![]() ![]() Army has yet to see Mission Command as what it really is - a culture of professionalism. Army has some great examples of similar command climates and approaches. This continued after decades of professional debate, implementation in officer development, and real-world application in three wars: the Danish-Prussian War of 1864, the Austro-Prussian War of 1866 and the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. The reform process that led to the first formal adoption of Mission Command by an armed force began with Gerhard Johann David von Scharnhorst, (1755-1813) in the early 1800s and was taken up by August von Gneisenau (1760–1831) after his mentor’s untimely death in 1813, and later Leopold Hermann Ludwig von Boyen (1771–1848). Yet the ultimate command culture-because it empowers by trust the individual to best solve problems after extensive professional development-did not come into official being until the publication of the German 1888 Drill Regulations. Even more importantly, it must be integrated into all aspects of so-called “garrison” life, in everything the military does. Instead, Mission Command must be integrated into all education and training from the very beginning of basic training. This kind of command culture cannot be comprehensively conveyed in a sole block of official instruction. Once an individual has been accepted into the profession, a special bond forms with their comrades, which enables team work and the solving of complex tasks. Strenuous, but proven and defensible standards will be used to identify those few capable of serving in the profession of arms. The overall commander’s intent is for the member to strive for professionalism, in return, the individual will be given latitude in the accomplishment of their given missions. It is the highest form of military professionalism. It is not a way to write short or no orders or to rely on verbal orders.Īuftragstaktik is a cultural philosophy. Helmut Karl Bernhard von Moltke, Instructions for Large Unit Commanders (1869) Each thereby retains freedom of action and decision within his authority. The detail of execution is left to the verbal order, to the command. The next lower command adds what further precision appears necessary. The higher the authority, the shorter and more general will the orders be. ![]() Seldom will orders that anticipate far in advance and in detail succeed completely to execution. In general, one does well to order no more than is absolutely necessary and to avoid planning beyond the situation one can foresee. How the Germans Defined Auftragstaktik : What Mission Command is - AND - is Not ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |