Home: Leadership: Home

Leadership

This guide provides basic information on leadership. (Image: cover of FM 22-100, 1990).

Feel free to e-mail Ask-a-Librarian or call (913) 758-3053 if you have questions or comments concerning this guide.

Army Leadership

Army Leadership: Books and ebooks at CARL Catalog search for some books about Army Leadership.
Army Leadership: CARL's Digital Library This is a search of CARL's Digital Library for Army Leadership.
Army Leadership: DTIC Technical Reports Collection Citation search for Army Leadership in the DTIC (Defense Technical Information Center) Technical Reports Collections.

Transactional Leadership

Transactional Leadership: Books and ebooks at CARL Catalog search for title and subject on Transactional Leadership.
Transactional Leadership: CARL's Digital Library This is a search of CARL's Digital Library for Transactional Leadership.
Transactional Leadership: DTIC Technical Reports Collection

Transformational Leadership

Transformational Leadership: Books and ebooks at CARL Catalog search for title and subject on Transformational Leadership.
Transformational Leadership: CARL's Digital Library This is a search of CARL's Digital Library for Transformational Leadership.
Transformational Leadership: DTIC Technical Reports Collection Citation search for Transformational Leadership in the DTIC (Defense Technical Information Center) Technical Reports Collections.

Servant Leadership

Servant Leadership: Books and ebooks at CARL Catalog search for title and subject on Servant Leadership.
Servant Leadership: CARL's Digital Library This is a search of CARL's Digital Library for Servant Leadership.
Servant Leadership: DTIC Technical Reports Collection Citation search for Servant Leadership in the DTIC (Defense Technical Information Center) Technical Reports Collections.

Reports - Army Leadership

Adapting the Army’s Training and Leader Development Programs for Future Challenges The Armys operational requirements have expanded since the start of the 21st century. Its forces must be prepared to react to a wide range of potential missions, from peacekeeping to high-intensity conflict. At the same time, the Army must keep additional forces prepared while a significant proportion of its structure is deployed and operationally engaged. This new environment has created a need for major change in the Armys programs for training units and developing leaders. In 2010 RAND completed research designed to support Army efforts in these areas by identifying directions that the Army can follow to achieve the needed changes, and make those changes at a time when reduced budgets are likely. This report presents results of that research it should interest those involved in designing Army training and leader development strategies and those involved in the process of providing resources for these strategies.
Army Leadership in the 21st Century: A Proposed Research Framework This report presents a framework for future research on Army leadership. Seven key themes, reflecting research on leadership models, tools, and problematics are suggested 1 Defining and assessing leader effectiveness, 2Identifying and assessing leader potential, 3 Leadership development as an integrated system, 4 The management of change, 5 Leader performance under adversity, 6 Leadership and the development of subordinate personnel, and 7 Leadership of retention. Specific research questions relating to each of these themes are also suggested. Example research programs addressing the four problematics are also provided. These examples were derived from contributions by several military and academic researchers at a conference convened by the authors to consider this research agenda.
Malleability and Measurement of Army Leader Attributes : Personnel Development in the U.S. Army Army leaders face a myriad of challenges that demand a wide range of knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics. Army Doctrine Reference Publication 6-22, Army Leadership, delineates the attributes and competencies that leaders should possess in the Army Leader Requirements Model (ALRM). This study supports the Army's leadership development and training efforts by examining psychological constructs associated with intellect, presence, and character attributes specified in the ALRM.
Reducing the Time Burdens of Army Company Leaders This report aims to help the Army identify ways to reduce and manage the time burdens on Active Component company leaders in garrison. The authors adopted the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model from the work design literature. The model considers two levers—job demands and job resources—to address the challenges of reducing time burdens at both organizational and individual worker levels.
Something Old, Something New: Army Leader Development in a Dynamic Environment Over the past two decades many aspects of military operations have changed profoundly, with the potential for equally profound effects on the things that Army leaders must know and do. The tangible threat of the Soviet Union has been replaced by amorphous, changing, and ill-defined threats and challenges. Simultaneously, the focus has shifted toward stability operations, support operations, and military operations other than war. As a result, considerations that once were peripheral now often take center stage. These changes have created a dynamic situation-volatile, unpredictable, and novel in many respects-making the conduct of military operations more complex and varied than in the past.

