J U L Y - A U G U S T 2 0 1 2 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 27

FO C U S O N FSI/FS TR A I N I N G

THE ARMY’S APPROACHTO LEADER DEVELOPMENT

ny look at the StateDepartment’s professional education and training pro-grams may benefit from a corresponding review of howother agencies handle this important career developmentrequirement. Such comparisons may help bring intosharper focus the unstated assumptions and invisible or-ganizational values on which the programs are based, aswell as the more visible techniques and methodologiesthey employ. With its long history of support for profes-

sional training and education, the U.S. Army’s approachmay be particularly instructive for the Foreign Service.

As an institution, the Army develops leadership skillsand traits in its personnel through a continuing programof professional military education that starts the first dayan individual enters the Army, and provides appropriatefunctional training and professional education through-out a soldier’s career. By comparison, the State Depart-ment’s method for developing professional diplomats,with the exception of language training, is episodic and adhoc.

Unlike the Army, State concentrates on developingmanagers, not leaders. Leadership development at Stateis largely a function of on-the-job training, which has along history of mixed results. For this to change, the StateDepartment needs to alter its approach to developingleadership skills in its personnel as part of their overallprofessional development.

The State Department and the U.S. Army differ inmany important respects, but the need for leaders to bewell-educated, adaptable and innovative is common toboth institutions. A look at how the Army meets thatchallenge may be instructive for evaluating how to im-prove education and training at State.

A LOOK AT HOW THE ARMY’S PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION

SYSTEM DEVELOPS LEADERSHIP SKILLS OFFERS POSSIBLE

LESSONS FOR THE FOREIGN SERVICE.

BY JEFFREY LAMOE AND TED STRICKLER

Jeffrey LaMoe is chief of staff for the Command and Gen-eral Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. A retiredArmy colonel, he previously served as commandant of theNational Geospatial-Intelligence School for the NationalGeospatial-Intelligence Agency. He was also an associateprofessor at the United States Military Academy and di-rector of training at the U.S. Army Engineer School.

Ted Strickler is executive director of the Simons Centerfor the Study of Interagency Cooperation at Fort Leaven-worth. During his 34-year Foreign Service career, heserved in Somalia, Ethiopia, Germany, Sudan, Egypt,Switzerland and Italy. He is the 2002 winner of AFSA’sChristian A. Herter Award for constructive dissent by aSenior Foreign Service officer.

28 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / J U L Y - A U G U S T 2 0 1 2

The Army as a Profession The Army consciously works to

develop its future leaders throughtraining, experience and a formal-ized, structured program of profes-sional education, a process that takesyears. It follows this approach be-cause it cannot hire professionalsaway from the competition. Nor isit possible to acquire the expertknowledge and experience to leadAmericans in combat without actually spending time inthe Army. Advanced degrees or senior civilian experi-ence are beneficial, but do not by themselves qualify in-dividuals for leadership responsibilities.

State, too, must develop leaders from within whohave the right mix of experience and professional edu-cation to successfully handle leadership roles and re-sponsibilities in the organization. As the Armydiscovered, this requires a continuing program of train-ing and education across an entire career. Disjointed,standalone, one-week courses on leadership at unpre-dictable times in an FSO’s career barely begin to meetthat requirement.

The Army trains and educates more than half a mil-

lion individuals per year in an insti-tutionalized, regular, course-basedprocess. Known as ProfessionalMilitary Education, this process isan investment in preparing soldiersfor success at their next level of re-sponsibility. It also confers an ap-preciation for the responsibilitiesthey will face following subsequentpromotions. Schools and courses atthe beginning of soldiers’ careers

generally focus on training, to prepare them for cer-tainty. As their time in service increases, their coursesare weighted more toward education, to prepare themfor uncertainty.

PME must be delivered at the right time to realizethe greatest value. The benefits are not recoverable ifcourses are attended out of sequence, provided too latein a soldier’s career or skipped. For example, an officerneeds to attend the Captains Career Course before com-manding a company, not afterward. Once shaped by thecommand experience, an officer cannot go back andapply what he should have learned from the earlier ed-ucational experience.

The Basic Officer Leader Course starts an officer on

FO C U S

By comparison,

the State Department’s

method for developing

professional diplomats is

episodic and ad hoc.

Army Officer Professional Training and Education TimelineYears in Service Rank Army School Course Length Attendees

0 Second Lieutenant Basic Officer 18½ weeks All officersLeader Course

3 Captain Captains Career 24 weeks All officersCourse

10-12 Major Intermediate Level 1 academic year All officers Education – Command and General Staff College

11-13 Major School of Advanced 1 academic year Board selectionMilitary Studies 100 officers per year

15 Lieutenant Colonel School for Command 5-7 weeks Officers selected for battalion Preparation and higher command

About 480 per year

20 Colonel War College and 1 academic year Board selectionFellowships About 370 per year

This example of an Army officer’s professional development timeline during a typical career shows a recurring pattern of institu-tional training/education followed by assignment to the operational force.

J U L Y - A U G U S T 2 0 1 2 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 29

the career path of professional mili-tary development. During BOLC,officers first learn skills common to allArmy officers. The final part ofBOLC covers specific technical andtactical skills associated with eachspecialty or branch (Artillery, In-fantry, Engineer, etc.), such as how tooperate a tank, how to maneuver aninfantry platoon, or how to fly a heli-copter.

Participants then learn the skills necessary to trainand lead other soldiers. In their first assignment as pla-toon leaders, they will each be responsible for develop-ing, training and leading 16 to 45 soldiers as a unit thatcan effectively operate in a tactical combat environmentwith full mastery of their weapon systems.

After about three years in an operational unit, offi-cers are promoted to the rank of captain and return toschool for the 24-week Captains Career Course. Com-

pletion of the CCC, combined withplatoon leader experience, preparesofficers for greater responsibility: ascompany commanders, they will eachbe responsible for 100 to 120 troops.Beginning at about the junior captainlevel, while they are still working tomaster their technical branch skills,each officer is also expected to begin,as an apprentice, to develop as acombined arms officer. The essential

task is integrating and synchronizing all the branches ofthe Army to sustain land operations in any mission.

A key concept of land warfare is integrating the com-bat power of several different weapon systems and tech-nical branch skills in time and space to achieve a militaryobjective. In addition to being able to lead their ownunits effectively, an NCO, warrant officer or commis-sioned officer must thoroughly understand how theArmy works and fights as a combined arms team. They

FO C U S

State must develop

leaders from within

who have the right mix

of experience and

professional education.

30 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / J U L Y - A U G U S T 2 0 1 2

must also be capable of serving in ajoint assignment where they are re-quired to integrate Army capabilities aspart of a larger, joint service effort.

As their careers progress, these offi-cers go on to master joint operationswhile developing skills in interagencyoperations.

Intermediate Level EducationAt about the 10-year mark in an officer’s career, the

Army takes him or her out of operational units for enroll-ment in an intensive, yearlong academic program knownas Intermediate Level Education. ILE marks the firsttime the Army brings all officers from different branchestogether in an academic setting to focus on combinedarms integration.

At Fort Leavenworth, the U.S. Army Command andGeneral Staff College educates and trains mid-careerArmy officers, international officers, sister service officersand interagency leaders to operate in full-spectrum Army,joint, interagency and multinational environments asfield-grade commanders and staff officers. Each year, intwo overlapping sessions, some 1,100 Army officers, 160sister service officers, 120 international officers and 30 in-teragency representatives complete the 10-month courseof study. About 100 top-rated officers are then chosen fora second year of graduate-level study at the School of Ad-vanced Military Science.

Only a limited number of lieutenant colonels andcolonels are provided the opportunity to command bat-talions and brigades. Battalion and brigade commandersare centrally chosen by a selection board convened eachyear at the Department of the Army’s headquarters.Those who are selected attend the School for CommandPreparation. This program, lasting five to seven weeks,prepares new Army commanders, their spouses and thenew command sergeants major for the unique require-ments of commanding and leading soldiers during warand peace across the full spectrum of operations.

Full-Spectrum LearningLeader development is a continuous process ― not a

single event, course or assignment. The proportion oftime spent in institutional training or education assign-ments during a career is typically less than 10 percent. Itmust be noted, however, that this percentage is much

higher during the first 12 years of a ca-reer so that there is a sufficient periodof time for the individual and the Armyto benefit from the learning.

These institutional training and ed-ucation experiences are critical to cre-ating the foundation on which morecomplex operational experience can beunderstood and used as a learning op-

portunity. While a significant amount of the learning thatgoes into attaining a developmental state comes from or-ganizational assignments, institutional learning is also nec-essary to create the best foundation on which to build andsynthesize that experience.

Full-spectrum learning is the idea that a soldier’s ca-reer should reflect an integrated balance of training, ed-ucation and experience. During the Captains CareerCourse the institutional focus is on training, but there areelements of education and experience. Similarly, at ILE,an officer’s focus is mainly on education, but training andexperience are still involved, as well. The emphasis in allassignments is on maintaining the appropriate balance ofthe three domains.

It is noteworthy that 6.5 percent of officers enteringthe Army as second lieutenants have a master’s degree.But for those who remain in the service for a minimum of20 years, the percentage of officers with at least one grad-uate degree increases to 84 percent. For many of theseindividuals, the advanced degree was earned with the helpof the Army, either at a military school such as the Com-mand and General Staff College or the Army War Col-lege, or in one of the many subsidized programs at civiliancolleges and universities.

As an indicator of the Army’s support and investmentin the development of an individual soldier’s career, this isa remarkable measure of performance. What is equallyimpressive is the effectiveness of that commitment ingrooming soldiers for top leadership positions. In devot-ing the energy and resources to maintain this extensivetraining and educational program of professional careerdevelopment, the Army is confirming its belief that lead-ers are made, not born.

Lessons for StateThe Army’s investment in training and education pro-

vides the essential foundation on which on-the-job expe-rience can take root and grow. Experience alone

FO C U S

The Army is

confirming its belief

that leaders are made,

not born.

J U L Y - A U G U S T 2 0 1 2 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 31

produces technically capable butone-dimensional soldiers. While thelevel of resources available to theArmy facilitates implementation ofits vision of leader development, theinstitutional commitment to sup-porting that vision is the real reasonfor its success.

In terms of professional educa-tion supporting leader development, the Army reallydoes put its money where its mouth is.

The lessons that the State Department can learn fromthe Army’s experience with professional leader develop-ment can be summarized as follows:

1. Leaders are made, not born.2. Leader development requires the proper mix of

training, education and experience throughout an entirecareer.

3. Professional development ofsubordinates is as much the respon-sibility of supervisors as it is of theinstitution itself.

4. Leader development needs tobe a top organizational priority.

Resources are always an issue, butthe Army has shown that an unwa-vering, institutional commitment to

leader development as a core element of professional train-ing and education is the important first step in obtainingthe necessary money and personnel for such a program.

For the State Department to carry out its foreign pol-icy and diplomatic mandates, it needs a Foreign Servicecomposed of trained professional leaders, not talented am-ateurs. The Army has a proven, professional leader de-velopment system that State would do well to study andadapt for its own needs. ■

FO C U S

Leader development

is a continuous process

— not a single event,

course or assignment.