in which it is spoken shows the in tent. Its wittiness sometimes lacks tile sting of reproof, yet drives home the lesson. It is useful with some types of men; but it must be employed with care, it must not become habitual, and it must never have the apparent purpose of causing humiliation.

There are many men to whom sarcasm or irony are not readily apparent as such, and with these men it tends sooner or later to create a kind of bewildered resentment. Such a man is never quite sure what hs THE LANGUAGE OF THE LEADER
,.o,,,,,I.fll.,,,fl.,,,,I,,,.,,flu flu,,,,,, leader means. Again, heavy sarcasm habitually used soon creates a general resentment because men feel that their leader is taking advantage of his position to be sarcastic. Even a bantering tone should not be used habitually. And when a leader makes a joke of something a subordinate does, as he occasionally may do to lighten a serious or tiring situation or otherwise cheer the spirits of his men, he should always try not to do so in a way that will hurt the feelings of the man himself.

Too much wise-cracking on the part of the leader will also inevitably result in wise-crack replies from his troops. The American soldier is too used to that kind of talk to resist coming back with it if he thinks lie can get away with it. He will have reason to think he can get away with it if he is habitually on the receiving end of such remarks. At the same time, any wise k'ader will know that in certain circumstances a certain amount of joking and wise-cracking is what the situatiOn calls for.

t is good when there is discouragement in .the air. A
flash of humor helps at a time when exhausted troops must be called upon for another effort. It tends to give confidence in any time of stress. Indeed, it is often the American way of implying sympathy and understanding and even cooperation in the midst of difficulty.

## Chapter 4 Tactfulness Can Be Acquired

lcw assets aie more valuable to an officer than tact.

Tact is the ability to deal with men without generating friction, without giving them offense. It is the common sense appreciation of when and how to rio things.

Like many oilier qualities of leadership, tact may be to a certain extent a natural endowment, but it can be acquired and developed. Intelligent analysis of personal acts that have caused antagonism will demonstrate either that time time selected was not a good time, or that the language, the approach to the act, or the manner of the act was unlortunate. And, too, tact undergoes an unconscious and natural development as a by-product ol CXpCrKflCC in liandliiig men.

Lack nI tact is always rescnte(l, even though the suboLdinate may realize that there was no intent to hurt. The tactless superior, sensing friction and opposition but feeling that his act was based upon his own best jtidgimieiit, himself develops resentment, with rc
suiting damage to cooperation and efficiency. Every ofhcer, no matter how. scant his experience, can recall Limes when his tactlessness has brought him results the opposite of those he desired; or where, conversely, the exercise of tactthe diplomatic choosing of his time and manner of approachhas easedi situations that might have proven rligastrous.

## Tactfulness Can Be Acquirei)

Tact is particularly called for in those deahngs with.

subordinates in which a personal clement is involved.

Eor example, it may he necessary to tell a hard-working, driving subordinate leader that lie is asking a littk more of those under him than they can reasonably bc expected to produce. The criticism has to bemade in such a way that it will be apparent, yet neither cause cliscouragement nor detract from the drive and energy of the subordinate leader. 1-lere perhaps it is usually wise to open up with a compliment on good work done
and then to say that there are certain aspects oF the subordinate's work that he can improve.

One commander in our Army today, in calling to the attention of junior officers their faults and errois, successiully uses the method of telling them that hr wants very ninch to give I hem outstan(liug dllicieiiry reports but that there arc certain ilnprovcnlcnts lie thinks they need to make in themselves before he can give them the kind of report he knows they have die stuff in them to deserve. Other leaders in scc1dn improvement in enlisted nienwimere criticism, rt her than blame or punishment for something cionc, is involvedalways speak of the good points along with the bad. r0 do so is to use genuine tact. Tact is, of con rc, very CIOSC to courtesy and even to cheerfulness, loth of which will be covered in later chapters.

Subordinates usually are more tactful to leaders thm leaders are toward subordinates; the junior recognizes that antagonizing his superior will bring results probably immediate and painful, and certainly disadvantageous to himself. No such brake exists over the leaderthe results of his tactlessness are more remote and certainly less easy to recognize. Nevertheless, they are thereand they are doubly dangerous, for they are cumuIaive. Briefly, tact, like courtesy, works from the top clown as well as from the bottom up.

## Chapter 5 Cheerfulness Spreads; So Does Gloom

,II,,,IS,ItII,III.,ft,,.,I,II,,rnI,,,.IlII
Since the countless factors that promote cheerfulness are among the elements that develop morale, this whole book is actually devoted to methods and measures for its maintenance. But in considering cheerfulness as a necessary trait for a leader, it must be repeated to begin with that subordinates are imitative and that the leader's example will be copied by those he leads.

Close to cheerfulness is optimismthe ability to see and to emphasize the brighter side of things. The optimistic leader is not a man who sees this world as the best of all possible worldsa man who foolishly insists, whether sincerely or not, that everything that happens is for the best. For men readily detect sham and artiliciality, and quite as readily detect foolish optimism.

The truly optimistic leader is one who sees and points out every possibility, however slight, that will make for eventual success.

On the other hand, the pessimist who dwells continually on the dark side of every situation spreads apprehension, doubt, gloom, and even despair when combat has its tight, doubtful, or discouraging aspects.

A long face is seldom if ever the face for a leader. It may be useful at rare timc to tone down too high a degree of optimism. But it often earns the nickname
"Sourpuss" among ubordinatesa name that mcvitably carries with it a certain implication that the troops find something a little wanting in their leader.

At the same time, it must he remembered that there are certain men whose facial muscles are so inflexible that they are not able to smile or even look cheerful without actual muscular effort, and that for like reason some men cannot smile freely at all. A leader who has this handicap can readily offset it through the cheerfulness of the words he uses, and even by the expression of his eyes as he speaks.

The following incident illustrates the influence of a typical glooin.ower. A company commander, in a regiment that had suddenly been ordered on an expedition which in all probability was going to involve some fighting, assembled his company to give them a last talk before they boarded the transport. For more than half an hour he gave them a long-faced, serious, and rambling speech about the extraordinary duties they would probably have to perform, the extraordinary difculties with which they might be faced when they came to fighting the probable enemy, and the practical certainty thai a number of them would not survive the expedi tion. In a feeble attempt to speak lightly of a serious matter he brought out this last point by saying several times, "Don't forget it! Some of you are going to be pushing up daisies when this thing is over!" There was not one word of cheer in his whole harangue. It cast a definite gloom over the whole company.

## Cheerfulness Spreads; So Does Gloom Iii.Ls,Sh*I*Iss$I.,S,$I.,.S,,Iisiiii.Lil,Si,,L.I.Llsliisi,,Ui. I

Only the excitement of the expedition and the hard and interesting work of doing such special training as could be done on the transport helped to dispel the general gloom created by this leader. As a matter of fact, these very things eventually brought this leader himself out of his pessimism.

Of a similar nature to cheerfulness and optimism is enthusiasmdoing things with vigor because of willingness and gratification in accomplishment, rather than doing them halfheartedly merely because it is duty.

But enthusiasm cannot be allowed to run so wild that it produces distortion of values or blinds to fatal miscalculations. To Davy Crockett's "Be sure you're right;
then go ahead" we can well add, "And while you are going ahead be sure that you continue to be right.

## Ci-Iapter 6 Courtesy I-Las No Limits

lISuII,,,I,fl$flI,SlUIIII
Courtesy is politeness, a civility in which a superior cannot afford to be outdone by a subordinate. It is the lubricant of human relationsa thing that has no limits as to rank or status. To demand it from a subordinate and to fail to return it in full measure is to indicate either an arrogance or a lack of interest that has no place in leadership. The inexperienced often feel that politeness in a military leader implies softness; or worse, that from a subordinate it indicates bootlicking. Nothing is farther from the truth. Real courtesy is simply common everyday civility.

Someone once compared politeness to an air-cushion.

l-Ie said that there was nothing in it, but that it eased the joints of human contact wonderfully. There may be nothing in it that can be grasped physically or converted into dollars and cents. The dividends it pays are found in the contentment, goodwill, mutual appreciation, and smooth functioning of the unit toward which it is used.

Courtesy, naturally, is a matter oF words and actions both. One leader may habitually bark out his orders, impersonally but abruptly. Another leader may habitially give his orders in a tone tinged with a courtesy that implies the expectancy of obedience. Both or these leaders will get obedience. But the second 0f the two will get the more willing obedience and codperation.

## Courtesy Has No Limits T.I.,,,,,,Fl,T,,,T,I,,T,,I,,,,,($,0Tufl,0I,Fl Lfthiiitijtfl,Si,T,S,,T,E,S?Pfl,Ii*Flbfli9Ijflh$Flpjj,Jhljjlj* *Jiiipj.I,J,Iji,U,,I,Ptfl,I..I

In times of emergency, of course, abrupt rapid-flre orders become desirable because they save time and there is no need to imply expected obedience, no need to do anything but make oneself perfectly plain and clear and foceful. There are times, too, when force can well replace a courteous tone, but even then there is never any reason for pure discourtesy. At most other times a leader will find that a somewhat mild, courteous, though firm mode of address will bring responsc.

Thus courtesy is closely tied in with manner and language. It can also be added that habitual courtesy is an example often imitated by subordinate leaders.

## Chapter 7 The Leader's Decision Of Mind

1.11111 llilflI tlflhiliiiuiiliil IOl.uiOl*lltlii.Oi4fl lOll ijilill 00011110111101 lUlOllOSlllSIlllOhllflllli$llSflfl lililliIi III
The leader who never seems to be able to make up his mind, who is always conferring and consulting with others, lacks decision of characterthe ability to reach his own conclusions. Such a leader seldom gains the confidence of his men, for troops ate quick to notice his lack of force.

The man who dawdles, who keeps his men waiting in idleness, who repeatedly changes without sound reason the courses and methods he has once adopted, irritates his subordinates. A spirit of grumbling is never causcd in a unit by work alone. As a matter of fact, no good troops mind work once they are at it and have an idea of its purpose. B waiting around for a leader to make up his mind is a potent source oi griping. Perhaps only one other tiung is worse, and that is when work once started is interrupted over and over again because of the leader's inability to form a plan and follow it through.

There has been an emphasis, in some past military instruction, on the thought that if a leader makes a poor plan oi action, and then comes to a fast decision on it and carries it out vigorously, he will be more successful than ii he does nothing at all. This, of course, is too general a principle to go on as a rule because there arc often situations in which the best possible decision is

## The Leader's Decision Of Mind ,,L,,,,.U,

to do nothing whatever for the time being. F knee
"action at all costs" attitude leads to ill-considered and hasty action, with costly results.

Timidity due to lack of experience is the chief cause of this lack of decision, especially in younger officcrs.

Haste is no remedy for such timidity. A decision must be thought out. A habit of rushing ahead blindly merely to be doing something is stupidand stupidity in battle almost always leads into needless danger and ioss. Only by observation, and plenty of practice and effort, and by some intelligent self-analysis, can a leader develop the self-confidence he needs.