Some Articles: Army Leadership

Leadership: Military Review Article Search Search of Military Review in the CARL's Digital Library for articles about Leadership.
Military Leadership into the 21st Century: Another “Bridge Too Far?” By Walter F. Ulmer, Jr.. This article was first published in the Spring 1998 issue of Parameters.

Leadership Bibliographies

The U.S. Army Heritage and Education Center (AHEC) has several bibliographies related to leadership.

Leadership Overview Leadership in historical perspective.
Mentoring U.S. Army Mentoring.

Leadership Resources

Doctrine: Army Leadership List of manuals, circulars, and pamphlets for effective application and training of the principles and techniques of leadership.
History of Army Officer Education This guide is meant as a starting point for lesser known sources on the history of Army Officer Education. There are no journal articles or newspaper articles listed from the CARL's journal subscriptions, although search terms and links to the databases are provided for assistance. What this guide contains are studies, papers, histories and doctrine that won't be found in a commercial database or by doing a Google search.
Leadership This guide provides basic information on leadership.

Some Books About Leadership

Leadership : Classical, contemporary, and critical approaches by Keith Grint (Editor) What is leadership? Are leaders made or born? Are the characteristics and challenges of leadership the same across time and cultures? Do leaders `pull' or are they `pushed'? Are leaders driven by needs that may be dysfunctional to the organizations they lead? Do women leaders behavedifferently from men? Should we look for models of business and organizational leadership in military organizations?These are all just some of the questions posed in this Reader which includes key statements from classical philosophy (Plato, Sun Tzu, Machiavelli) through to modern management writers (Barnard, Kets de Vries, Fiedler, Rosener). The collection will be invaluable to students and managers taking arange of courses in business management and leadership training.In his Introduction, Keith Grint both surveys current thinking on leadership and provides an excellent `road map' of the readings which are grouped under five headings: Classical, Traditional, Modern, Mythical, and Alternative.
Call Number: CARL Main Collection 2nd Floor: 658.4092 L434 1997
ISBN: 0198781822
Publication Date: 1997-05-15
Leadership : Theory and practice by Peter G. Northouse The market-leading Leadership: Theory and Practicepresents an academically robust account of the major theories and models of leadership with a focus on how theory can inform practice. Author Peter G. Northouse uses a consistent structure for each chapter that allows readers to easily compare and contrast different theories. Case studies and questionnaires provide students with practical examples and opportunities to deepen their understanding of their own leadership style. The fully updated Ninth Editionfeatures a new chapter on inclusive leadership, 17 new real-world cases that profile leaders from across the globe, a new discussion on leadership and morality, and examples of timely issues such as leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Call Number: CARL Main Collection 2nd Floor: 303.34 N876L 2022
ISBN: 9781544397566
Publication Date: 2021-02-22
Leadership and virtues : understanding and practicing good leadership Good leadership is something every leader and organization should strive towards. This book serves as a pivotal resource in encouraging the understanding and practice of leadership and highlights how good leadership is anchored in the rich philosophy and science of virtue. Through a diverse range of perspectives, the book highlights the importance of leading with virtue, unpacks what it means to be a virtuous leader, and outlines practical strategies for developing and practicing good leadership.
Call Number: ebook (requires AULS Login)
ISBN: 9781000854206
Start with Why by Simon Sinek The inspirational bestseller that ignited a movement and asked us to find our WHY Discover the book that is captivating millions on TikTok and that served as the basis for one of the most popular TED Talks of all time--with more than 56 million views and counting. Over a decade ago, Simon Sinek started a movement that inspired millions to demand purpose at work, to ask what was the WHY of their organization. Since then, millions have been touched by the power of his ideas, and these ideas remain as relevant and timely as ever.   START WITH WHY asks (and answers) the questions: why are some people and organizations more innovative, more influential, and more profitable than others? Why do some command greater loyalty from customers and employees alike? Even among the successful, why are so few able to repeat their success over and over?   People like Martin Luther King Jr., Steve Jobs, and the Wright Brothers had little in common, but they all started with WHY. They realized that people won't truly buy into a product, service, movement, or idea until they understand the WHY behind it.    START WITH WHY shows that the leaders who have had the greatest influence in the world all think, act and communicate the same way--and it's the opposite of what everyone else does. Sinek calls this powerful idea The Golden Circle, and it provides a framework upon which organizations can be built, movements can be led, and people can be inspired. And it all starts with WHY.
Call Number: CARL Main Collection 2nd Floor: 658.4092 S616s
ISBN: 9781591842804
Publication Date: 2009-10-29

Center for Army Leadership Annual Survey of Army Leadership (CASAL)

2009 CASAL: Army Civilians Since 2005, the Annual Survey of Army Leadership CASAL has been an established effort by the Center for Army Leadership CAL, Combined Arms Center CAC to assess and track trends in Army leader attitudes of leader development, the quality of leadership, and the contribution of leadership to mission accomplishment. In 2009, the survey was extended to Department of Army Civilians. New data from 4,721 managers supervisors of supervisors, 1,086 first line supervisors supervisors of employees, and 3,607 non-supervisor employees were collected on over 200 items dealing with quality of leadership overall quality, effectiveness of work performance, climate and situational factors within the work environment e.g., Job Characteristics Model, and quality of leader development superior support for leader development, efficacy of practices, organization training efficacy. This report supplements the main survey findings CAL Technical Report 2010-1, and provides a snapshot of civilian data and compares findings with secondary sources.
2009 CASAL: Army Education This report supplements the main survey findings CAL Technical Report 2010-1, and provides an in-depth analysis of professional military education PME and civilian education system CES courses. The report starts with course strengths setting objectives, providing useful and timely feedback, and course delivery time and weaknesses quality of leadership development received across cohorts, teaching subordinate development skills, and unit support for applying what was learned. In-depth reporting of course specific data and student recommendations for improvement is the largest area of the report. The report then drills-down to other factors influencing PME perceptions such as difference in resident versus distributed learner perceptions, trait versus state leadership development beliefs, and demographics on civilian education. Lastly, the report concludes with a summary and recommendations based on best practices, other research, and survey responses, which highlight the need for improved strategic communicating, handling pre-education attitudes, developing gap-based curricula to counter short-comings and provide new capabilities, and engaging and motivating students to apply what they learn.
2009 CASAL: Main Findings Since 2005, the Annual Survey of Army Leadership CASAL has been an established effort by the Center for Army Leadership CAL, Combined Arms Center CAC to assess and track trends in Army leader attitudes of leader development, the quality of leadership, and the contribution of leadership to mission accomplishment. Existing data sources were contrasted with newly obtained data for Army leadership performance, gaps in perceptions, and trends across leadership areas for uniformed and civilian leaders of the U.S. Army. New data 5,136 Active Component leaders 7,007 Reserve Component leaders, and 9,414 civilian leaders were collected on over 200 items dealing with quality of leadership overall quality, differences in deployed and non-deployed, effectiveness on core leader competencies and attributes and leader development superior support for leader development, efficacy of practices, unit training efficacy. This report examines 4 primary areas quality of leadership, contribution of actions and character to leadership, effects of climate and situational factors on leadership, and quality of leader development.
2010 CASAL: Army Civilians This report supplements the main survey findings in CAL Technical report 2011-1, and explores Army civilian leader attitudes and perceptions on the quality of leadership overall quality, effectiveness of work performance, climate and situational factors within the working environment e.g., Job Characteristics Model, and the quality of leader development superior support for leader development, efficacy of practices, organization training efficacy. Results are augmented with findings from secondary data sources. Findings indicate that the quality of civilian leadership is favorable and appears stable. Civilians are generally effective in demonstrating the Army core leader competencies and attributes. Leadership areas where civilians are rated lowest include developing their subordinate leaders, building effective teams, creating a positive environment, leading by example, and communication. Civilians show high levels of affective commitment toward the Army, hold high levels of career satisfaction, and moderate to high levels of morale. An area of concern is stress due to high workload that is perceived by civilian leaders. The priority for leader development in organizations is also low and shows a decline. Experience, self development, and institutional education effectively grow civilian leaders, though not equally. Recent graduates of upper level Civilian Education System CES courses generally rate the courses as effective, though several aspects of the Foundation Course FC are in need of improvement. Organizations show room for improvement in how they utilize or support what is learned in courses.
2010 CASAL: Army Education This report supplements the main survey findings CAL Technical Report 2011-1, and explores PME attendance, quality, effectiveness, and relevance of course experiences, along with ability to transfer what was learned from the classroom to the field, and potential recommendations. This report is a direct response to General Officers feedback on last years PME findings. Specifically, Army education was concerning for senior leaders last year due to a downward trend in ratings of Army education across cohorts, a failure of most criteria to meet the 23 favorability threshold, and the fact that while perceptions of PME have been decreasing the reported effectiveness of the other two development domains operational experience and self development have been increasing. For the 2010 data, Army institutional education perceived value is still a concern. Although the findings are more favorable than last years with the leveling of a downward trend, the data still show a downward slope from 2005. Quality of course instructors and technology resources are strengths, but weaknesses still include providing relevant content, preparing leaders to develop the leadership skills of subordinates, preparing leaders to influence others, and unit effectiveness at utilizing or supporting the leadership skills graduates learned in the course. Colonels, Lieutenant Colonels and Chief Warrant 5s were also surveyed about what skills were lacking for recent graduates. The most common response is appropriate critical thinking and problem solving skills. Students who found their course ineffective were surveyed about potential improvements. The most common response was to make leadership a focus and cover specific leadership issues.
2010 CASAL: Volume 2, Main Findings This report is organized in 4 main sections quality of leadership, contribution of actions and character to leadership, effects of climate and situational factors on leadership, and quality of leader development. Leadership quality continues to be a strength and most of the Leadership Requirements Model competencies and attributes are effectively demonstrated. A notable and consistent exception is the Develops Others competency. While over three-fourths of leaders are confident that their unit can perform its mission, over one half also report that their unit wastes time and energy on unproductive tasks, and only 38 agree that the Army is headed in the right direction to prepare for future challenges. About 20 of superiors are viewed as demonstrating patterns of negative or toxic behavior. Turnover intention levels appear adequate with 66 planning to stay in the Army until retirement eligible. The quality of leader development is mixed. Issues remain regarding lack of support for leader development at the unit level and perceived lack of impact from professional military education PME. The report concludes with a look at trends and recommendations to improve leadership and leader development in the Army.
2010 CASAL: Volume 1, Executive Summary This report summarizes the main survey findings of CAL Technical Report 2011-1 Volume 2 organized in 4 main sections quality of leadership, contribution of actions and character to leadership, effects of climate and situational factors on leadership, and quality of leader development. Each section begins with a visual scorecard and concludes with recommendations except the first section on the quality of leadership. Leadership quality continues to be a strength and most of the Leadership Requirements Model competencies and attributes are effectively demonstrated. A notable and consistent exception is the Develops Others competency. While over three fourths of leaders are confident that their unit can perform its mission, over one half also report that their unit wastes time and energy on unproductive tasks, and only 38 agree that the Army is headed in the right direction to prepare for future challenges. About 20 of superiors are viewed as demonstrating patterns of negative or toxic behavior. Turnover intention levels appear adequate with 66 planning to stay in the Army until retirement eligible. The quality of leader development is mixed. Issues remain regarding lack of support for leader development at the unit level and perceived lack of impact from Professional Military Education PME courses.
