- Dr. Francis J. Harvey
- General Maxwell R. Thurman
- Lieutenant General N. Ross Thompson
- Lieutenant General Ted Stroup
- Lieutenant General Alcide LaNoue
- Lieutenant General Robert M. Elton
Dr. Francis J. Harvey served as Secretary of the Army from 2004 to 2007. Throughout this period he embarked on an ambitious organization wide business transformation project to transform the Army into a leaner more effective fighting force. A key element of this transformation effort was the systematic application of requisite organizational design principles to current operations. Under Dr. Harvey’s tutelage, a number of organizational restructuring studies were conducted by a team led by Dr. Stephen D. Clement. The subsequent impact of these studies led to a substantial reduction in overhead personnel assigned to the Department of the Army level. Dr. Harvey appointed Mr. Thomas E. Kelly as the Deputy Under Secretary to oversee these efforts. He also appointed Mr. Michael Kirby to manage the day-to-day business transformation initiative. This latter initiative involved developing and applying a robust lean six sigma capability in the Army. A key finding from the aforementioned efforts was that lean six sigma programs are likely to be much more effective if they are first preceded by an organizational design study. Dr. Harvey also published the Army’s first management philosophy.
Gen. Thurman was the most notable of the Army’s senior leadership who supported the research and subsequent application of requisite organizational design principles to the US Army. As the Training and Doctrine Commander (TRADOC), he used the principles in restructuring the headquarters organization. In this effort he pioneered the concept of “getting Generals to do Generals work”. In his role as Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, he developed a close working relationship with Sir Roderick Carnegie, then Chairman of CRA. He brought Sir Roderick to the United States to address the senior generals on the Army staff on the nature of work at the executive level. Gen. Thurman clearly understood the underlying theory and supporting principles that underpinned requisite organizational theory. He appointed a full time Army staff officer (Dr. Stephen D. Clement) to liaison with CRA and the Army and to translate applicable RO concepts into Army friendly organizing principles. When Gen. Thurman was the Chief Personnel Office (G-1) he also personally supported the research projects being sponsored at the time by the Army Research Institute (Dr. Owen Jacobs). Gen. Thurman saw the practical utility of separating strategic level staff work from day-to-day operational work. He had a unique ability throughout his career to discover concepts and principles that were innovative in nature and had the potential for dramatically increasing the operating effectiveness of the Army units he commanded.
LTG Thompson continually embraced the application of new management concepts and principles in his role as Principle Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition and Logistics (ASALT). He strongly supported the use of requisite organizational design principles (RO) in a thorough analysis of the ASALT organization. He was a true innovator in both theory and practice. For example, he worked closely with Dr. Stephen D. Clement in pioneering efforts to link lean six sigma studies with organizational design studies. The Depot and Arsenal structure under General Thompson led the Army in the application of lean six sigma techniques.
General Thompson also stressed the value of continuing education. He sponsored on-going workshops and off-sites to better prepare the Army Acquisition Corps for more effectively managing the Army contracting and acquisition process. In one of these workshops, he brought in Sir Roderick Carnegie (the former head of CRA) to talk about how the systematic application of requisite organizational design concepts and principles could lead to substantial increases in productive effectiveness. In addition, LTG Thompson personally conducted several management improvement related workshops for his senior staff and other interested Army leaders utilizing RO concepts and other advanced management techniques.
LTG Stroup was a stalwart supporter of Elliot Jaques and the application of requisite organizational design principles throughout his earlier military career and into his current role as Vice President of the Association of the United States Army (AUSA). As a young Brigadier General he served as the Resource Manager for General Maxwell Thurman at the Training and Doctrine Command. In this role he not only funded the application of RO principles to the headquarters, he also actively supervised the project for General Thurman. When LTG Stroup was the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel (G-1), he also ensured that the Army Research Institute which was a subordinate G-1 activity strongly supported Dr. Jaques and Dr. Owen Jacobs in their ongoing field research efforts.