No leader should neglect the opinions and stIgcstions of others. An officer who will listen to nobody is a self-opinionated fool. But once he has heard the ideas of others, the leader himself must make the dccision.

in other words, lie must possess self-con lidence, and tlic ability to weigh the opinions of others, rather than conceit. At the same time, the value of the opinions of others must never be held so high that the leader turns to his assistants for advice on every minor matter. in general, the time should be taken to do this only when the suggestions of others will actually be of value in arriving at decisions. A man who builds up his own sehf-conlklcncethe courage of his convictions, and faith In his ability to carry out what he thinks nceds doingis rarely possessed of doubt.

Self-confidence is much more a matter of practice

and experience than may seem to be true at first thought.

With a little reflection, it should be plain to any leader that his mind is inclined to waver. A leader who finds this tendency in himself can usually, by mere practice, build up his decisive powers. Indecisiveness lalgely resuits From apprehension. Many apprehensions will, on examination and reflection, be discovered to be unfounded. Other apprehensions similaj examined will be found to be exaggerated. Thus the pl'actice of coming to decisions speediJy, once the available facts are known and briefly weighed, is desirable to all leaders.

It can be cultivated deliberately, with respect to one minor decision after another, by any leader who finds his uncertainty habitual.

Nor should an occasional wrong decision deter a leader from making up his mind with reasonable speed or lead him further into dawdling or excessive caution.

If he lincis that many of his decisions arc wrong ones, en it is his judgment that is at fault and not his power decision. Tk only remedy for bad judgment is a closer study of ones profession.

Of indecision it should also be said that, probably more often than we like to think, it is actually due to lack of knowledge. The leader who does not, have the fullest grasp of his own duties, the duties of those under him, the technique of the means of warfare his troops employ, and a thorough grasp as well of the duties and responsibilities of at least the next higher commander THE LEADER'S DECISION OP MIND
flh,,lt0tflhIflhI.11,1 ItlIllIlOIslIll I0I$lflhuIIi 10001$',.

I
,II
above him, is liable to find himself lacking in the knowledge he needs to carry out new duties upon promotion. It is true that promotion, especially in periods of emergency, sometimes comes suddenly. if the leader is not fully prepared for it in every sense, then it is up to him to dig in and acquire as rapidly as he possibly can the new knowledge he must have if his new responsibilities are to be met. If lie feels indecision, if indecision tends in the slightest to become habitual, then he must force himself to reach decisionsmust, in so many words, practice decisiveness.

It is also sometimes true that a commander will find that one of his staff is so able and expert that his advice almost always offers a suitable basis for decision. To some commanders this may be an irritating state of affairsto have as an assistant a staff officer or noncom who is always right. Other commanders, the true leaders, thank Cod that they are lucky enough to have such assistance. There need be nothing at all embarrassing in such a situation. An able leader will in fact learn, and learn gladly, from an expert subordinate. Actually, of course, the decision itself is always his, and even if there are few major differences of opinion on his part there will always be occasional minor ones on which the commander's decision will be his own.

This is to a large extent the situation that faces a newly commissioned officer when he first takes chargc of a platoon. I-Ic may find in his platoon sergeant a maii

so conversant with the leadership of a platoon that he will have much to learn from him. Nothing is ever to be gained and much is lost, in such a situation, by making arbitrary and incorrect decisions merely to bring out and emphasize the power of decision. For this power is vested in the leader and seldom needs c-niplias. It forms tite working basis of leadership in the United States Army.

## Ci-Iapter 8 Initiative, Too, Can Be Developei)

It has been said, commonly and falsely, that willpower is born and not made. Self-confidcnce usually accompanies strong will; and as confidence kvclops, will increases the more.

Initiative and willingness to assume responsibility are direct products of self-confidence and will-power.

To do well just what he is told to do but never to initiate anything himselfto drag along with his interest so1eiy on his pay check and on keeping out of possible trouble
these are the traits of military deadwood, the symbols of timidity, laziness, and mediocrity.

Initiative does not belong exclusively to the leader.

It is essential in all ranks and grades. The commander must foster initiative among his subordinates by giving them duties commensurate with their rank and then letting them work out the details and ftnish the job unaided. 1k is a supervisor, an executive. A company commander who is a busybody and who will not trust his subordinates, who handles all details of the ordr]y room, the kitchen, the supply room, who is the Cotl)OEaI
of every squad in training and battle, not only narrows his own vision and ability, forming the hindering lmnl)it of attention to petty detail, but kills time pride, the spirit and ambition, the initiative, of every man in his unit.

This does not mean, however, that the leader can
UtIIfl
,,l,,,,,,t,SIt,SIIuSuI,IlIl.uIIWII$I
,,Iu,,,,,,,,.Ii,,,tHh,.,I,A,.,..,u,,...

deal out the tasks and then do nothing else. He must know, of course, how to handle the jobs himself, certainly well enough to check their performanceand he must make such checks. Furthcrmore, he must retain for himself those functions that are exclusively the commander's. He must not decentralize to the extent that he weakens the primitive relationship between chief and follower. There should never be permined the slightest doubt as to who is the boss.

J3ut the leader who smothers initiative within his unit, throughdistrust of the abilities of his subordinates or through a well-meaning bitt nevertheless vicious desire to see that everything is done exactly rightthe leader who does these things in time of peace and during training at any timeis denying to those under him what is perhaps the chief tradition of American troops in battle, the tradition of estimating the situation with speed and acting accordingly whether or not thereare orders from higher authorities to cover the situatibn. It has been initiative that has marked our most successful units in our wars of the past. It has been a lack of initiative (often, it is true, due to briefness of training) that has brought about most 0f the mistakes American commanders have made in past wars. But as a whole, the American soklier, both officer and enlisted man, has taken pride in his ability to act and to act successfully in the face of any circumstances, no matter how confused, that war might bring.

## U,,,,,.,,,L,,Ui$.I,Oooo,Hhl Initiative, Too, Can 3E Developei)

Thus it is an utterly vital matter for every lender to develop initiative among his subordinates. There is nothing that heightens the morale a troops more than the feeling that every one of their leaders [rain the lowest acting-corporal to the highest commander has bccn trained to take care of his troops in unexpected circumstances and will be able to act and act fast when the need for action arises. Nor should training in the use o initiative be limited strictly to leaders. Every prom ising private should be given every possible chance to use and develop his initiative.

Initiative, like most of the other qualities a title leader needs to have, can be developed only. through much practice. in training this means that the leader must work up hundreds a situations covering as many contingencies, and must use such instruciou almost daily in his training. For this type of instruction he should not wait until his unit has completed its basic tactical training. He should work such situations into the daily training of his troops from its beginning. This is not hard to do, because for the most part it mcans taking one situation and varying it in many different ways. For example, it is possible to take a small map problem or terrain exercise and give it at least twenty twists, every one of which will teach a different lesson.

it is also obvious that there is a distinction bctween genuine initiative and undue license. Authority ivcii to a subordinate should never be made by him the basis for exercising an authority never meant to be delegated.

"Discipline," said Colonel.Applin, "is instant and willing obedience to all orders, and in the absence of orders, to what you believe the order ivou!d have been."
1-Ierc is the essence of true initiative.

In final analysis, leaders and the troops they lead inu't above all things have constant practice in the development of initiative so that when the unexpected happens, as it is always doing in war, they will be used to the idea of having to sum things up and having to act with the utmost speed.

## Chapter 9 Loyalty ToAnd OfThe Leader

111111
,*,$I,,IOhIlfltuI,t, One of the fundamental elcmcnts of discipline is loyaltywilling and voluntary compliance to the plans and will of the superior, unfailing devotion to a cause.

Loyalty is in no way merely a blind and servile service to the letter of the regulations. It is an active, intelligent, and willing effort to carry out the intent of the commander to the best of his ability.

There is within all men a strong desire to do things their own way and to express that desire in words. It is fortunate, then, that commanders who fail to listen to the suggestions of their subordinates are few. Thus there is normally open to subordinates a channel for the expression of Kkas. l3ut once the commander has ma(lc his decision, compliance must he wholehearted, regardless of personal views. When the final decision has been made the subordinate must give complete, energetic support. If he is a man who can be depended upon to carry out with zeal only those ideas which be himself approves he is unreliable and worthless in any unit.

The constitutional right to freedom of speech and the average man's liking for his own thoughts and the sound of his own voice combine, sometimes, to produce loose criticism. Sometimes, indeed, upon receipt o an order there is an off-the-record attempt to tear it to pieces and to show how another plan would have been
- I,,,,, p.o..,.., i.,.,.,,,,,l,,,,.,.i.pI,,S.litlu,I'.ll Ip4,,,ilP ,.,,,,,,,,l.it*flhl,ONii,I,t,,I,,PS,l,llil,l.,IliillIlllulISI
better. SLICh criticism may satisfy the ego of the individual concernedbut it shatters loyalty straight down through the organization. In a unit given to knocking, growling, and griping, the source of infection may oFten be found at the top.An officer who sets the example of loose criticism, especially in the presence of enlisted men, cannot be surprised ii he gets from his men only a similar lack .of loyalty.

At the same time, it is something of an American privilege to blow off steam; by no means is all griping an indication of disloyalty. It takes no great common sense on the part of a leader to realize for himself that an occasional expression of impatience, even strongly worded, is only an American habit of which few mdividuals are free. in the ordinary course of events these things mean nothing, and are followed by fully as willing a cooperation and obedience as if the cause of impatience had been met with a smile.. In war the average American soldier will take out his griping on the enemy, but at no time can he be expected to lose his habit of expressing an occasional complaint.

Loyalty works both ways. Loyalty to one's own organization and men is just as vital as loyalty to superiors. If a leader is proud of his men, if lie has in them the Faith that real loyalty demands, they will return his support and backing a hundredfold.

To give this a practical turn, the leader who never hesitates when occasion comes, as it usually does, to

## Loyalty '10And OfTile Leader

present the case for his unit to his own superiors (when, for instance, his unit is discriminated against through inadvertent administrative error) is known to his men as a leader who watches out for them. But this, 01
course, can be overdone. It can even become the habit of playing to the grandstand. It can breed real dicontent among his own troops if he ever makes a habit of showing that he feels that higher authority may "have it in for him" or his outfit. The solution is simply a matter of standing up within reason for one's unit. When it comes to actual campaign and battle, the stand should never take the form of protest. And at any time, the best way to handle the situation is to make certain that the higher commander is aware of what may be a mistake on his part or on the part of his staff.

## Chapter 10 Military DutyThe Leader Must Give His Best

A military duty is an obligation to be performed, a task to be carried out. Thus a high sense of duty results in a high standard 0f performance, a constant and continuous effort to give the best a leader has in him to the completion of the task at hand.

Duty is also the subordination of personal interests to the job to be done. It is alertness rather than woolgathering on sentinel duty; it is the careful feeding and watering of animals before resting after a march; it is the thorough inspection of a weapons-carrier rather than a haphazard glance; itis looking to the comfort of his men, no Platter how tired the leader himself may be. Duty is servicea privilege and not a compulsion.

J)tity well done brings to every soldier, whether oflicer or enlisted man, a glow of achievement and satisfaction.