2011 CASAL: Army Civilian Leaders This report discusses Army civilian findings of the 2011 CASAL, and is meant to serve as a supporting document to the technical report of main findings Riley, Conrad, Hatfield, Keller-Glaze, Fallesen, 2012. The 2011 survey was administered to 9,621 Army civilians, representing sampling error of - 1.7. Findings for Army civilian leaders are addressed in three key areas quality of leadership, climate and situational factors within the working environment, and the quality of leader development. Army civilian leaders tend to be satisfied or very satisfied with their careers, although many would like to be kept better informed of decisions that affect their work. The quality of leadership of Army leaders immediate superiors is rated effective the percentage of effective ratings depends on the rank of the leader making the ratings and the specific competency, attribute or special area being rated. Develops others is the competency that receives the highest number of negative assessments. Strong behaviors include getting results, preparing self, demonstrating resilience, and impact on subordinate safety and work quality. Workload stress is seen as a serious problem by more than one third of civilian leaders. Informal methods of leader development for civilians are seen as having the largest impact on their development. The Basic, Intermediate and Advanced Courses are generally perceived as effective by graduates, while the Foundation Course and Supervisors Development Course are rated less favorably.
2011 CASAL: Main Findings The findings in this report are organized in 3 main sections the quality of leadership, the effects of climate and situational factors on leadership, and the quality of leader development. The findings are based on responses from over 16,800 uniformed leaders with an overall accuracy within - 0.7. Leadership quality continues to be a strength of the Army, and most of the Leadership Requirements Model competencies and attributes are effectively demonstrated. Leading others and getting results are two strong competencies. Attributes dealing with character, values, empathy, fitness, resilience, knowledge, sound judgment, and mental agility are strong as well. Elements recently added to emphasize discipline, trust, and stewardship are also effectively demonstrated by Army leaders. One consistent exception in strong indicators is the Develops Others competency. Many leaders are perceived as not providing useful counseling, nor encouraging individual development, and not showing genuine concern for subordinate development. Three-fourths of leaders are seen as putting the needs of the unit and mission first before their own needs. Leaders with negative leadership behaviors are more likely to be associated with low unit cohesion, unit discipline problems, low subordinate motivation, poor work quality, and lowered commitment to the Army. Ratings of the LD effectiveness of professional military education PME courses improved from the last two years. The report concludes with a look at trends and recommendations to improve leadership and leader development in the Army.
2012 CASAL: Army Civilian Leaders CASAL is an annual survey sponsored by the Combined Arms Center to assess the quality of Army leadership and leader development. 2012 findings are based on responses from Army civilian leaders. The report provides findings for over 200 survey questions. Civilian strengths in leader attributes and competencies are reported. Army civilian leaders are strong in getting results, understanding complex situations, and making good resource decisions. Civilian leaders, like uniformed leaders, can improve in the actions related to developing subordinates. Work experience is favored as the leader practice that has the largest impact on civilian leader development. Most graduates of a Civilian Education System course 80 felt that the course met their expectations, while around 50 felt that the course challenged them, improved their leadership, or helped them develop their subordinates. Also less than half felt that their last performance counseling was useful in setting goals for improvement. Most Army civilian leaders 88 believe the Army is a profession. Findings are also reported on trust, career satisfaction, and workload stress.
2012 CASAL: Main Findings CASAL is an annual survey sponsored by the Combined Arms Center to assess the quality of Army leadership and leader development. 2012 findings are based on responses from over 27,000 Army leaders, including 20,192 sergeants through colonels from the Active component, US Army Reserve, and Army National Guard. The 2012 study has additional coverage on mission command, unit trust, strategic leadership, and the Army Profession. Getting results, preparing one self, and stewardship are the most favorably rated doctrinal competencies. The Army Values, confidence and composure, and professional bearing are the highest rated attributes. Develops others continues to be the competency most needing improvement. Over three fourths of leaders are rated effective at exercising mission command. Trust among unit members is moderate with most concern among junior NCOs. Leaders who are effective at building trust also tend to achieve higher levels of morale, commitment, and work quality. The percentage of