At the time, ARI was utilizing the Career Path Appreciation (CPA) assessment tool to assess an individual’s cognitive capacity. LTG Stroup supported the longitudinal assessment study of a number of Army War College students during this period. The results of this effort came to be known as the “brown envelope study” because of the sensitive nature of the study itself. Over the years, LTG Stroup worked closely with Dr. Stephen D. Clement in applying RO concepts and organizing principles to several large Army organizations, e.g., the Army personnel Command, the G-1 staff, TRADOC, etc.
Today, LTG Stroup continues to support application of relevant concepts to the Army in his role as VP of AUSA.
LTG LaNoue served as the Army’s 38th Surgeon General. In his capacity as Surgeon General, he recognized that the Army Health Care System would need to be totally reorganized if it was to continue to deliver world class health care services to soldiers and their families. To achieve a reorganization of this scope, he established a special organizational design task force (Task Force Aesculapius) and chartered it with restructuring the entire Army Medical Command. The theoretical basis for this restructuring was built around requisite organizational design concepts and principles. The task force analyzed every major subordinate command in the Department, consolidated like entities and eventually recommended the Medical Command that still exists today. Each major subordinate command was established as a stand-alone fully operational business entity. Several new commands were created organized around distinct product lines, e.g., the Dental Command and the Veterinary Command. Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine initiatives including dramatic new innovations were reorganized into a separate medical command. This was a revolutionary move in the medical field at the time. (Interestingly, this move is now being replicated across the country as part of the new health car initiative). LTG LaNoue was recognized as a visionary leader at the time. He was also a staunch supporter of the application of requisite organizational design principles to the health care field.
Lieutenant General Robert M. Elton was the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, Department of Army, during the critical time period when Stratified Systems research was done by ARI. General Elton gave his invaluable personal support to the work by opening access for ARI to senior general officers, Army-wide, and by actively supporting utilization of the work in Army doctrinal manuals and instruction. His personal letter to senior generals requesting access made in-depth interviews about general officer performance requirements possible with nearly two-thirds of the incumbent four- and three-star general officers, as well as an equal sample of two- and one-star general officers at a later time.
This work was accomplished under a long-range plan developed jointly by the Leader Policy Division of the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel (ODCSPER) of the Department of the Army (DA), and the Executive Development Research Group (EDRG) of ARI. The interviews were aimed ag gaining an understanding of the nature of work at the executive level of the Army, the positions held by three- and four-star general officers and members of the Army's Senior Executive Service (SES). This would then serve as a basis for subsequent writing of executive-level concept material, and for initial designs of an improved leader development system.
General Elton organized the Senior Leadership Coordinating Committee (SLCC) in 1984 to oversee work at the senior levels. Based on this work, he also personally directed the publication of AR 600-100 which differentiated three levels of leadership requirements (direct, senior, and executive), each with unique requirements essentially as suggested by Stratified Systems theory. The SLCC also approved exploration of the feasibility of developing concept material that might lead to some form of executive-level doctrine. Unlike doctrine at lower levels, this would not be used to guide "instruction" of senior leaders. Instead, its intent was to establish a set of guiding principles, establishing long-range targets in a career-long development system, and to discipline this system to be purposefully sequential and progressive.
General Elton’s efforts led to lasting change in the Army’s leadership doctrine and have had an enduring impact on senior leader development in the US Army.
|1978 – 83: Monitor Elliot Jaques basic research at the Army Research Institute|
|1982: Development of Army Goals using RO concepts (Human & Leadership Goals)|
|1983: Application of CPA to selected Army General Officers|
|1984: Study of capability of Army senior leaders (Generals and Civilians)|
|1984: Developed Vice Chief of Staff briefing on strategic leadership (Army War College)|
|1984: Workshop with Sir Roderick Carnegie for Gen.Max Thurman & Army staff (RO principles)|
|1985:Participated in HQDA Reorganization Study
|1988: HQ Training & Doctrine Command (TRADOC) organizational study|
|1991: Organizational study of the Directorate of Military Personnel Management – G-1|
|1993 – 1995: Led reorganization study of the Army Medical Command including 6 major subordinate commands|
|1996: Organizational study of the G-1|
|1996 - 1997: Medical Department Information Management study|
|2001: Department of the Army Realignment Task Force: HQ DA organizational study|
|2002: CIO/G-6 organizational study|
|2002: G-3 study|
|2004: G-1 / Assist Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs organizational study; Senior Executive Service analysis and study|
|2006: Panel lead on Review of Education and Training for soldiers|
|2006: Installation management Study; Office of the Admin Asst study|
|2007: TRADOC and FORSCOM HQ organizational studies|
|2008: Asst Secretary of the Army for Acquisition and Logistics organizational study|
|2009: Developed SES Executive Leadership Course|
|2009: CIO/G-6 study|
For the past 35 years, elements of stratified systems theory (SST) and/or requisite organizational design principles (RO) have been applied to a variety of Army initiatives. Some of these initiatives pertained to identifying specific leadership skills and practices apropos to senior leaders operating at specific organizational levels. Alternatively, SST and RO principles were also used as a foundational base in numerous organizational design projects involving various Army commands and/or headquarters organizations. In all cases, the theory base described above enabled the Army to continue to innovate and improve its day-to-day operating effectiveness.
What makes the above efforts noteworthy is that they have “stood the test of time”. In the military, there is universal turnover of all senior executives according to a strict schedule. General Officers, by law, are only permitted to remain on active duty for select periods of time. After that they must retire. Political appointees serve at the pleasure of the current administration. They too must leave when administrations change. Despite this continual turnover of senior executives, application of SST/RO concepts continued virtually unabated for the past 35 years. This gives testimony to the continued relevance of these concepts and principles throughout this period.
The U.S. Army is unique in that it is both stable and adaptive at the same time. The warfighting culture is one of constant adaption characterized by the motto of “adapt or die”. Thus revolutionary change is always present. The chain of command is notable for having had the same number of managerial layers since Roman legion days – seven. The number seven corresponds to the same number of layers that RO theory espouses. Each of these seven layers adds unique value to the work being performed at lower levels.
Alternatively, the non-warfighting culture is characterized by stability reflecting continuous improvement but not necessarily revolutionary change. Generals work in both cultures. They move from one to the other according to preset career tracks. Over the past 35 years, many of these generals have understood and applied SST/RO concepts in both domains. They would not have done this if they did not perceive these concepts and principles as value adding. These Generals learned from one another. For example, one Brigadier was an outside observer at the time when a four star General applied these concepts to a restructuring of the four stars' headquarters. Later, when the Brigadier became a three star General, he applied the same concepts to a restructuring of his own command (the Army Medical Command). Learning by word of mouth is a powerful technique.
The Army will undoubtedly continue to apply these concepts and principles as it struggles to meet the myriad of challenges currently facing it. The rationale for doing so is simple. The concepts and principles make sense, they work, and senior leaders intuitively know that they are both practical as well as useful.
In any discussion of requisitely structured organizations, the military is often cited as a prime example of a correctly structured institution.
After all, it is the military that has been described as having seven organizational layers in its natural state dating as far back as the Roman Legion era:
Dr. Owen Jacobs:
Festschrift articles for Elliott Jaques:
Contributions of Stratified Systems Theory to Military Leader Development and Organization Redesign (353.83 kB) T. Owen Jacobs and Stephen D. Clement in Organization Design, Levels of Work and Human Capability Executive Guide Eds. Ken Shepard, Jerry L. Gray, & James G. (Jerry) Hunt.
Executive Leadership: Requisite Skills and Developmental Processes for the U.S. Army's Civilian Executives (608.97 kB)
Technical Report (406.07 kB): Executive Leadership: Requisite Skills and Developmental Processes for Three-and Four-Star Assignments
Click here for extra bibliographic resources.
| Transforming your Organization while Defeating the Competition
by Dr. Stephen D. Clement & Michael Kirby
U.S. Army Transformation Update: The Synergies of RO together with the World’s Largest Lean Six Sigma Project
US Army Transformation Update
Synergies of RO with the the World`s Largest Six Sigma Project
Lessons Learned in Applying RO in the US Army
Implementing Quality Management and Requisite Organization in the US Army
White Paper: The Synergies of RO and Lean Six Sigma in the World’s Largest RO/LSS Project_Clement (3.27 MB)
|Michael A. Kirby
United States Army
|Dr. Stephen D. Clement
United States Army
Complementary Fit Between Lean Six Sigma and Requisite Organization Theory
Differences in Implementing and Diffusing Lean Six Sigma and Requisite Organization
Implications of RO Concepts in Re-Designing the Business Side of the US Army
Learning from the Succesful Implementation of Requisite Organization in Other Organizations
Succesive Encounters with the Requisite Organization Theory
Why Did I Find Requisite Organization So Compelling
United States Army
|&||Dr. Stephen D. Clement
United States Army
Did Requisite Organization Stand the Test of Time?
How the Compression of Time Affected the Work in the US Army
How Time-Span Can Be Effectively Applied in a Time-Compressed World
Managing Organizational Change While Implementing RO Principles
Success Stories in Implementing Requisite Organization
Proving Organizational Changes Benefits Using Requisite Organization Principles
How the US Army Got Interested in Requisite Organization Concepts
Beginnings of My Cooperation with Elliott Jacques in the Leadership Research Program for the US Army
Levels of Work and Complexity in Military Organizations
- Asch, Beth J., and John T. Warner, 2001, “A Theory of Compensation and Personnel Policy in Hierarchical Organizations with Application to the United States Military,” Journal of Labor Economics, July 2001, 19(3):523-562.
- Aupperle, Kenneth E., 1996, “Spontaneous Organizational Reconfiguration: A Historical Example Based on Xenophon's Anabasis,” Organization Science, Jul/Aug96,7(4):445-460. The successful retreat of a Greek mercenary army from Persia in 401 BC. Their spontaneous reconfiguration in a hostile environment was a key to their survival. Used as proof of the need for a horizontal form in business.
- Bachman, Richard K., 1996, “Turning an Organization on its Head - military medical management,” Physician Executive, August 1, 1996, 22(8)25-29. American College of Physician Executives. Tampa, Fla. On line. Describes the organizational change at Keller Army Community Hospital (KACH) at West Point, New York, in response to the competitive managed care market, to improve access and quality, while reducing costs through a nontraditional hospital structure and management philosophy. This intervention used a mixed bag of concepts, including RO. D.
- Barber, Herbert F., and Jacobs, T. Owen, eds., 1991, Strategic Leadership Conference Proceedings, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, PA, and U.S. Army Research Institute, Alexandria, VA, Feb. 11-14, 280 pages. [Dated April 1993.Unclassified.] An anthology of eight papers/ chapters on military/ civilian uses of SST. Note: Four generals presented to 300 military and private sector attendees. Hosted by General Carjan, Commandant of the War College. (See also the second book from this conference with 16 academic papers on links to SST: Phillips, Robert L.,and James G. (Jerry) Hunt, eds., 1992,strategic Leadership, A Multiorganizational-Level Perspective,Afterword by Robert J. House, Quorum Books/Greenwood Publishing, Westport, CT and London, UK, 336 pages.) (First of a series of conferences on military/civilian/academic applications of SST. See the 1994 and 1996 conferences also, Cage ed,1994; Hunt, Dodge, and Wong, eds., 1999.) NYPL SIBL Microfiche. 1991. Army War College (U.S.) D 101.2:ST 8/6. [[0325 (MF)]].
- Barber, Herbert F., 1992, “Developing Strategic Leadership: the US Army War College Experience,” Journal of Management Development, US, Sept 1992, 11(6):4-12. Based on the findings of a preliminary conference: the environment in which the leader must function, their tasks, and the competencies they require. Competencies include personal characteristics, frames of reference, and specific capabilities. Compared academic and practitioner learning. The role of mentoring. Cited Jaques and Jacobs 1987. Cited Steiglitz 1985. (See Barber book from conference.) Clio on-line. Rp PJ.
