Chapter 2 of Army Doctrine Publication (ADP) 6-22, "Army Leadership," lays out the foundational principles for developing character within the force. This chapter posits that character is not merely an innate trait but a cultivated set of attributes that are essential for effective leadership and the successful execution of missions. By examining the interconnectedness of these attributes, their development through training and experience, and their impact on the Army's operational effectiveness, it becomes clear that character formation is a critical, ongoing process that underpins the entire military enterprise.
ADP 6-22 identifies three core attributes that form the bedrock of Army character: presence, internal knowledge, and influence. Presence, as described in the doctrine, encompasses how a leader appears and carries themselves – their bearing, confidence, resilience, and competence. This is not superficial; it translates directly into how subordinates perceive their leader's ability to handle stress and uncertainty. For instance, a leader who maintains composure during a simulated attack exercise, as often seen in training rotations at the National Training Center, projects an image of control that reassures their troops. Internal knowledge, on the other hand, refers to a leader's understanding of themselves, their subordinates, their mission, and the operational environment. This includes self-awareness, empathy, and a deep comprehension of Army values. A platoon leader who takes the time to understand the personal challenges affecting a soldier, perhaps a family emergency, demonstrates this internal knowledge by offering support while still ensuring mission readiness. This understanding allows for more informed and ethical decision-making. Finally, influence speaks to a leader's capacity to inspire and motivate others. This is achieved through communication, mentoring, and setting a positive example. A squad leader who actively coaches junior soldiers, providing constructive feedback after a challenging task, exemplifies influence by fostering growth and building trust.
The doctrine emphasizes that these attributes are not static; they are developed and refined throughout a soldier's career. This development occurs through a combination of formal education, such as the Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development System (NCOPDS) or the Officer Candidate School (OCS), and informal learning gained through practical experience. Training exercises, deployments, and even day-to-day interactions within a unit provide opportunities to practice and hone these character traits. For example, participation in a multinational exercise likeannter-Strike demonstrates how leaders must adapt their communication and decision-making styles to diverse cultural contexts, thereby enhancing their influence and expanding their internal knowledge. Furthermore, the doctrine highlights the role of feedback and reflection in character development. Leaders are encouraged to seek out and learn from their mistakes, a process often facilitated by after-action reviews (AARs) following training events or real-world operations. The debriefing after a complex field training exercise, where honest self-assessment and peer feedback are encouraged, is a prime example of this structured reflection.
Ultimately, the character of Army leaders directly impacts the effectiveness of the force. Soldiers are more likely to follow and trust leaders who exhibit strong character. This trust translates into higher morale, increased unit cohesion, and a greater willingness to take risks and endure hardships in pursuit of mission accomplishment. A unit known for its integrity and ethical conduct, even when faced with difficult moral choices in a deployed environment, will find it easier to gain the support of local populations and maintain operational legitimacy. Conversely, leaders who lack character can erode discipline, breed cynicism, and undermine the unit's ability to function. The historical accounts of leadership failures in various conflicts often trace back to deficiencies in character, such as a lack of integrity or an inability to demonstrate resilience under pressure. Therefore, the deliberate cultivation of character, as outlined in ADP 6-22, is not a secondary consideration but a primary driver of military success.