"Duties" in the common military sense offer a yarying degree of opportunity to demonstrate ability. Some are pleasant; others by their very nature are disagreeable. For these reasons many duties should be rotated as far as possible, in order to avoid the least suspicion of partiality or favoritism. Since any duty is an obligation, no duty should ever be perverted and degraded by making it into a punishment.

Sprouting from the thought that coddling ruins so1-
,.,,,fl,,,.Hu.,fl,,.

diers, there exists a traditional and mistaken idea that duty should be hard and uncompromising, even when this is unnecessary. Every leader must realize that the American soldier is intelligent enough both to realize and to resent needless discomfort, whether die discorn-
(OTt: he undergoes is due to ignorance, neglect, or faulty
(jF sincere) leadership. This same quality of intelligent discernment, of knowing which end is up, also makes the American soldier cheerfully and even willingly undergo equal or worse discomforts when he realizes that the hardships are unavoidable.

There is no reason, either, Why the acceptance of obligations should he so overworked as eventually to make everything obnoxious that comes within the broadest conception of duty. To claim that all things unpleasant arid laborious must be clone just because ohligation rcqiiirc it makes duty a taskmaster rather tkin a standard to be achieved. Any leader who persistently follows such a plan may cause his troops eventually to detest the very mention o the word. If a task is laborious or unpleasant it is better to give a man, a real incentive for doing it than to drive him to it under a perverted sense of duty.

The spirit that a leader must try to develop and kcep going within his units is well expressed in the words of a noncommissioned officer, used in describing an American regiment which had an important station in China, duty at which involved many unexpected and

sometimes unpleasant tasks: "This is a good outfit.

Whenever this regiment has a job to do everybody in it tackles it, and no matter how hard it is, the whole outfit tries to see how well and how soon they can get ft over and done with?'
- ,.,.,,.t,,uS.,. a.,,, ,.,,,It,ui,II,,,,,fl,,IS,I
, 1I uiss.

## Chapter 11 The Leader Must Know His Men

I, The matter of personal contact between Comm issioned officers and their men enters into leadership in so many different ways that it is hardly possible to condense it into a single brtef discussion.

When Alexander Pope wrote that "The proper study of mankind is man," he coined a fine motto for the art of personal leadership. For the crux of personal leadership is the leader's knowledge of his menand knowledge of men has as its cornerstone an intelligent understanding of human nature.

An officer must therefore know his men, individually as well as collectively. T be able to lead their minds he must know what they really thinkand he cannot possess this knowledge without first having entered a certain extent into their lives, hopes, fears, joys, sorrows. If he does this with common sense it iS no more subversive of discipline than the kindness of a father is destructive of his son's obedience.

A company officer should know every man in his organization by name. To hail an individual as "you man" or "hey, youl" is belittling. :The enlisted man feels that lie is just another man in ranks with a serial nwnher-an unimportant cog in which his superior has rio personal interest. To use his name without his tithe in speaking to a noncommissioned officer produces much I
*0111111 OIl tillIsfItO 011111 OIlOttItIt*IlIItIIllllIIIItOtIIII*I
l*IOIItIItIfltIIlISlIIIllIItIlI
the same effect. "Corporal Jones," "Sergeant Kelly," is the right way; every human being responds tothe recognition of iiis personality and his ability and achievement or experience as indicated by his rank.

Much can be learned about individual men by studying their service records and qtiali(ication cards.

Visits to regimental headquarters to study Soldiers'
Qualification Cards (WD AGO Form 20) could well be made mandatory, for through them a company officer can get a comprehensive picture o the make-up of his unit. But these things are not enough by themselves. The man himself must be studied. The company oll'icer should know his regional and temperam'ntal characteristics, his weaknesses and strengths;
his hopes and apprehensions. He should know something of the lives of his men before thcy enlisted, their families, their educational and vocational backgrounds.

I-Ic should constantly endeavor to know their states of mind, their attitudes toward their service, and all the minor things which tend to raise or lower their morale.

The leader Sl1oUl(l weigh and consider every mdividuat in his unithis physical, mental, and moral qualities; his appearance; his manner and performance of duty. 'rhis kind of sizing up is a task that is never completed. It is an unending job, both because first impressions may be erroneous and because every enlisted man wifl inevitably become better or worse. If an oIllcer thus reviews his first impressions in the light of later

## The Leader Must Know 1-Us Men

IlIlIHIlSIt daily contact and observation, he will improve and perfect his ability to analyze character.

Much o this necessary knowledge can only be secured from the men themselves. IF an enlisted man is formally questioned he will often have only a minimum to say. He will do the sanie thing if he lacks confidence in his officer. The ability of an officer to talk to an enlisted man in a way that shows an understanding of him as a man is a certain way to his confidence. And when it seems best, the official military relationship can be temporarily set asideand a man put at ease and told to sit down to talk things over.

Personal information that an officer learns about other men of a unit from his noncommissioned officerleaders and other sources should be carefully wcigliccl by him. Sometimes such infocrnation is heavily colored.

Too, it is destructive of morale for the men of a unit to feel that their leader may have snocpers or "white rats"
in the unit, which is sometimes true in the unit of a leader who has the wrong ideas o leadership.

A few officers seem to possess an almost instinctive ability to find out the strengths and weaknesses of their men; but most of them must approach the task consciously and deliberately. For a company officer to ignore this constant study of the human beings that make up his unit is for him to run the risk of disaster in battle itself, this through lack of a vital knowledge.

As a leader gains knowledge of his men he will always find out things about certain ones, in the course of normal observation and without any prying on his part, that will in no way seem to him admirablein fact, things that will often seem the opposite. These will, of coure, be the ordinary weaknesses of humankind which any leader must freely acknowledge to exist, must look upon with reasonable tolerance, and must never permit himself to judge narrowly and harshly.

If he does misjudge such traits he will find himself building up prejudices against individual subordinates who may well have the stuff within them it takes to carry out their missions when it comes to combat itself.

Every leader must indeed constantly remember that his own ideals of conduct may not be those under which a articular member of his command has been brought UI) or accustomed to observe. This, of course, applies to many of the things already discussedlanguage, manner, and the like. For example, a big-talking, loudmouthed, bragging individual is not necessarily ninetenths made up of wind. [-le may simply be good and know it, though lie possesses the weakness of not being able to keep the news to himself. On the other hand, the mild-mannered, soft-spoken man who seems uncertain of himself and is nevr in the forefront, often creating in the leader's mind even an unpleasant appearance of ineffectuality, may simply he a man who shrinks from the limelight or who shrinks from added

## The Leader Must Know His Men Iis.Fl,Tl.Ui,

responsibilities because he thinks they will give him extra work.

Impatience with human foibles is to be found in greatest degree in young officer-leaders whose ideals and desire for perfection may sometimes be higher than the present state of humankind will warrant. Such leaders especially must be careful to weigh their men in terms of battle resultsand not in terms of the more or less rigid standards of conduct which they themselves have learned to follow and to think of as admirable.

Knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of his men is one element of leadership that a leader can hardly possess too fully, For its results are always positive and never negative. The ability of an officer to predict a man's reaction under various conditions must be based almost entirely upon the officer's first-hand knowledge of the man concerned. And from close observation of his unit lie can often predict with accuracy how the entire organization will react. He can thus not only forecast but even create reaction and condttct.

## Chapter 12 Complaint And Criticism

,.,,,,,,,,IIl,,,I,.fl,ll,IS,IS.,,,, I,.,I,,,tS,,,,.,,t.,IIIlISIllllOl*lt41SltiI1l11111tI11Pfl11
Complaint is the verbal expression of resentment or pain; criticism implies censure or an unfavorable opinion. Both are usually expressions of discontent or disapproval.

Criticism of constituted authority or of its policies and orders is discussed elsewhere in this book in its application to loyalty. Criticism in its broader sense is an agency for pointing out and correcting faults.. In this respect it serves a necessary and important service.

Ilowever, if it is unwisely used it lowers morale in a marked degree. Used freelyor unjustly, or in a nagging, fault-finding manner, it tends to break the spirit of individual men, to stimulate ill Feeling, and to produce uncertainty and discord within any unit.

The tendency of a critical leader is to direct his criticisms more toward the persons whom he holds responsi-
We than toward the conditions lie thinks need correcting. Thus criticism is apt to become so personal that any proper perspective is lost. Furthermore, a true criticisin must be more than 2 mere showing up of faults.

It must carry with it the direction or suggestion of how to make improvement.

Ordinarily, only constructive criticism (which offers a better alternative) is good. If given with courtesy and impartiality it is welcomed rather than resented,
.,,.,s,.,,,.,I.,u,.,,..,,,,,fl.o,,,sfl..,,
.

S
COMPLAINT AND CRITICISM
,.,,,fl.,
,,,,.,,,I, I
S
S
for the manner in which it is given demonstrates its intent. Itowever, in emergencies unfair criticism, like violent language, may be used to provoke strong resentment, usually rousing men to activity in their effort to show its injustice.

Here it should be said that under stress few leaders will not at one time or another jump on a subordinate unjustly. Realization of such a mistake usually follows quickly. Just as quickly theti should follow an acknowledgment on tlic part of the leader that he was wrong.

There should never be the slightest hesitancy in hic so doing. If he has spoken sharply in tile presence 0
others to one of his men, then he shouk! speak as opcniy and plainly in acknowledging his own haste. Such words as, "I was quite wrong; you were right," arc human words and readily taken as such, and they promptly restore morale. There is no need o doing, of laboring the point abjectly, and once the apology is made the leader may well go on directly with other details of the matter as he now sees them.

General Wave!1 forcefully emphasizes and rcmpllasizes in his Life of Allenby how this successful and able leader, despite the fact that he was often explosve and irritable, seldom actually "cut off the heads" of those who worked under him, of his staff members or the commanders of the units in his army. I-us habitual loss of temper was a definite weakness for any leader. [3ut unlike most leaders who have this fault, Allenby had

flu 01011 UtIIflfllfl
,IIlIfl,flhI, I,,IIIpI,.tIIIIg$,IIS00IOtII
other qualities that more than offset it. He appeared to believe, and certainly worked on the principle, that it was wisest in war to make the most of and to encourage the man of mediocre abibties, the man who might possess weaknesses that were not too grave. As a consequence, morale in his army was always high because his subordinate leaders knew that if they did their very best, even though they sometimes made mistakes, they need not expect summary relief. In other words, Allenby preferred to make the most of those assigned to his command, and in this and other waysexcept for his temperto build up a high spirit of cooperation, and thus morale, rather than to create the atmosphere of demanding perfection (with the consequent lowering of morale which always exists when subordinate commanders have to hold their breaths from day to day in the knowledge that if they make mistakes riley can expect a transier).

Now a high commander, an army commander like General Allenby, was in a position to exercise the power of constant selection and replacement in the search for perfection or near-perfection among his staff and command. Yet he built up a thoroughly eflicient fighting army without exercising this power in any great degree. The leader of a small unit, say a company commander, does not have that power of selection to any such extent. If he is dissatisfied with half his noncorns and platoon commanders lie cannot, except in ex-

## Complaint And Criticism I.,.,,

treme cases where something may be dead wrong throughout a unit, as very rarely happens, expect any assistance from higher authorities in accomplishing a wholesale breaking and making. Far more likely than not, higher authorities will look upon it as a weakness of leadership if a company commander cannot create a sound fighting outfit without first largely demoralizing his company through a wholesale replacement of subordinate leaders. In sum, topnotch leaders are rare;
leaders of moderate ability are plentiful; and leaders of moderate ability can be made into leaders of greater and greater abilityof sufficient ability for all battle purposesthrough constructive criticism and leadership and not through destructive.

Complaints on the part of troops will necessarily exist and will often be reported to higher authority. A
superior has a natural tendency to resent such criticism, especially if it is undeserved. But such complaints have a genuine psychological value. They not only enable Faults to be traced to their sources; they give the men a chance to blow ofF steam, to ventilate real or imaginary grievances. Men in a depressed or critical state of mind usually try to express their troubles to somebody.

Obviously it is better to have them talk to those qualified to correct the fault and explain the error, or to give the personal sympathy often unconsciously sought, than for them to seek relief by complaining to the ignorant, misinformed, or irresponsible.

S
S S,S,,S,flh.,t,S.,,Sl,,,SSlS,I*ISOSS*SSSS uilSISSSl SUSflIIISSS
An officer should never wall himself off from his men. 1-le should assure himself that subordinate leaders are not denying his men access to him. FIe should be receptive and sympathetic, whether the dilficuities concerned are general or personal, real or imaginary.

The habitual complainer can soon be spotted; his case can be handled as the conditions warrant. As a matter of fact, the average subordinate stops making complaints, except for strong reasons, the moment he sees that his complaints are given careful consideration. He does not wish to be found in error, and he acquires conficlcnce in the alertness of his leader to determine and correct defects.

Indeed, if every complaint is carefully investigated, unsound complaints will practically cease, and most of those received will reveal faults that do require remedy.

Acting on complaints is one of the best methods of building up morale. What the complainant often wants is personal interest and a decision. Even if the decision goes against him he is satisfied if he can be made to see the justice of it.

If a leader receives a complaint in a grudging or irritable way, the man who makes it senses that tlicr is a lack of real interest in his problem and that there is small chance that justice will be done. The leader should listen patiently, whether or not there is a real basis for action. The fact is that any man who complains to his leader thinks he has suffered an injustice.

.,m,,,u,u,
                                                        I ..flfl.,.,, .n,,,sIu,,,,.,,, I,.,,
                                                                                                               S
                       COMPLAINT AND CRITICISM

                                           S
                                                                                 SSItII
 If he has, the fault should be remedied; if he has not,
 his faulty impression should be corrected. An imaginary
 ill has the same effect on an enlisted man as the actual
existence of the condition he is complaining about.
             Sometimes chronic grumblers and growlers will be
 found. Each of these represents a separate and indi-
vidual problem; each case has some reason back of it.
Whether the cause behind the attitude is real or fan
cied, such men always have a negative effect on the
unit. That effect will vary according to the amount
of influence a ringleader in discontent possesses.
            Such men are not easy to handle. Usually avoiding
breaches of regulations, they may even subtly sap esprit

de corps and morale through passive resistance to
authorityresistance doubly dangerous and hard to
counteract. Sometimes they have ce!tain qualities oi
leadership and strength of character. If that leadership
can be turned into constructive channc]s, those men
can he made valuable to the organization, sometimes
even as leaders themselves. No two such men can be
treated alike. Some need praise, othefs punishment;
some need responsibility, ethers change of duty. But
any man of this type will need careful analysis of his
personal ity, interests, and preferences before any
ures are applied.
  With the rapid development of "psychological var-
fare" within the past few years, it is not unreasonable
to assume that attempts at subversive activities may be
                      (49)

I,,.I,fl,,.,t.,,,,I.t.,,,.,,,.p..u.,u.fl.,....,SIItttflti,I.I,t.IflhI,S$.I,SI
                                                                                   ,t..Iut.I.II,mtflhlI,ts,IS,u,.,,II.,t,t.tSSSt.s*utI,
       LEADERSHIP FOR AMERICAN ARMY LEADERS
                                  fltflltut,,,,,$II,,$II$I,$,,,I,lUuuI nun

found within the services. Such efforts may be carried
on by men above average in personality and intelli-
gence, men therefore difficult to detect and to ferret
out. A wave of defeatism, an abnormal spirit of "what's
the use?", a general lowering of morale for which a
cause.seems lacking, may well indicate subversion with-
in a unit. In such instances, a leader who knows his
men is invaluable to higher authority.
  As a matter of fact, the United States Army has al-
ways been remarkably free from grumblers and growlers
of a type truly destructive to morale, This discussion
has been carried on in full appreciation of that fact-
but in complete realization that where such influences
exist they must be handled before, imtionaliy or un-
intentionally, they sap the morale of their units.

# . .,,.,,,I,L.,, Nil,,.,. ,,..U,N,,.,. Chapter 13 Relations Of Ofpicer-L.Eaders Anj) Their Men

Often persons who do not know of armies and how they are trained and led cannot understand why thcre should be any difference in status between officers and enlisted men. A newly-appointed officer, lacking in practical leadership experience, usually has no great difficulty in learning to give commands and combat orders to his subordinates. But often he does find it hard, because of awkwardness or uncertainty, to reach a sensible and natural attitude in dealing with those whom he leads (when they are not in formations for drill or other training).

That general managers anti day-laborers, sea caithins and able seamen, surgeons and hospital nUcn(lants do not usually find each other mutually congenial is natural and unquestioned. Wide divergence in cdtication and in other qualities creates differences in interests and outlook, Those who sometimes question the military, system may recognize this relatively minor point, but do not, however, consider the fact that discipline is the real basis for these distinctions, whether such distinctions are found in civilian or in military life. It is inescapable that a generally intimate association between leaders and those they lead tends to tiestroy prestige. And there lies the reason why rclation are official rather than social, why, as a practical matter o leadershp, there is a necessity for a definite line of familiarity beyond which, as a general rule, neither leader nor subordinate should iass in military life.

Contact between banker and clerk, judge and codrt attendant, coach and athlete is brief in duration and single in purpose. But consider the extent and complexuy of the relation of the company officer to his men. i-Ic is responsible for them clay and iiight. He sees that they are physically cared for, that they are clothed, housed, fed, kept free from disease. He has direct or implied responsibility For, and power over, their morals and conduct. He supervises not only their work but much of their play. Their relations with each other and with the surrounding community are a part' of his concern. I-he not only touches every one of their official problems but many that are personal. In short, he is the directing force that exerts pressurepressure toward the ultimate end of success in battleon his troops for twentyfour hours a day. Therefore the officer, more than any other leader, must understand the workable, successful relationship which establishes a general line of demarcation l)ctween superior and subordinate.

It is very true that a high, intimate, personal type of leadership is possible with rare men and in rare circumstances. It is, however, only possible in units no larger than those in which the leader has intimate daily contact with all of his men. This type of leadership, more-

## Relations I3Etween Officers Ani) Men Iiis,Ississt,T,S,*It,.Ssi,S,.,S,,.,Ssn,,.S,,,Uso.,S.

over, is only possible in its fullest sense for thosc who have remarkable powers of leaclership. It is not attainable by the average leader, not only because the average able leader of men does not in the nature of things possess a highly inspirational character but also bccau;c it is a leadership that can only be based on intimate understanding between leader and led over a consider able period of time.

Here is an eampIe of SLICII leadership on the part of a company commander. This commander was a man who came into the Army early in the World War after an unusually successful career in handling the general athletic training of the entire inembership of a small progressive college. He was a man wise in his undcrstanding of human nature and a man who possessed in high degree every natural and attainable quality of leadership. This man handled those lie led in the sanic way he had been accustomed at his college to control and develop those under his charge. He would not be many months in command of a company until every man in it looked upon him as his leader, his defender, and his adviser. An athletic type, lie usually led his company in all its athletic endeavors; and owing in no small part to his abilities of this kind the teams of his company led in most regimental matches. in talking and dealing with his meli, however, this leader never gave the slightest indication of superiority in rank. Flis attitude was that of a father toward his sons. Nearly H.fl,,,,.,,,, I I.lI,,S,In$
,,I.,,mIS,
,,,.,l,,,IflhI,I,,tSdItI( IIttIItIt flq,,,,.,,fl,ttIt#l's,,It.II$iIJSIJPIhIU,flJJ'''
every man in his company called him by his first name, and he in turn addressed by their first names all those who had been under him for any length of time. His company was at all times a splendid, cohesive unit.

This leader made no attempt to get other company commanders to use his ideas. He simply ran his company iii his own way. From his previous experience lie felt it was the one way he knew would work, and it actually did workfor him. For the great majority of lead ers it would not have worked. Any such close personal relationship would have resulted for most in the lessening of influence rather than in an increasein a loss of prestige, in the creation of internal jealousies within the unitand with all these things, a complete collapse of morale.

For when we get down to the practical workings of the cstal)hslIcdl differences between officer and enlisted man, perhaps the most important fact of all is that such a system more efficiently than any other that has ever been tried enables a designated leader, who may not himself possess a truly high degree of ability in leadership, nevertheless to lead and to lead successfully his troops in battle. After all, that is the primary end of any army of democracy, and unless that end can be obtained this nation cannot live.

There is one other point worth making about that special type of leadership, that peculiarly intimate type of leadership described above. When it comes time for

## Relations Between Officers And Men

another conunancler to take over command of the company in which a highly personalized form of leadership has been used, the adjustment is difficult indecd. For it is an adjustthent due not merely to the fact that the new commander has quite probably never had experience in highly personalized leadership. It is clue still more to the fact that, even though he may be capable and able, lie is nevertheless likely, to lack the strong personality, the unusual magnetism, the inspirational characteristics possessed by his predecessor.

The wise officer will set a middle course, a commonsense course. At one extreme, unfortunately, is the tinreasonable martinet, imbued with exaggerated ideas oF
rank and authority, using his conferred status to impress subordinates with his military and social superiority, assuming a caste which has no place in American institutions. At the other extreme is the officer who neglects or ignores the distinction that prevails in all armies between officers and men, the officer who permits familiarities that, unless he is an extraordinary leader indeed, will destroy his prestige.. Enlisted men understand and appreciate the reasons and the necessities which generally prevent undue familiarity, and, except in the most unusual cases, have little but coi'itempt for the officer who, forgetting his own place, deliberately crosses the dividing line into tiwir terrain.

The officer's duty, then, is to bring himself as close to the enlisted man as he can without impairing his own status and weakening his authority. He should be on conversational terms with his men, so thai they can talk to him freely and frankly without embarrassment or fear. This relationship should be personal, frank, and candidmutu2 nd not one-sided. Military and social status should have nothing to do with it, for it is essentially the controlling relation between the head of a family and its members. No back-slapping familiarity is needed on either side. Relations should in general be close and cordial, but they must be sympathetic rather than familiarly social.

This, of course, is merely a general guide. Common sense, for example, should tell any officer-leader that a present difference in military status should not be permitted to affect in the slightest a friendship of long existence at all times when relations need not be official.

Nor shiouki it operate to prevent the occasio.ual close association of an officer and enlisted man owing to a close comnniunity of intellectual interests or military work.

Much nonsense has been written about our present Armyand all our past armiesin this regard by writers ignorant, seemingly, of American armies and their discipline. One rule, however, must be remembered: In the presence of other enlisted men, the relationship between friends who happen to be officer and enlisted man must be purely military, whether to them it seems artificial or not. It is always best for the general discipline for this to be done.

## Relations Between Opfcers And Men

Occasionally a young soldicr, swept by admirat1m or liking for his officer, vi1I by act or speech impulsively and unconsciously assume a greater intimacy than is warranted. Usually that impulse is promptly followed by realization and embarrassment. At all events, the oflicer must be tactful; for nothing is to be gained by adding humiliation to a confusion and embarrassment already present.

Even more often this assumption of intimacy is done through sheer ignorance of customary military relations. It is easy enough to say, then and there, in a toic of explanation and not of admonition, something to the following effect: "The way you have just Leen tailcing to me isn't the right way to speak to your ollicers. Officers are no different from anybody else, and it isn't necessary to use any special language in speaking to them. All you have to do is remember to speak in a businesslike, Army way, just as you might talk to your employer ii you had a job in a big company. Naturally you wouldn't go up and slap your chief on the back and say, what about this?' or 'What about that?' First you would probably go up and say, 'Mr. So-anti-so (or Chief, or Boss), can I speak to you for a few minutes?'
Then YOtL would go ahead and say what you wanted to say, making it as dear as you knew how. You wouldn't be very long about it, either, because you wouldn't want to take up too much of your employer's time, knowing how many things he has to attcn to in the LEADERSHIP FOR AMERICAN ARMY LEADERS
,I,,Il,SI,,,,,,,,u,S,,.:.,,.,,.II,, fl I,.,fl,,,P,.,.,,,o course of his own day's work. Well, in speaking to an officer it's very much the same. You use the officer's title-Lieutenant, or Captain, or Major or whatever it happens to be. It has long been the custom in the Anny, too, to use the word 'sir' in talking td officers, just as you might use it in talking to your father or to your employer. It isn't ever necessary to overdo the thing and say 'sir' eveiy other word. There isn't any particular rule about it, You simply use it in a natural manner."
An enlisted man of the smart-aleck or wise-guy type may deliberately presume upon his officer-leader, especially if the.offlcer is new to the unit, in an effort to see just how much he can get away with. Given an inch, he will usually rake the rest of the mile. Forcefully bringing to his attention the fact that his presumption is recognized will usually be enough to show him his mistaken attitude and prevent repetition.

Especially in tile presence 0f enlisted men, officers should be soldierly and courteous in their dealings with other officers. The force of example is a vital thing. As in almost every other phase of military life, laxity in military customs and courtesies is traceable just as frequently to tile top as to the bottom, But thcse suggestions should not be taken at all as meaning that officers must never relax in front of their men. After all, they are not a group of super-punctilious Kentucky colonels with long beards and sabers, bowing and scraping at every turn. A bit of horsing and RELATIONS BETWEEN OFFICERS AND MEN
,fl,flh3,I$flS.,It*I,,PtI,,,P,flh,,II4,uI$St,I,SS$
UOPUtI 011.1,., tPIIII*I*IIIdt4UhtIII(4Uhf0t,ll4El,tI.IlflIJlIIlII, kidding among themselves never hurts their prestige; rather, it indicates that they are human. And a natural demonstration of the fact they are human beings heightens the personal side of their Jcadership.

## Chapter 14

# DisciplineBut Not Througfi Fear

PSuu*I00,,,*II,*I,*l,*l*.I.fl.,t,,l,*$I,, ,*,I,,tIflP.I.*I,*.It*I,II, IIt.I*.I.s.stI4u.*PsIssIIStnflI.**.,sS(*It,, Since our Government is founded on the fostering of individualism, "discipline" in the sense of strict rule and summary punishment is a word repellent to the American ear. in no other country have the citizenS
received less hammering from the top. Therefore, if discipline is conceived of as a cowed, fearful, and blind sulMmssLon to the will of the superior, the men of our nation should be less amenable to discipline than the soldiers of almost any other nation on earth.

The autocratic discipline of force and fear has been an effective whip for those peoples who have known the lash for many generations. It has come to be, perhaps, the only language some peoples understand. But it is far mom the ideal concept, and it will not work in the United States of America. The individualism, the independence, the aggressive spirit of the American so1-
dierthose very qualities which make the discipline of force repugnant to himmake him peculiarly adaptable to the highest type of discipline.

just as our civil government rests upon the consent of the governed, so does this same general principle apply to the military service. Since democratic governinent stands upon the approval of what is handed down from above rather than on its enforcement through painful experience, the pcak of discipline is the enforce-

## DisciplineBut Not Ti-Irougii Fear

ment by public opinion of the policies formed and directed by the superior. The army ollicer is hacked by military lawno discipline can survive if force is !acking when it becomes needed. But the iitore lie lcacl rather than drivts, the less the application of any Force whatever becomes necessary.

Military discipline may not be particularly pleasant.

No discipline is actually pkasant, for human beings seldom welcome control. Yet any dissatisfaction a soldier, whether officer or enlisted man, may hae toward.

the service is not due so much to discipline as it IS to the manner in which the requirements of discipline rc sometimes enforced. There is no special obcct lo discipline itself, for its necessity is recognized. But restrictions that appear unnecessary, that seem to have been imposed under the assumption that they might be akls to discipline, have usually the opposite ctlcct and may arouse resentment and indisciplinc through the thought that such requirements represent an arbitrary and harsh exercise of power. The martinet antagonizes those on whose support he must rely.

Discipline is founded upon two timingstraining and morale. Training represents the knowledge and ability to fight; morale, the will to fight. Training affects the machinery; morale is the power that makes th machinery function. Both are indispensable. Disciplitic, then, is also a state that can be brought about and de
velopeci by general principles. 1-lowever, in their mcdiads no two successful disciplinarians are exactly alike;
even with similar general methods, each wiii have a dif ferent approach to the individual problem.

Military discipime is popularly misunderstood to be a state created and maintained by force. A discipline of force, which tries to compel adjustment rather than to prevent maladjustment, arouses reaction and opposition, An officer or noncom who constantly endeavors to Inainlaili discipline through punishment and the Manual for Couris-Mariial, rather thaii by arousing a willing cooperation, usually develops deceit and evasion in his subordinates, and a contest of wits between
,Irejiclcrs and himself. Such a disciplinarian is not a lca(kr; he is merely a minor autocrat who, unless his superior can show him the harm he is doing and can cause him to change his nietliods, should not be permittcd to command.

lrUe hsciphne, accordingly, is tile result of volition and is gained through building willingness, eiithusiasm, and cooperationnever through fear of punishment. It cxists not only while men are under the eyes of their superiors but while they are off duty, because they want to d0 the things Ji1ier should do. This discipline is voluntary; ft is based on knowledge, reason, sense of duty, and idealism.

Ii a leader has built up such a state of mind in his troops that they give him timeir utmost in trust and support, the force of public opinion has almost entirely

## DisciplineNut Not Tihiougi! Fear

supplanted official compulsion. lie rules them imol through utilnnited asic1 arbitrary jowcr but tlirotili having developed in his men a cheeriul and wi liii obedience that wants to respondthat wants to cirty his orders outa spirit of nuuual helpfulness and COIlfidence in which all ranks, moreover, desire to tale iiiuch of the burden from their superiors. I lie unit becomes regarded by its members as a cooperative amid mutual military I)USIflCSS m the success of which cvcry man is peronalIy interested as a shareliokier.

Although (bscipline means submission, it does iot mean stmbniission to tile leader so much as to the system which he applies. If a leader wears his authority as a personal attribute it will be resented. Ihe impersonal attitude that denotes impartiality is host in a contest oh wills. Outward conformity to discipline may be given, but sullenness and passive resistance are almost always bound to result.

## Chapter 15 The Spirit Of A Military Unit

l,i,I
fl.O, l'he expression esprit de corps covers so much ground that its meaning can no more be catalogued in a compact little definition than can that of morale. Because they'are so closely related, these two terms are often ioosciy used synonymously. But they do not menu quite the same thing, Morale is all-inclusive; it ensbraces such elements as hope, doggedness, tenacity
elements not necessarily a part of esprit.

Esprit de corps is the one quality above all others that distinguishes a military unit from a mere aggregation of the same number oFmen. It is the pride in group effort and group standards and group achievements which, even more than the coordinated action of training and righting as a unit, makes for singleness of pur
Lose and drive, and for the highest standards of military accomplishment in training and in battle.

sprit, of course, means spiritvivacity, ardor, enthusiasmand pertains alike to the individual and the group. 1sprit. dc corps a1)1)lieS to a unit as a whole. It is a mental state that represents the sum total of all forces that make for cohesion, for sticking together, for organized willing endeavor. It is enthusiastic support, by and of the group, along with a jealous regard for the integrity and performance of the group. It is the sense of strength and pride that comes from feeling one's self

## The Spirit Of A Military Unit

DIII!

II!

I
sills a part of a distinguished and efficient organization ot splendid traditions.

Esprit de corps may be oF spontaneous growth, of development without external direction. This sometimes occurs within units of long service; more often it comes From the intensive welding oi combat experience. flut it can lie developed by a commander and transmiIte!

through subordinates, until by its very contagion it pervades his unit as a whole.

The promotion of comradeship is one of the first interests of superiors, for its bonds are strong in holding men together for the common purposes of baffle. When the group is kept together as a unit, either at duty or at play, the close relationship between individualsbuddies, partnersextends beyond the limits o direct acquaintance. An alert leader can in many ways promote mutual knowledge and relations between the individual men he leads.

For example, a company commander can do his Utmost to preserve the physical integrity of the lower unitsthe squad, the section, the platoon. It is true that doing this is emphasized in manuals for training, but it is not specifically required by regulations. Thus it often happens, particularly in periods of expansion, that the importance of the integrity of units is arbitrarily passed over or neglected. For mere aciministrative convenience there Follows much shuffling of men among the squads and sections, and each time this is IS,,S*,,(,U.Ifl%41,,I,,fl.IttI,II,,%
done whatever esprit these units had already acquired is to a large degree lost and has to be rebuilt in each group newly formed. To keep units intact is one way in which esprit de corps can be built up and fostered.

The salute, which is the expression of military courtesy and recognition between offlers and enlisted men, is not only an indication of esprit but an agency for its development and expression. It has, of course, often been mistakenly looked upon, especially by those who have never studied its meaning or effect, as a compulsory manifestation of inferiorityalmost as an act of servility. It is actually as much a greeting as "Good Morning?' It goes beyond the individual; it is given to the uniform he wears, and through that to the Government itself. It is at the same time the distinctive recognition of a brother-in-arms and an expression of pride in being a member of the Army of the United States. A soldier who belongs to a unit of high esprit expresses that spirit in giving (or if he is an officer, in returning) the salute. And in the very act of thus salutmgcorrectly, smoothly, and according to customlie fosters and even acids to his personal sense of esprit and hence to that of his unit.