Army leaders demonstrating negative leadership behaviors to the degree they would be deemed toxic continues to be low. Operational experience continues to be the most favored leader development practice. Army courses are seen as effective by a majority of graduates at improving leadership, but average ratings did decrease. Assignment and performance evaluation practices are seen as effective for leader development by half or fewer of Army leaders. Most leaders agree that it is important for the Army to be a profession, and they consider it to be a profession. Study recommendations include increasing instruction on the development of leadership as a skill, increasing emphasis on leaders developing subordinates, using advanced learning principles to increase the challenge of Army courses, and using position and duty assignments more intentionally to develop individuals.
2013 CASAL: Army Civilian Leaders CASAL is an annual survey sponsored by the Combined Arms Center to assess the quality of Army leadership and leader development. 2013 civilian leader findings are based on responses from 2,006 managers and 2,971 first line supervisors. Getting results, preparing one s self, and stewardship are the most favorably rated competencies from leadership doctrine. Demonstrating expertise, confidence composure, the Army values, technical knowledge and self-discipline are the highest rated attributes. Areas for improvement include developing subordinates, building effective teams and building trust. Working environments are generally conducive to civilian leaders abilities to complete their tasks and missions. Civilian leaders report moderate to very high levels of trust in those with whom they work, and levels of commitment among teams continue to be high. Morale showed a sharp decline in 2013 reflecting a challenging period of DoD fiscal uncertainty. Operational job experience is favored as the practice that has the largest impact on civilian leader development. Most who have completed a Civilian Education System course view the quality of the education received as good or very good. Course ratings for improving leadership capabilities show room for improvement. Formal and informal performance counseling continues to occur inconsistently for civilian leaders and most do not have a mentor. Findings are also reported on leader influence, workload stress, distributed learning, the mission command philosophy and satisfaction with military and civilian leadership.
2013 CASAL: Main Findings CASAL is an annual survey sponsored by the Combined Arms Center to assess the quality of Army leadership and leader development. 2013 findings are based on responses from 27,605 Army leaders, including 21,956 sergeants through colonels from the Active component, US Army Reserve, and Army National Guard. The 2013 study has additional coverage on mission command, methods of influence, unit trust, distributed learning and mentorship. Getting results, preparing one self, and stewardship are the most favorably rated competencies from leadership doctrine. The Army Values, professional bearing, Warrior Ethos and self-discipline are the highest rated attributes. Develops others continues to be the competency most needing improvement. Three-fourths of leaders are rated effective at demonstrating the principles of mission command. Trust among unit members is mostly moderate to very high with most concern among junior NCOs. Subordinates trust superiors who effectively build trust, demonstrate mental agility, live the Army values, lead others, demonstrate empathy, and lead by example. The percentage of Army leaders demonstrating negative leadership behaviors to the degree they would be deemed toxic continues to be low. Morale and career satisfaction remain steady and unchanged. Levels of commitment continue to be very high. More than half of active duty captains intend to remain in the Army until retirement or beyond. Operational experience is the most favored leader development method while favorable attitudes toward self-development have declined. Nearly two-thirds of leaders engage in mentoring which is greater than levels observed in 2000. The currency, quality and instruction at Army courses are viewed favorably by two thirds or more, though fewer graduates rate courses effective on being challenging and improving their leadership.
