Air Force Doctrine and Leadership

Aerospace Power Journal,  Summer, 2001  by Steve Michael

• E-mail
• Print
• Link

MAJ STEVE MICHAEL [*]

MILITARY MEMBERS UNDERSTAND the critical value of doctrine to the military. They also critically value leadership. Without either doctrine or leadership, the service is a headless vector aiming in wild directions, subject to institutional failure and battlefield defeat. Does a link exist between doctrine and leadership? More specifically, should leadership doctrine exist at all? The answer to both questions is yes. This article provides the reasons.

If doctrine basically represents the best practices of how to organize, train, equip, fight, and win war, then why would we not want some fundamental principles about the best ways to lead people? Libraries are full of books and articles about military leadership. Some are good; others are out in left field. But they are not doctrine. Obviously, trying to codify leadership traits, techniques, and personality types into "approved solutions" can be dangerous. After all, Clausewitz was right on target in identifying the unique nature of war and the myriad circumstances (read fog and friction) commanders may face in the heat of battle. The successful general's coup d'oeil does not suggest a robotic or "by the numbers" approach to leadership. On the other hand, institutions led by amateurs whose leadership styles were ad hoc products of chaos have failed ignominiously.

Doctrine is not dogma, regardless of the subject. Doctrine on leadership needs to be authoritative but also appropriately flexible and descriptive, rather than prescriptive. Much of that type of appropriate doctrine on leadership is already in place--just not directly identified as such.

For example, consider some of the fundamental principles contained in Air Force Doctrine Document (AFDD) 1, Air Force Basic Doctrine. [1] The "principles of war" list security and simplicity as important. Who better than the person in command can promote planning and execution that are as secure and simple as practicable? The list goes on: surprise, objective, mass, and so forth. The leader--the decision-making authority--is responsible for keeping these principles in mind while he or she prepares units during peace or employs force against an enemy during war.

In addition, the tenets of aerospace power are inherently intertwined with leadership. Centralized control and decentralized execution speak expressly to leadership issues that are becoming increasingly complex due to technological advancements that bring detailed information about the battlefield into the lap of everyone involved, from the pilot in the cockpit to the four-star general at headquarters. Yet, even though we have doctrine that involves leadership, it is not the same as leadership doctrine.

We can benefit from the right kind of leadership doctrine for two reasons: it identifies leadership as a critically essential element of aerospace power in its own right, and it promotes the correct thinking that certain fundamental truths speak to the best way to lead troops in time of peace and war. Our Air Force leaders need to have a good working knowledge of those fundamental beliefs.

Many of today's great ideas are not new. In fact, that is part of the reason for doctrine in the first place-to record important ideas so that future soldiers won't have to reinvent them. Yet, in the area of Air Force leadership doctrine, official products have been few and far between. The Air Force last put out a leadership pamphlet in 1986 (even so, it wasn't necessarily considered doctrine). There is a danger of commanders falling to link leadership and doctrine.

Because Air Force senior leaders suspect that some members of the service are not doctrine-smart, they have placed new emphasis on doctrine in education and training. Thus, we have a golden opportunity to enhance the development of Air Force leaders at the same time. A thorough, working knowledge of aerospace-power doctrine is essential for all airmen, but it is also critically important for effective leadership. Leadership and doctrine are not separate worlds.

Gen Michael E. Ryan, Air Force chief of staff, effectively summed up the importance of doctrine: "Doctrine provides the Air Force with a common, integrated vision..., draws from agreed upon best practices..., and offers airmen a proven set of principles for how we organize, train for, and execute military operations." [2] Vision, practices, and execution--doctrine is covered with leadership's fingerprints.

Doctrine is inextricably interwoven with the concept of leadership and in many respects provides the basis for it. [3] Aerospace leaders develop their fundamental war-fighting beliefs from a study of doctrine. From their understanding of the integrated nature of aerospace operations and the need to properly combine diverse capabilities to fully exploit aerospace power's war-fighting potential, leaders have the mental ammunition to argue convincingly for the right use of assets. [4] In the complex interaction of politics, finances, and war, one must have solid leadership to ensure that the joint world uses aerospace power most effectively--without wasting lives needlessly and without setting false expectations. This was the lesson from Operation Torch in the Second World War, codified in Army Field Manual (FM) 100-20: an airman needs to lead air forces. [5] An airman knows how and why to achieve essentials such as air superiority, and as a leader, he or she must fight against other parochial interests to show that aerospace assets are the premier maneuver force. One finds much impressive-sounding, carefully crafted terminology in various vision statements and white papers. But only true leadership can turn words intoreality. And only a doctrinally smart leader can produce the synergistic effects of combined aerospace and surface-force operations.