There is no distinction of grade or rank in saluting.

It belongs alike to the private and the general, and the salute is identical for both. When soldiers of any rank become fighting men their saluting is always a matter of genuine pride and never in the slightest an automatic gesture of subservience. Hence the salute, through explanation of its full meaning and through training in its proper and prideful use by the members of any unit, is a means for its leader to develop and maintain esprit. The leader himself must always remember that a man or a unit sluggish in the rendering of military courtesies will respond more readily to example than harangue. A leader who often beats his subordinates to the salute will thus go far toward making his unit into an outfit with alertness, teamwork, pride
in short, with esprit.

Traditions are strong in creating esprit de corps.

Representing the crystallized experiences, ideas, and sentiments of the past, they arc powerful in their cffcct on the group. The splendid history and tradition of his Army should be brought home to every soldier. I-I is Army has shown its superior fighting ability and endurance, and the will of the Nation itself to continue the way of American life, n many a past campaign and battle. The story of what his Army has done will stimulate the imagination and the confidence of every man new to ranks, and will make him proud to be a member of his unit and proud to be an American soldier.

Many of our units at the moment are new. Some have few historical links with the past. But every ncw unit begins at once to establish its own traditions. The leader can help in the beginning to establish a basis for tradition, especially by dramatizing the special qua!-

ities and duties of his particular units and by emphasizing the traditions of similar units.

At the same time, every new unit is formed from a cadre of men from old units. Hence there is at least a thin historical thread of tradition binding the new units to the old. This, also, can be emphasized by the basic cadre at least until the new unit itself begins to build up its own traditiona thing that every unit will do even within a few months. At first this tradition will consist of minor incidents and happenings in the development of the unitperiods of maneuvers, unusually difficult days of training owing perhaps to bad weather, events that were worthy of newspaper mention. Indeed, from its very first day, every new group begins to form its traditions. Those of historical type may not come until the unit has seen an actual campaign. But there is many a fine unit with high esprU that has not seen battle for forty yearsand some have never seen battle at all.

The leader must constantly remember the value of even small personal mention in the press in fostering the esprit of his unit. 'there is no need here to go into the methods of doing this. At the very least, he must be certain that the doings of his troops receive their full share of mention in the camp and local newspapers, whether in time of peace or war. These things give to a unit and to the men within it a sense of importance and deserved recognition that fullills a normal
,S,I.l,t.I,S,,,,,,SI.,,ItIStuSSItHhSt,,II,,IISII,lItuS.u,fI,,l,I,, ISulSISIISSUIIItIU$IOS4 I
THE SPIRIT OE A MILITARY UNIT
IIIItIIHMII*SI*StIIISI4IISIIIuItI
$IIIISOSIHISIIIISS
American desire and impels both the group and those who make it up to improve and achieve.

The record of past and present accomplishments oF
a Unit's history can be framed and placed in its rccrcation room or other appropriate place. Past commenclations and photographs of activities sl]ou]d be similarly displayed. Trophies won by military or athletic skill should be openly displayed where all can see them.

They should not, for example, be put in the unit orderly room, Commendations received either by individuals or by the unit should immediately be placed on the bulletin board and at the next suitable formation read to the assembled unit.

The company commander shouki seize upon every opportunity to promote group spirit and comradeship, whether such chances come through teamwork in working, training, maneuvering, and fighting, or in the recreational field of special dinners, trips, dances, and participation in and support of athletic teams.

In final analysis, the task of the leader in promoting esprit de corps is to develop within each man the (IC-
sire not only to do what is best for him but whnt is best for those who fight with him in combat against the enemy. It is esprit de corps that is the basis of unity of effort and accomplishment in battle.

## Chapter 16 DiscontentThe Leader Must Watch For The First Sign

Discontent is caused by the blocking 0F the outlet, or by the denial of the complete expression or satisfaction, of one or more of a man's normal traits or instincts.

Since armies by their very nature must impose restrictions, discontent is an inevitable problem. However, causes of discontent are more limited in an army than in civil life, for the flow of energy is more often diverted than blocked; and thus the causes of discontent in an army can usually be traced to their sources.

Discontent goes through two distinct phases of developmentdissatisfaction and disaffectionand often it never reaches any final stage of delinquent act. These phases and their rapidity of growth are dependent both on the character of the individual affected and on the intensity or continuation of the aggravation. Remedies can be applied at either of these first stages; and obviously, the earlier the application, the simpler the remedy usually needed.

Dissatisfaction, personal in nature and striking at the individual, may spring from disappointment, mortification, annoyance, regret, pain, uneasiness, disapproval, displeasure, opposition. Disaffection is stronger and more open in its manifestations. Through the contagion of sympathy, it may pass on to the

## DiscontentLeader Must Watch For Signs

group. It takes form in dissension, noncompliance, contradiction, denial, protest and repudiation. It can result in hostility, bitterness, rancor, disloyalty, ill-will, disgust, estrangement, animosity, malevolence. The remedy for this amplified dissatisfaction is infinitely harder to apply, for not only must tile original cause be found and removed but a well-established state oi mind must be squarely and convincingly dealt with and a new and favorable one built up.

Discontent is carried, and can be directly and instantaneously read, in a man's face and in tile hesitadons and changes of manner that indicate his reaction toward unpleasant things. As it becomes magnified it takes articulate form in complaint and criticism.

Since these are tile signs of impending trouble, and thus the warnings that may precede some overt act of delinquency, the importance to any leader of hccding them is apparent.

Delinquency is tile ultimate expression of disconrenc when it breaks out openly in acts of derdiction, disorder, misbehavior, offense, and misconduct.

Though it is true that causes of discontent are sometimes beyond the control of the leader, discontent should never he allowed by him to develop to the stage of delinquency if the leader is alert to signs of trouMe, as a good leader is. Remedial action after delinquency occurs becomes a complex matter. It usually has to inchide disciplinary action, as well as everything done

Ii uI4I,I$flO$,,SIItI,flflfl for the first two stagesnamely, the removal of the original aggravation, destroying the existing bad mental state, and building up a new and desirable one.

According to its degree, discontent affects physical elliciency just as do physical depression, fatigue, and exhaustion. Undesirable mental and physicl states act similarly in reducing snap and effort, in lessening initiative and persistence. As interest and desire wane, there develop wavering attention, sensitiveness, impatience, and resentmentwith the acts of slovenliness and indifference that express them.

Since discontent is due to an infinite number of causes, therc is no general remedy for it. Each case has to be considered as to nature, cause, and seriousness.

Thus the finding of a solution, in final analysis, is usually the problem of the leader, and of all leaders the company commander most often has such prob.

iems to solve.

Discontent of one kind can be, of course, a helpful stimulus to improvement. It can bring efforts to improve surroundings and conditions, and it can even give rise to the effort of an individual to lift himself into a more desirable status. The discontent at the basis of hope and ambition is a constructive force, for complete satisfaction with a condition means stagnation.

Thus the problem of leaders in general, and particularly the company commander, is to discover and check the undesirable influences that tend toward pessimism

## DiscontentLeader Must Watci-I For Signs

and inefficiency and to stimulate the discontent that expresses itself in ambition and higher efficiency.

Because troops live in etre1nely close contact, group discontentwhich maybe a direct result of the original irritant or may merely be sympathetic reaction to the complaints of the original sufferercan spread much more rapidly than in civil life.

Major causes of discontent are seldom found in our Army. But even a minor grievance or fault, if real, serves as a nucicus about which a number of imaginary difficulties tend to crystallize. These petty difficulties can be appreciated and solved only by considering them from the viewpoint of the enlisted man Ith;tself. It is his state of mind, not the commander's, that needs improvement.

Thus the officer who regards the comfort of his men as something that does not greatly concern him, who does not watch the life of his unit daily for UnnCCCS-
sary irritations and unpleasant conditions o ilic end of. correcting or improving them when he finds them, is paving the way for loss of efficiency, individual delinquency, and perhaps even group disorderthings that he deplores when they occur but which he has not taken measures to prevent;

## Chapter Training For CombatThe Aim Of Leadership

u,,u.IISSutItilmohS.,flI.,,I.,.,,,fl,.

The value of learning lies in its application to future action; the true purpose of training, then, is to prepare for a rapid and efficient adjustment to any new situation of war. The discipline, citizenship, and vocational training to be gained in military service are unques tionably of high vahe to the soldier and to the nation
but these thin either be inherent in military training or else by-products of it. For the one ultimate goal of military training is to increase the proportion of the known to the unknown, in preparing for the situations that will be encountered t battle. Military training itself is an effort to secure desired responses when future military conditions are presented.

In battle the leader can seldom ert an immediate personal influence over the individual member of his command. During the fight each fighter becomes an independent unit, mechanically carrying out the movemeritswhether of fighting teamwork or individual combatin which he has hn rehearsed until they have become the flghtin T;m of a soldier. The bullets, shell fire, and bombs o the enemy, and the absolute need for a high degree of concealment in battle, added to the sheer rapidity of combat action and the area of dispersion covered by any unit, inevitably sepa-

## Tbalning Por CombatAim Op Leadersiiip

rate a leader from most of his men. The purpose of preliminary training is to enable the soldier to act methodically and efficiently, and even with a degree of calmness, both in situations strange to him and under conditions whose result on a group of untrained men might be their domination by the urge for self-preservation-
by panic and flight.

Training thus confers an ability to be more or less mechanical in the execution of acts. It makes the horrors and hardships of war much less noticeable as a result of mental concentration on a fixed purpose. It gives confidence, in that the soldier vaguely recognizes that if his mind becomes confused in combat he has nevertheless so habituated himself to a large variety.

of experiences that his trained muscles and trained nervous system will still permit him to carry on the task and thus enable his aggressive and defensive powers to continue. Mass training also gives a sense of solidarity, of reliance on the group. A trained soldier does not readily yield to an individual emotional state if the group of which he is a part is unaffected, yet he reacts rapidly to suggestion from withoutespecially from the leaders over him. Thorough training gives him also the desire to live up to his groupto do as well as the others, or better.

Granting that training programs and schedules are made up by higher echelons, the actual imparting of instruction to the individual enlisted man is almost the LEADERSHIP FOR AMERICAN ARMY LEADERS
IS,II,SS,II,I.,l., IItSSIflSUflht exclusive task of the leaders within the company or its equivalent. In their hands, and particularly in the hands of the company officer, within the limits prescribed by higher command, rests final responsibility for the education and training of the men of the unit.

Thus ability to teach and to instruct ranks high among the important qualifications of leadership.

The art of teaching is largely based on the science of psychology. This does not mean that company officers and drill sergeants must be psychologists. It does mean, however, that besides a knowledge of their subject they must have an aptitude for understanding and handling the men whom they must teach.