2014 CASAL: Army Civilian Leader Findings CASAL is the Armys annual survey to assess the quality of leadership and leader development. 2014 findings are based on responses from 23,264 Army leaders, consisting of 16,795 sergeants through colonels in the Regular Army, US Army Reserve, and Army National Guard and 6,469 Army civilians. This tenth year of the survey has additional coverage on methods of influence and self-development. Among Army civilian leaders, the quality of leader attributes surpasses a benchmark of 67 by up to an additional 12 of assessed leaders, except for the leader attribute of total fitness, at 64 effective. Five of the ten leadership competencies from doctrine fall below the benchmark, including leading subordinates, leading by example, building trust, creating a positive environment, and developing subordinates. 64 of civilian leaders rate their job experience effective in developing them, a drop of 10 in the last year. 59 of recent graduates of Army civilian education courses rate them effective for development. Less than two-thirds rate each course effective at improving leadership capabilities. 68 of Army civilian leaders rate self-development effective at preparing them for future responsibilities. Engagement is a measure of initiative and productivity. It is highest among civilian leaders but is at or below uniformed leader levels on items that reflect active support by superiors in the leaders development. The climate in which civilian leadership occurs has mixed indicators, with consistently high levels of commitment to ones team but an 11 decline in the proportion of civilian leaders who report career satisfaction since 2009. There is an increase in workload stress to a level where almost two-thirds of civilian leaders report it as a moderate to serious problem. Recommended steps that the Army and individual leaders can take are offered to address these tendencies.
2014 CASAL: Military Leader Findings CASAL is the Armys annual survey to assess the quality of leadership and leader development. 2014 findings are based on responses from 23,264 Army leaders, consisting of 16,795 sergeants through colonels in the Regular Army, US Army Reserve, and Army National Guard and 6,469 Army civilians. This tenth year of the survey has additional coverage on methods of influence and self-development. Among uniformed leaders, assessments of leader attributes and leadership competencies surpass a benchmark of 67 favorable by an additional 6-21 of the assessed leaders, except for developing others on which 62 of the uniformed leaders are rated effective or very effective. Operational experience has the largest percentage of active duty leaders rating it as an effective domain of leader development at 79, followed by self-development at 73, and institutional education at 62. Favorable attitudes toward self-development increased by 10 since 2013 for active duty NCOs and 7 for reserve NCOs. While professional military education quality is rated favorably by 77 of recent graduates, only about half believe their course was relevant to their job duties or improved their leadership. Even in the face of not receiving developmental support from their superiors, many leaders are not proactive in seeking feedback or engaging in self-development. Aligning with the Armys preferred mission command philosophy, the use of commitment-building influence techniques are more frequent than compliance techniques. The climate in which leadership occurs has mixed indicators with high commitment to ones unit, but a decline in the proportion of leaders who report career satisfaction, an upturn in unit discipline problems, and an increase in workload stress. Recommended steps are offered to address the results.
2015 CASAL: Military Leader Findings CASAL is the Armys annual survey to assess the quality of leadership and leader development. 2015 findings are based on responses from 25,943 Army leaders, consisting of 20,015 sergeants through colonels in the Regular Army, US Army Reserve, and Army National Guard, and 5,928 Army civilians. This eleventh year of the survey has additional coverage on methods of unit leader development, mentoring, and workload stress. Among uniformed leaders, assessments of leader attributes and leadership competencies surpassed a benchmark of 67 favorable by an additional 5-20 , except for Developing Others, on which 64 of the uniformed leaders are rated effective or very effective. Operational experience has the largest percentage of active component leaders rating it as an effective domain of leader development at 79 , followed by self-development at 73 , and institutional education at 61 . While professional military education quality is rated favorably by 75 of recent graduates, only about half believe their course was relevant to their job duties or improved their leadership capabilities. Less than 50 of leaders indicate awareness of formal leader development plans and guidance in their unit, despite units employing effective methods at least occasionally. Notable gaps in the occurrence and quality of performance counseling for junior leaders persist, and many of these leaders are not proactive themselves in seeking out feedback or mentorship. The climate in which leadership occurs has mixed indicators with high commitment to ones unit, effective collaboration among teams and working groups, but a decline in the proportion of leaders who report career satisfaction, and an increase in workload stress. The respondents reported that effective leaders mitigate workload stress by addressing it through management of task assignments, clear guidance, advocating for resources, and respecting subordinate contributions and worklife balance. Recommended steps are offered to address...