- Boice, L. R., and Tarr, H.C., 1990, Leadership for the Nineties: Development of Training and Research Instruments, Army Research Inst. for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA. July 1990, 54 p., ARI-RN-90-66. Published by NTIS, Springfield, VA, ADA2279495. Personnel turbulence, which negatively affects small-unit integrity and leader-led stability, has been shown to erode cohesion, resulting in a reduction of soldier performance. Investigated the effect of leadership training and division-level policies concerning soldier assimilation and integration on cohesion. Confirmed the three-dimensional factor structure of cohesion cited by previous researchers: horizontal, vertical, and organizational bonding. Cohesion is significantly and consistently correlated with psychological readiness for combat. MS.
- Boice, L. R.; Maguire, J. T.; Hicks, J.; Lucas, Kenneth; and Stewart, Steven R., 2001, Executive Development Research Group 1987-1988, Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA, NTIS, Springfield, VA, July 2001, 411 p., ADA393387. This report contains five working papers dealing with leader development, executive leadership, management training, and problem solving. [Finally declassified?] (Lucas and Stewart have written on Jaques elsewhere.) MS.
- Bourgeois, L. J., III; Daniel W. McAllister; and Terence R. Mitchell, 1978, “The Effects of Different Organizational Environments upon Decisions about Organizational Structure,” Academy of Management Journal, [Research Notes], Sept. 1978, 21(3):508-514. (College students playing) managerial roles opted for mechanistic structures during turbulent times. When experiment began peacefully, they opted for organic structures. But once turbulent, they never went back to organic structures. This was the opposite from research showing a switch was appropriate managerial action. (Researchers were unaware of levels of capability. Deeply flawed research study - subjects didn’t have the needed capability to be managers. Participants all at max of stratum I: Declarative over and over. No hierarchy of ability. Ah, but
is THIS today’s reality? This should be studied in real firms over time. Jaques discovered this dynamic in the US Army in the late 1980s-early 1990s.) MS. PJ. A.
- Boyce, L. A., Gade, P. A., Zaccaro, S. J., Klimoski, R. J., 2000, Thinking Strategically About Army Strategic Leadership: Revolution or Evolution, 1999 Senior Leadership Seminar (10 Sept.), George Mason University, Department of Psychology, Fairfax, VA, 81 pages, April 2000. Published by NTIS, Springfield, VA. ARIRN-2000-08. ADA377891. Presentations by Dr. Ireland of Baylor and Gen (Ret.) Gordon R. Sullivan, former Chief of Staff. Brought together Army, industry and academic leadership experts. (The issues surround Jaques’ work but it is not clear if the theory was discussed directly.) MS.
- Bradford, Jeffery A., 2001, “MacArthur, Inchon and the Art of Battle Command,” Military Review, Fort Leavenworth, KS, March/April, 81(2):83-86. An illustrative article on battle command. See U.S. Department of Army Field Manual (FM 3-0) Operations. Jaques not cited. MS.
- Byrne, John A., 1993, The Whiz Kids, ten founding fathers of American business - and the legacy they left us, Currency/Doubleday, New York, NY, 581 pages. The story of the original Operations Research gang from the Army Air Force in WWII. They entered Ford Motors as a group and later fanned out across US corporations. These were the “best and brightest” with their faith in numbers, youth, and rationality. “Tex” Thornton moved on to Litton Industries. Robert McNamara to Secretary of Defense. Arjay Miller to head Stanford B-School. An excellent read with great stories that illustrate Jaques’ theory. Sadly, Byrne was unaware of Jaques’ levels of cognitive complexity, maturation curves and Archimedes growth concepts. See Goronzy and Gray 1974; Cowden 2004. MS.
- Cage, Jack Hays, Steven R. Stewart, George B. Forsythe, Philip M Lewis, 1994, Strategic Leadership Conference: proceedings, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, PA, April 1994, 108 pages. Contents of anthology: A Model of strategic leader development / by Jack Cage -- Strategic leader competencies/ Senior service college experiences / by Steven R. Stewart -- A Leader development framework / by George B. Forsythe and Philip M. Lewis. See also the 1991 and 1996 conferences (Barber and Jacobs eds 1991; Hunt, Dodge, and Wong, eds., 1999). (Only copy is in Carlisle Barracks library. Steven Stewart probably has a copy, maybe also the 1991 proceedings.) Also involved ARI and ICAF. (Presentations/ chapters not published by NTIS or ARI. Elsewhere?) Not seen. Rp.