Training manuals and other War Department publications present the technique of instructing in military subjects. Their step-by-step discussions of equipinent necessary, of the order in which each different phase of training is to be approached, are based upon practical experience. They are thorough booksand give the official military doctrine and technique.

But how much each individual man assimilates from a course of training depends entirely upon the timing, method, manner, and personality of the instructor himself.

In brief, the requirements of a good instructor are sound knowledge, confidence and method in approach, an understanding of the difficulties of those being instructed, an ability to judge individual clifferences in ability to learn, and a sympathetic attitude.

TRAINING FOR COMBATAIM OF LEADERSHIP
0119
tillS 11111101 SlIt
01,1111
He must know the way the normal human being reacts to outside influences, and he must have some understanding of the way the average brain absorbs and retains information.

First of all, an instructor must know his subject himself, thoroughly and completely. If he is poorly prepared or partially informed lie will fool nobody; lie will lose prestige in the eyes of his menand their attcntion will unquestionably wander from tile subject under discussion to the unpreparedness and lack of know!-
edge of the instructor himself. Worse, this lack of knowledge will deeply affect his own enthusiasm, and his manner will become self-conscious and diffident rather than interested, alive, and vital, as his manner must be if he hopes to put his training over.

It is perfectly true that in our expanding Army there are thousands of leaders who will realize, as they read the paragraph just prcccding, that they have not yet had the time or the training to gain a full knowledge of the many things they must know. Before giving instruction, it is up to such leaders to do everything in their power to acquire all the knowledge they can.

This naturally means that they must squeeze in every possible extra hour at night and over week-ends, with the official manuals and other aids, to keep at least one jump ahead of the troops they arc instructing. As a matter of fact, most leaders who have not yet had the opportunity to perfect themselves in all subjects of
flI.fl,.,,.,,,II,,flI t.tflt .,,,fl,u,,,.,fl.,,...,.

LEADERSHIP FOR AMERICAN ARMY LEADERS
u.n...

n.,,,..nh,,u,.,..,ut,,,.u,.l,
, ci..,. I
IIUflIIUI
training will already have at least a fair knowledge of each subject. But a fair knowledge is not enough.

Every leader without exception must have as thorough a knowledge as he can gain.

It will often happenit has already often happened in every unit in our expanding Armythat a leader will find himself at a loss during instruction. When this occurs, he will not be able to fool anybody about it. No attempt, to cover his lack of knowledga, no bluff, will succeed. The right thing to do, of course, is for the leader then to acknowledge in plain words his lack of complete familiarity with the instruction in hand, and to say that at the next opportunitythe next drill period or the next day, if possiblehe will have cleared up tile point of instruction that has stumped him and will take it up again. Where leaders must to some extent learn with those they are leading, a frank attitude always works best.

The officer-leader should not be embarrassed if at times he finds that one of his noncoms or experienced privates knows more about a phase of training than he does. 1-le will lose no measure of the esteem of his men if he shows his willingness to learn from those under him who have had more experience. But he should strain every effort not to make this necessary, through using every moment of his time before a period of instruction to perfect himself in the work. And as his unit progresses in its training lie should insist to TRAINING FOR COMBATAIM OF LEADERSI-I1P
fli 1111111
III
.,,,,,.,l,.,n,,,.,,,u,, ,I,.,,,,n,,,o.,I,,,,,,,,.fl,,,,,, himself on becoming the leader of his group in every sense of the word, the leader in military knowledge as well as the leader by appointnient.

The matter of enthusiasm deserves further discussion. Through the contagion of force of example the instructor's interest and enthusiasm have direct reflection in that shown by his men. All officers at one time or another experience boredom with the task of instructing; they may know their subject thoroughly, l)ut the very monotony of having covered the ground so many times before may invite indifference and lack of interest. If they make a conscious effort to feign enthusiasm, ii they project themselves into their work as an actor gets into his part, that enthusiasm will become real. For in the human being the emotion follows the act just as readily as the act follows the emotion.

The one main secret of creating and lccping up interest in instruction is to show constantly the application of the instruction to war and to the defeat o an enemy. There is absolutely no phase of military instruction in which this cannot be done. At the same time, the neglect to do so often makes a subject seem rather remote from its serious and practical application. Especially in tactical instruction can the leader make every phase of almost fascinating interest to his men. Actually, every "situation" is a story of war. In training1 these stories, these plays, must be imaginary.

But that does not prevent the imagination of the leader
,tuI,,fl,,,,$,tt,4IOflII$UhII
from lending much realism to them. If he will prepare himself to do this, if he will put in every situation of training at least some sharp touch of realism, then the one purpose toward which every particle of training aimsthe eventual defeat and destruction of the enemy
will. be continually impressed upon his men, and he himself will learn habitually to think in terms of combat action during all his instruction.

There is no other end to military training than efficient battle operation to the defeat of the enemies of our country. Only by getting this thought day after day into periods of training can the work of the soldier be made to seem real, be made to seem purposeful.

Perhaps because Basic Field Manuals are so specific, compact, and logical (and therefore somewhat dull, viewed purely as reading matter), perhaps because at first glance many of the phases of military training seem cut-and-dried, instructors are inclined to ignore completely the important art of asking questions. This tendency is most prevalent among old-timers, who have been over the material so often that it seems simplicity itself. As a result, troops are often exposed to a training subject in a most perfunctory manner. They are told to do a thing without being told its reason or purpose, and they are seldom questioned on the fundainentals or the methods of carrying them out. If men learn blindly and unintelligently, results are slow in developmentand the newly-acquired knowledge is TRAINING FOR COMBATAIM OF LEADERShIP
U,.,I.,Ifl.ut I,,,,,, I
mechanical and temporary, not intelligent and pcrmanent. Accordingly, questions should be constantly used to arouse and increase interest, stimulate thought, emphasize facts, and test knowledge. They should be asked in novel form, and both questions and answers should be heard and understood by au. They should be directed to the bright and the dull without regular order. A man should never be asked by name, "Jones, why shouldn't you clean your rifle with brass polish?"
The question should be asked first, then the entire group given time to consider the problem, and finally a man called upon by name to discuss the question.

A continuation of this discussion of methods OF Iflstruction without first considering the process by which man acquires and retains knowledge would be to follow the course of the Old Sergeant who rattles olf the rules but not the whys. Certainly a catechism form of instruction, besides being thoroughly dull, often brings an instructor to the point of absurdity. For example, there is an old question based on a passage in Field Service. Regulations which used to be a part of every soldier's instruction, "What should be done whenever possible?" The answer was, of course, the passage from the regulations, "Troops should be fed fresh beef whenever possible." In his talks to future olflcers, a British writer on leadership, Lieutenant Colonel Portway, gives a similar example: "What must the rifle be cleaned with?" This, he says, in the old British Army

had one and only one answer, "Great care." Similarly, the answer to the question, iVhat must be kept on the range?" was, "Perfect silence."
A man may be an Information, Please expert on military matters, but it does not follow that he is an expert soldier. The storehouse 0f his memory may be jammed with facts, but they may be unrelated facts
and not necessarily the facts that readily add together to produce the answer to a previously inexperienced military problem.

The official Basic Field Manuals and Technical Manuals do contain the fundamental military information for ailsoldiers of every arm. But none of these manuals contain cut-and-dried answers to unlimited combinations of combat problems. Thus their contents are not to be learned blindly by heart. They must be learned with some understanding, for facts from them must often be dug from the memory later and added together to produce a previously unrehearsed solution.

The modern conception of the old law of association of ideas is that two ideas do not become associated unless they have been experienced together. That is to say, for instance, that a man's name and his face become associated in mind only if they have been experienced at the same time. The troop leader knows enough when lie recognizes that association is a method used in searching out facts from a well-filled filing case q,.I,I,,S,l.I,Wt,..,....SI,,UUp.Sl.Uh,,I,,tI.,,.,IS.IlO,Su,,,S.u,,,.,SIO I.,,,, nIl,.,., of memory. If association is used in filing those facts, they will be easier to find when searched for.

Association is strengthened b' explanation, which gives logical learning. Explanation should be bolstered by analogies and comparisons; these create a numbcr of associated lines of thought leading to the original
and the more the trails leading to a given fact in the recesses of the memory, the easier it will be to find it when it is needed. Furthermore, clear and forceful explanation always excites interest in any subject. And the greater the interest, the greater the desire for knowledgeand the better its retention.

Putting material into that memory so that it may be found more readily when wanted demands that instruction be correlated (systematically connected) or that its facts possess contiguity (contact or proximity).

Thus if instruction has been interrupted, a review is essential at the start of the next session so that the flow of material into the student's mind is a logical continuation 0f the previous instruction.

## Chapter 18 CompetitionThe Principal Game Is War

Iu.l,U,flhuII,l Competition has been defined as "contention of two or more for the same object or for superiority; rurally." And then, again, "Competition may be friendly; rivalry is commonly hostile." (The italics are the author's.)
Thus, within the very definition of competition lies a warning against its unthinking, arbitrary employment.

Used well within reason, competition has value. But used without careful consideration of its probable results it can easily become a potent morale-destroyer.

Whetl.ier competition is between individuals or between groups, it falls naturally into two general divisionsathletics and training.

All forms of athletics are essentially competitive.

They produce physical fitness, mental alertness, selfconfidence, cooperation among the players. They build a group spirit, a feeling of solidarity, of esprit and unit pride among the supporters. Yet, two important elements must also be considered. A leader must never allow athletic rivalry to become so intense that there develops proselyting among organizations (involving, for example, promises 0f grades or ratings to athletes of other organizations as an inducement to transfer), nor must he let it develop to such a pitch that it interferes with training because of concessions to coaches COMPETiTIONTHE PRINCIPAL GAME IS WAR
,1*SI*flhI,fltflflttIfl$flflflp$
1SII
whose desire to build winning teams tends to make them lose sight of the real military objective. \'Var is always the main game of an army.

Competition in the field of training merits carcfui thought. On the credit side lie several factors. Rivalry is instinctive among men. Especially strong among those of early military age, it is expressed by the desire to equal or to surpass any higher standards set by others. Thus it is a constant spur to progress. In the individual it is the more-or-less conscious effort to reach an ideal or a goalplus a desire to receive personal attention. That ideal or goal should deliberately be placed before the individual. The commander thus makcs it a cause for training. In setting up standards to he achieved, he is supplying to the individual a goal pcrliaps not previously considereda goal which the traits of pugnacity and rivalry in that individual will urge him to surpass.

In group competition men act for the common end rather than for their own personal benefit. Thus tcamwork is stimulated; the individual learns c&ipcration.

The leader should inform his group of the accomplishments of others and should stimulate his own men to exceed them. The method of arousing competition varies with the circumstances; yet a workable solution can be found for almost any situation.

Further, competition concentrates interest and purpose on the result rather than on the immediate per-

formance. Thus it takes the mind off the painful, wearisome, or unpleasant details incident to the task.

1-lowever, any competitionespecially in the field of trainingneeds careful planning, direction, and control. Rivalry without sportsmanship breeds envy and jealousy. The only competition of value is that which produces the Vest results for cooperation of an entire unit. A competition between squads that results in improvement in the squads but disnpts the platoon is worse than valueless.