2016 CASAL: Army Civilian Leader Findings CASAL is the Armys annual survey to assess the quality of leadership and leader development. 2016 findings are based on responses from 3,206 Army Civilians. This eighth year of the survey with the inclusion of Army Civilians has additional coverage on organizational citizenship behaviors within teams. Army Civilian leaders surpass a benchmark of 75 effective on 9 of 13 leader attributes. The 4 below 75 includeTotal Fitness, Innovation, Interpersonal Tact, and Warrior EthosService Ethos. Seven of the 10 leadership competencies from doctrine fall 5-10 below the acceptable level, while an eighth, Develops Others, could improve by 20 to reach the benchmark. Up to 9 of civilian leaders demonstrate more counterproductive than productive leadership behaviors. Two-thirds of civilian leaders rate their work experiences 68 and self-development 69 effective in developing them for increased leadership responsibility a lack of upward job mobility is cited as a reason why levels are not higher. 76 of recent graduates of Army Civilian education courses rate the education quality as good or very good. Two-thirds or fewer graduates rate their most recent course effective at improving their leadership capabilities. Engagement is a measure of initiative and productivity, and is higher among civilian managers and first line supervisors than non-supervisory employees. Army Civilian engagement exceeds military leaders on items that reflect job latitude, perceived importance of duties, and team collaboration, but is less favorable on items that reflect active support by superiors for leader development. Four-fifths of civilians agree team members exhibit organizational citizenship behaviors that promote positive working environments. One-third of civilian leaders report workload stress as a serious problem, with unit personnel shortages cited as a key reason. Results of the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey FEVS corroborate several CASAL findings.
2016 CASAL: Military Leader Findings CASAL is the Armys annual survey to assess the quality of leadership and leader development. 2016 findings are based on responses from 11,006 Army leaders, consisting of 7,798 sergeants through colonels in the Regular Army, US Army Reserve, and Army National Guard, and 3,208 Army Civilians. This 12th year of the survey has additional coverage on methods of unit leader development, organizational citizenship behaviors OCB, and integrated professional military education PME and unit training. Among uniformed leaders, 11 of 13 leader attributes and 2 of 10 leadership competencies surpass a benchmark of 75 percent favorable. Develops Others and the Leads category of competencies warrant the most improvement. Operational experience has the largest percentage of AC leaders rating it as an effective domain of leader development at 75 percent, followed by self-development at 71 percent, and institutional education at 61. While the quality of PME is rated favorably by 77 of recent graduates, smaller percentages believe their course was relevant to their job duties 65 or improved their leadership 56. Integration of AC and RC leaders in PME courses and in unit training exercises is well received as having a positive effect on these learning experiences. Only one third of leaders indicate awareness of formal leader development plans and guidance in their unit. The climate in which leadership occurs has mixed indicators. There is high commitment to ones unit and effective collaboration and demonstration of discretionary helping behaviors i.e., OCBs in teams and work groups. However, there is insufficient access to resources to accomplish duties to standard and an increase in problems with workload stress. Levels of morale and career satisfaction remain relatively stable and moderate. The intentions of AC captains to remain in the Army reached a 12-year high. Existing leader development resources are designed to address areas that need improvement but remain underutilized.

CASAL Reports, Other -- Requires CAC Card to Access

Other CASAL Reports,

The results of CASAL have been posted on the DTIC web portal, which requires a CAC card to authenticate users. To be able to see these results, please go to this web URL: https://www.dtic.mil

Each CASAL report has a unique identifier. The list is as follows:

AD1187824 -- FY22 CASAL VIEWS FROM THE FIELD EXSUM
AD1187840 -- FY22 CASAL MILITARY AND CIVILIAN LEADER FINDINGS
AD1158060 -- CASAL FY21 MILITARY AND CIVILIAN LEADER FINDINGS
AD1168380 -- 2018 CASAL: INVESTIGATION OF LEADER EFFECTIVENESS AND UNIT PREPAREDNESS
AD1184207 -- 2018 CASAL MILITARY AND CIVILIAN FINDINGS; TECHNICAL REPORT 2019-01