- Clark, Kenneth E. and Miriam B. Clark (eds.) 1990, Measures of Leadership, Center for Creative Leadership and the Psychological Corporation, Greensboro, NC; Leadership Library of America, West Orange, NJ, 636 p. A collection of papers presented at Oct. 1988 San Antonio Conference on Psychological Measures and Leadership sponsored by the Center for Creative Leadership and the Psychological Corporation. Many were very curious about the J&J’s concepts toward leadership and did not believe them. General Edward C. Meyer, USA Army (retired), was asked to react to their claims of validity. “I am not at all surprised at these findings,” he responded (p. 61-62). Jaques did not attend. Jacobs was there only one day and gave a presentation, assisted by Hendrick (p. 573-575, p. 591-592). NYU, Fordham, Stevens have it. Go thru NYPL.
- Clement, Stephen D., and Donna Ayers, 1976, “A matrix of organizational leadership dimensions,” US Army Leadership Monograph Series, No. 8, Fort Benjamin Harrison, IN. Cited in Jaques and Clement 1991 and in Jacobs 1991 (in Barber and Jacobs 1991). Not seen. Misc.
- Clement, Stephen D., 1985, “Systems Leadership: A Focus on the Gestalt,” Chapter 11 in Hunt, James G., and John D. Blair (eds.), Leadership on the Future Battlefield, Pergamon-Brassey’s International Defense Publishers, Washington, London, Toronto, Sydney, Paris, Frankfurt, p. 151-167. On levels of mental complexity (1982). Rp. Cohen, Eliot A., and John Gooch, 1990, Military Misfortunes, The anatomy of failure in war, The Free Press, New York, NY, 296 pages. A detailed examination of how the levels of organizations interact as one organization collides with another on the battlefield. How one army fails under the impact of battle. (Many concepts drawn from Charles Perrow’s Normal Accidents.) This book complements Jaques’ SST/RO theory. Case studies of Pearl Harbor, Gallipolli, France 1940, Arab-Israeli War 1967, North Atlantic 1942, Korea, etc. A case. See Engles and Ferrill. MS. Collins, Joseph J., and T. O. Jacobs, 2002, “Trust in the Profession of Arms,” chapter (p. 39-58) in Matthews, Lloyd J., ed., 2002, The Future of the Army Profession, McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA. (UB147 .F87 2002) Not seen. Rp.
- Coppola, MAJ M. Nicholas, 1997, “The Four Horsemen of the Problem Solving Apocalypse,” U.S. Army Medical Department Journal, DC, July-Aug 1997. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, problem solving became an industry all its own. A simple search reveals over 100 companies and consulting firms. A great majority of the tools are very similar. Cognitive dissonance between competing problems, recidivism in problem solving methodology, linear problem solving approaches, and general fear of decision making all lend themselves to problem solving failure. These Four Horsemen of Problem Solving often lead toward problem solving failure or Apocalypse. Cited Jaques 1989, Jaques & Clement 1991, Shafritz & Ott 1992, Scholtes 1995. Rp. NJ.
- Coram, Robert, 2002, Boyd, the fighter pilot who changed the art of war, Little, Brown and Company, New York, NY, 440 pp.
- Corbett, Arthur J., 2000, “Proliferating Decisionmakers: Root Cause of the Next Revolution in Military Affairs,” in Chapter Three (p. 27-52) of Johnson, Douglas V.,II, ed., 2000, Future Leadership, Old Issues, New Methods, Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle, PA, 130 p. Next time - we may take a page from the private sector - flat orgs. Follows closely on previous chapter by Bergner. Theory not cited. MS.
