Mapping the Route of Leadership Education: Caution Ahead

Abstract

One of the hardest things for a successful organization to do is question the assumptions on which its success is attributed. The U.S. military reached its preeminence on the battlefield, in part, due to a highly systematic approach to training and leadership development. Much of the program planning and curriculum in the U.S. system of professional military training and education was developed through a systems analysis approach, best illustrated in the Army's use of detailed tasks, conditions, and standards. There are aspects of the systems analysis approach to education that are useful. There is nothing inherently harmful in developing competency lists, provided they are kept general in nature and viewed with the appropriate level of circumspection. The authors are concerned, however, that this approach lacks the complex contextual and relational elements that combine to determine leadership effectiveness or failure. When carried to the extent of detailed crosswalks to learning objectives, competency mapping represents an over-engineered approach to leadership development and education that is more bureaucratic than professional. This article critically examines the control-oriented approach to leadership development exemplified in the use of list-based techniques such as competency mapping. The authors recommend instead an organizational learning-based process enabled by vastly expanded assessment and educational network components. Their recommended framework uses context-relevant study to justify continuous curriculum adjustment facilitated by a network of the various elements of the professional military education system. They further advocate using this network to improve leadership education and curriculum development. A networked approach to joint leadership development can lead to multiple perspectives of leadership more appropriate to a rapidly changing environment and one more worthy of the military profession.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Jan 01, 2004
Accession Number
ADA486462

Entities

People

  • Christopher Paparone
  • Craig Bullis
  • George Reed
  • Ruth Collins

Organizations

  • United States Army War College

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • C4I
  • Energy and Power Technologies
  • Human Systems
  • Materials and Manufacturing Processes

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Abstracts
  • Adaptive Systems
  • Assembly Lines
  • Education
  • Instructors
  • Leadership
  • Military Education
  • Military Operations
  • Military Training
  • Personality
  • Psychology
  • Schools
  • Social Sciences
  • Students
  • Training
  • Universities
  • War Colleges

Fields of Study

  • Education

Readers

  • Economics
  • Joint Military Operations and Doctrine.
  • Systems Analysis and Design