Competition in marksmanship, fcic ctance, wh:
the men can see the scores and can understand why they lost, is never harmful. But competitions involving such intangibles as the opinions of judges on matters
1recison, neatness, records, an1 similar eJ;, usually breed resentment. A leader must realize here that only one unit canwin, and that the others, which have worked equally hard, will inevitbly feel a distinct sense of let-down. Thus must avoid contests that designate "the best squad," "the best platoon"; for the jealousy, tile friction, the drop in morale caused in the majority usually offset any gains.

Thus competition in training should usually be designed so that organizations will be brought into a state o unconscious comparison of their own standards with those o their rivals; rarely, if ever, should competing units be listed in a numerical order of achievement

## U,. CompetitionThe Piuncipal Came Is War

Weakness is searched for, not in criticism but for correction. The reward of coin petition should not be a silver cup, or a numerical rating, or a streamer br lize guidon; the reward should be tile satisfaction resulting from the achievement of a high state of training.

## Chapter 19 Leadership In Thought As In Acflon

uuIu,IflpIuuu,,,.

in the other chapters of this book we have discussed the things a leader of any rank in the Army of the United States can doand keep from doingto develop and foster among those he leads contentment, loyalty, espru, willingness, disciplineall the elements;
in fact, that together contribute to the almost indefinable quality called morale.

But in the Anny of a democracy such as ours these elements of leadership, daily common sense guides for the conduct of a leader toward his men, are still not enough, no matter how high the degree of personal leadership they develop. There is still one other side of the leader's work and duty, one other aspect of leadership, without which all else the leader does toward perfecting individual and group spirit within his unit can hardly be fully effective.

There still must be developed by every leader an Unclerstancling among his men of the utterly necessary place of an adequate, efficient, modern army in American life. Not only must the leader make clear the immediate needs of the total war effort but also the dangers of wishful thinking, the false military ideas, the military penny-squeezing 0f the past that have resulted so often for us in the costs of life and national wealth that might have been avoided, and must be avoided in

## Leadership In Thougiit As In Action

the future of our nation. And with this understanding of the place an army Irnist fill in a great democracy, there must also be developed by the leader a willilignessa genuine eagernessamong those he leads, to train and perfect themselves as fighting men, and then, if necessary, to fight, not alone as members of a hardened skillful fighting team behind the leaders that have made them such but above all as soldiers of the United States of America.

Once the shooting starts, willingness and enthusiasm for army and nation become almost spontaneous in growth, for by then there is a clear, unmistakable aim in view. It makes no difference whether it takes some idealistic form, such as saving the world for democracy, or the form of a practical hard-headed realization that the light ahead is an aggressive battle for survival. But during a period of military expansion, preparation, and training, before war in earnest does begin, and even during actual hostilities, the mind of the American citizen in uniform is often as muddled in thought as the mind of the citizen who is not bearing arms, The soldier's mind, at such times, may have no sufficient background of national military thought to help him see clearly. It then becomes a primary duty of his leaders to provide such a background for him.

Such leadership in thought is utterly essential for one main reason. A great strength of our democracy is I,.,,,.

its freedom of speech, of the press, of the air. For freedom of speech permits every man to make up his own mindto reach a decision that is based upon a fill general knowledge of the factsa method of decision therefore impossible in a dictator country where the facts are kept hidden. But in this very strength as we actually have it there can also be a weakness. For freedom of speech, press, and air, unless there is immediately available to hearers and readers some clear statement of the-aims and purposes of all speakers and writers, can embrace and even foster a tremendous flow of subversive propaganda. This can reach into the Army as into the rest of the nation. To the sum of such propaganda must be added the flood of loose talking and thinking by impractical theorists, political oppor-
L1nists, anti amateur military commentators, and the Frequent overemphasis and distortion of fact expressed in headlines and in sensation-seeking news stories in papers and magazines. There is also the deluge of words and ideas emitted by pressure groups whose motives may be of the highest but whose divergent methods and sometimes erratic ideas for defense can but add to bewilderment. All these have their impact;. and to whom should a man in uniform turn for guidance from confusion of mind if not to his leaders?

An Army leader, more than a leader anywhere else, must be a leader in every sense. And for such a leader to l.elp his men in everything but in their thinking is
ISuJIISII,,,IUh.,p..t.It.,,.I....u,uIflUflI.....I,.,,.,..,,..,..,.,,,,. ..flm..,,.uu,,,.

LIADEISHIP iN THOUGHT AS IN ACTION
,SII*Itl,.UUhIfl,t.flS.,,$h,I$IIISI,S,H,,,,(.,Hfl,,,,Itfl,(,fUfl flhItIIItflU UflUflhfItIffttf Itfl,#flftflfln,, II,tSIISI*Infllfl for him to avoid one of his chief responsibilities and to neglect one of the chief methods in which hc can serve his men, his Army, and his country. By his cdiication, his training, his very position, it is his duty to assist his subordinates in clarifying their thinking and in reaching an understanding of the purpose of their Army and its constantly vital place in the year-by-year existence and development of their Nation.

It is true, though it should not be, that American military leaders as a whole, while they enter into the lives of their men in almost every other waystraightening out their personal problems, praising them and punishing them and taking care of them and training themnevertheless seldom go into such basic questions, for example, as "Why am I receiving this military training?" or "\?Vhat is this war all about?"
There arc probably several causes for this attitude of avoiding leadership in thought. One leader may have the idea, "Keep them busy with hard training, and see that they are well cared for and given reasonable recreational facilities, and they won't have time for much thinking." A second may feel, 'Let them make up their own minds; that's their own business, jot mine. I'm only here to make good soldiers of them."
A third may think it the duty of only the high command to influence the thinking of troops, or may feel that iie must have orders covering the matter. And a fourth may be uncertain as to just what lie thinks him-

self. And probably many a leader steers away from the thought of helping his men to think clearly because of the possible political and social questions that may arise if he attempts to guide the thinking of his men.

They are all wrong. A man is never too tired to think unless lie is completely exhausted. It is the business of a militaly leader to see that his troops know why they are training and "why we are fighting this war." No military leader can fence himself off from the rest of his country. I-Ic works for his country, he receives the men whom he trains from his country, and he is responsible first of all to his country for the results of that training. It is certainly, also, the duty of high commanders to assist in guiding the thought of their troops; but even more so is it the duty of a leader in daily contact with the men he leads
and no such leader need wait for orders. As for the leader who is uncertain himself, his first duty is to endeavor at the earliest monient to clarify and establish in his own mind the general purposes of an efficient Army of the United States, purposes not merely of the present period of war, but 0f all times as far into the future as we can peer at all.

The leader who fears that broad political and social questions may arise if lie attempts to help his men think more clearly should remember several things.

To begin with, the form of government which he has sworn to uphold is established by the majority of the I IIIItIflhIIII$IflIIP$II$IIIISItISIIIIHIfIIItIIIISI
I IflIIIIflIUIIIItIIlIItIIItIItIIII
voters. The full allegiance of every military man is due under his oath to any duly elected commander-in-chief from any political party whatsoever. A soldier, whether commissioned or enlisted, is free to think about politics and to express himself in private discussion. But politics has no place in official discussion or instruction, and that is all that need be said if political matters do come up when a leader endeavors to help his men clarify their thinking. It may be well, too, for all wearers of the uniform to remember that no matter what political party may come duly into powerDemocratic, Republican, Socialist, Farmer-Labor, or any other-.-
it will be the duty of the Army to strive its utmost, within the means allotted to it, to continue to perfect the nation's defenses right on.

Broad social questions are of fundamental military concern for the reason that they deeply concern the people from whom the Army comes. The higher military commanders must be fully aware of their implications and must study their efFects on measures of national policy. They must also be prepared to present their opinions to the proper governmental authorities, or to assist these authorities in meeting such problems, when called upon to do so. The lower military leaders must also keep fully aware of social developments and adjustments, but for different reasons. Such leaders meet these problems daily in the affairs of their men. Such matters as requests of influential parents for special IflSIS,b)fl4,,S,4,lSSt,,t,I, privileges for their Sons in training, problems of poverty that worry men from poor families, and the problem involving the morals of the neighboring community
these are all practical social matters with which the small-unit leaders must constantly deal.

Thus every leader of whatever grade or Tank needs to recognize fully all social problems that exist and to recognize also that most of them directly affect the esprit of their troops. He needs to remember constantly, too, that the leaders and the led of the American Army have come, since our Army began, from the people themselvesfrom the people of every section of our American national life.

It would accordingly be absurd for any leader to fear that an attempt on his part to guide, direct, and clarify the thought of his men would give rise to unwelcome discussion 0F social questions, for he must lace them daily, anyway, in the practice of his profession. The very existence of an army in a democracy makes it certain that the impact of such matters on the Anny will be constant. It is the part of all military leaders to be well aware of them. The leaders of lower units, such as company officers, should in general be guided by instructional material provided officially in any general discussions they may make touching upon social questions. In general, there should be no thought of bringingup such matters in frequent harangues to troops.

Instead the leader should usually confine his discus-
LEADERSI-IIP IN THOUGI-IT AS IN ACTION
.u.,,flh.S,I.,t.,,.It,,,,I.$,.,,.u.,.fl,,,S,,.,S.It.t.,I,uI.

sion of them to such suitable times as the periodic readings of the Articles of War and the giving of any general instructional matter on better citizenship and similarly broad subjects as directed by higher authority.

The main thing is for the leader to make his subordinates feel both that lie is willing to be their leader in thought, whenever they need him as such, and that they can be individually sure of his help in such matters. Otherwise the leader should make it plain that the Army's one big job is to fight the war, and that while social problems do always affect the Army and the war effort in general, their solutions usually go far beyond the Army to the people themselves and their Government.

Because of his educational advantages, his training, his very status, the ofliccr-leaclcr especially is looked to for guidance and advice in all things. If he stops lo consider that his men's minds are continuusIy being subjected to the impact of truths, half-truths, and downright lies, lie must realize that despite the American common sense that aids many a. man to see what is sound and what is unsound, many another will nevertheless need his guidance and help. Such help is not prpaganda in the vicious sense that has clung to the word since World War I. Such help is merely the attempt to outweigh by common sense the distortions and lies that throw men's thinking out of balance. It is simply the lending of a needed hand to men who are LEADERSI-UP FOR AMERICAN ARMY LEADERS
flI,It,I,u,fl,,sfl,,li.,,p,.,,,,,,,,Ius.I.,,,,I,u,.I.,t,
.,,t,,,I.,,,,,,.l..flIt.SIII.I,t,tll,ttIIH,I.I,t,ISItItII,II,Ifl confused and disturbed by the mass of material that comes to them through rumor and gossip, through the press, through the radio, and sometimes even throtigli the privileged mails.

In final analysis, then, a leader's job is not alone one of housekeeping, of training, of example, of command;
it enters just as completely into his men's thinking as into their physical existence. He is their guide, their director, their chieftheir chief in everything from military discipline to, if need be, the final exhortation to the extreme activity, effort, and sacrifice of battle.