- Cosby, L. Neal, 1997, “SIMNET - An Insider’s Perspective,” online article. The development of SimNet Air Force flight simulators at ARPA by Jack Thorpe on fighting with firepower not manpower. It since has been adopted by the Army. Slight reference to Jaques’ concepts. W. http://www.sisostds.org/webletter/siso/iss_39/art_202.htm
- Clement, Stephen D., 1989, “The Roles of the Immediate Commander and the Commander One-Echelon-Removed in a Requisite Organization,” US Army, Military History Institute, PA, 60 leaves. Thesis/dissertation/manuscript (?). (WorldCat)
- Crowe, William J., Jr., 1993, Line of Fire: from Washington to the Gulf, the politics and battles of the new military, Simon & Schuster, New York, NY, 367 p., with David Chanoff. Admiral and Chairman of JCS, 1985-1989.
- Day, David V., Stephen J. Zaccaro, and Stanley M. Halpin, eds., 2004, Leader Development for Transforming Organizations: Growing Leaders for Tomorrow, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, NJ, US, and Jossey-Bass Wiley, London, UK, 448 p. The chapters collected in this edited volume were originally commissioned by the U.S. Army Research Institute as "white papers" to better help Army officers and researchers understand important issues in leader development including developing leaders and leadership, and transforming organizations to better meet the challenges of a complex world. The organization is around four central themes: a) Accelerating Leader Development, b) Cognitive Skills Development, c) Developing Practical and Emotional Intelligence, and d) Enhancing Team Skills. Not in NYC. Not seen. Rp.
- Department of the Army, 1992, Leadership and Command on the Battlefield, TRADOC-P;525-100-1, Fort Monroe, Va. Dept. of the Army, Headquarters, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, 1992. Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O., . General Maxwell Thurman had left TRADOC by this time. NYPL SIBL READEX Microfiche D 101.22/22:525-100-1. Rp.
- Department of the Army, 1999, Army Leadership: Be, Know, Do, FM 22-100, Washington, DC. These earlier publications were subsumed within this one: FM 22-101, FM 22-102, FM 22-103. Field Manual 22-100. The US Army’s manual on leadership, incorporating J&J 1990. (See Paparone 2004.) (Leadership and Command at Senior Levels, FM 22-103: 1987 edition may have been written by Jacobs and Jaques.) Excerpted in Leader to Leader, Drucker Foundation, Fall 2002, No., 26. See also: L2L, Winter 2002, No. 23, p. 48.) Not publicly distributed. Rp.
- Department of Health and Social Security, 1972, Management Arrangements for the Reorganized National Health Service, H.M.S.O., London, UK, 174 p. Report of the Management Study Steering Committee, chairman: Sir Philip Rogers (a.k.a. the ‘Grey Book’ or the ‘Rogers Report’). This was the official implementation plan for reorganizing the NHS. Written by department civil servants. (It came from a civil service working party that also included Jaques, Rowbottom, and some McKinsey consultants [per R.R., 2005].) Brunel Lib has it. (See White Paper, 1972.) Rp.
- DePuy, William E., General, U.S. Army retired, 1988, “How to Win the Battle and Live,” Army Magazine, August, p. 28. Excerpted, page xxii, in Jaques, Elliott, and Stephen D. Clement, 1991, Executive Leadership, Blackwell, Oxford, UK, and Cason Hall, Gloucester, MA. Cited by Jaques in Social Power and the CEO on p. 126 [This cite is DePuy p. 28, not p. 47.] Not in NYPL, Not in Clio. [Can om M. get a copy?is it at NDU?] MS. '
- Dodge, George E., Webb, H. W., and Christ, R. E., 1999, “The impact of information technology on battle command: Lessons from management science and business,” U.S. Army Research Institute of the Behavioral Sciences, ARI Technical Report 1091.Unpublished. Ru.
- Dorfman, Peter, Jon Howell, Benjamin Cotton, and Uday Tate, 1992, “Leadership Within the ‘Discontinuous Hierarchy’ Structure of the Military: Are Effective Leadership Behaviors Similar Within and Across Command Structures?” chapter in Clark, Kenneth, Miriam Clark, and David Campbell, eds., 1992, The Impact of Leadership, Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, NC. Cited in Leed PhD 2001. Rp.
