Coping with Change Brief

Question Background

The constant changes in the social environment changes have taken place in the culture organizational and thus an increase in the skills and characteristics that the institution demands of its military leaders. The features described in this work indicate that the leader of today must have a very different leader for decades, whose pattern conformed more to the monitoring and supervision. Studies show that communication fails 75% of the time and this is often the fault of the communicator. We will write a management brief in order to make the transition effective for the military.

Arguments

Transition from Combat to Garrison

There was always some tension in the garrison and the environment domain (or today, combat) environment in the army. GEN Colin Powell, in his autobiography criticized what he called "Breaking the starch," referring to the tradition of uniform starching utilities so that it was necessary to push a broom handle from the bottom of pant leg to separate the tissue before they can be threaded. He was of the superficial practices received more attention in its opinion that training and capacity at that time early in his career.

Leaders Integral for Smooth Transition

Despite Alfred Thayer Mahan's limited abilities when it came to commanding ships, the Navy recognized his intellectual prowess and planted him at the Naval War College where he produced his revolutionary works. As a junior Captain, Pete Ellis was sent to the Naval War College by the Commandant of the Marine Corps where he predicted war with Imperial Japan and designed the concepts that would carry US forces to victory, thirty-two years later. In 1960, the Air Force adopted an air-to-air tactics manual written by thirty-three year old Captain John Boyd in his spare time. In 1982, the Army released the AirLand Battle doctrine that was mostly written by a Lieutenant Colonel Huba Wass de Czege, a graduate of Harvard.

Issues When Dealing With Change

Today's military is facing a significant crisis. This crisis has several dimensions. The rank and file of the military who have made or witnessed the massive efforts and sacrifices of the past decade, and who have seen so very little in the way of satisfying results in return, are puzzled by the self-assuredness of their leadership. They question the slogans and the continued assurances that things are “on-track” and that we are accomplishing the mission. They are disappointed by the failures of leadership and imagination that have yielded toxic commands, a rash of firings in some services, and a breach of trust with our most vulnerable service members. They wonder about the future of the weapons systems that support and defend them as they read tales of acquisition woe.

Branch of Service Addressing These Issues

The Department of Defense is exhibiting the classic symptoms of a “resource advantaged” corporation that has passed its prime. Despite differences in background, time period, and branch of service, these four men had similar stories. Those in power recognized their ability and placed them where those abilities could best ...