- Duggan, William R., 2005, Coup d’oeil: strategic intuition in Army planning, Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle, PA. Electronic resource: digital PDF file. http://www.columbia.edu/cgi-bin/cul/resolve?clio5620099 Misc.
- Dunnigan, James F., and Raymond M. Macedonia, 1993, Getting It Right: American military reforms after Vietnam to the Persian Gulf and beyond, W. Morrow, New York, NY, 320 p.
- Engels, Donald W., 1978, Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the Macedonian Army, U. of California Press, Berkeley, CA. How Alexander conquered the world through extraordinary logistics. The best antidote to the Great Man theory of leadership. Moving an army means feeding the army along the way. How to think through a task. Most generals destroy their own armies before they encounter the enemy. See Cohen and Gooch, and Ferrill. Misc.
- Gent, Michael J., 1984, “Theory X in Antiquity, or The Bureaucratization of the Roman Army,” Business Horizons, ScienceDirect Elsevier B.V., Foundation for the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University, Jan/Feb 1984, 27(1):52-56. This is an extended book review of Connolly, Peter, 1979, The Roman Army, Silver Burdett, Morristown, NJ (not seen). Between 100 BC and 100 AD the Roman Army moved from a “citizen” based entity to a “professional” army - and fell into deep corruption. Gent lets the blame fall on Theory X, but it was far more than that. Legions went from a 3-level hierarchy to 5-levels with lots of staff jobs as they grew in size from 4300 to 5300. Jobs grew simplified and soldiers were motivated by pay, not citizenship. (And pay-off.) The size of the Army grew from 8 to 28 legions and shifted from conquest to maintaining the frontier. Centurions were no longer elected, but appointed from above. They drove the men with brute force as if they were idiots. Then the legions took up residence in Rome. (The Roman road was different from the modern one, but they got there.) Misc. PJ.
- Gunal, Hasan Peker, 1990, New Horizons of Command and Leadership at the Strategic Level of Responsibility, NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, USA, 23 pages. US Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, PA. 12 Feb 1990. 23 p. AD-A 223 511. M.S.-level study project. Predicted initial evolution of two social events - warfare and the social body - which are basic definers of command and leadership. Tried to define the future dimensions of command and leadership, and the measures necessary for evaluating, selecting, and developing commanders and leaders. MS.
- Hooijberg, Robert, R. Craig Bullis, and James G. Hunt, 1999, “Behavioral Complexity and the Development of Military Leadership for the Twenty-First Century,” Chapter 6, p. 111-130. In Hunt, James G., George E. Dodge, and Leonard Wong, eds., 1999, Out-of-the-Box Leadership: Transforming the Twenty-First-Century Army and Other Top-Performing Organizations, JAI Press, Stamford, CT. Monographs in Leadership and Management, Vol. 1 (q.v.). Linked Quinn and Jaques.
- Hunt, James G., Richard N. Osborn, and H. J. Martin, 1981, “A Multiple Influence Model of Leadership,” (Tech. Rep. No. 520), US Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI), Alexandria, VA. Leadership is a process which only occurs where there is decision discretion. If there is no discretion, there is no opportunity for leadership. (Hunt’s research with the US Army may have opened the door to bring Jaques over from the UK.) (Was this also a presentation?) Cited by Jacobs and Jaques 1990.
- Hunt, James G., and John D. Blair, eds., 1985, Leadership on the Future Battlefield, Pergamon-Brassey’s International Defense Publishers, Washington, London, Toronto,Sydney, Paris, Frankfurt. Hunt is at Texas Tech University. Anthology. Table of Contents (?): See articles/chapters by Blair and Hunt, Clement, Jacobs, Osborn, Haythorn and Kimmel.
- Hunt, James G. (Jerry), and Robert L. Phillips, 1991, “Leadership in Battle and Garrison: A Framework for Understanding the Differences and Preparing for Both,” chapter 21 in Handbook of Military Psychology, ed. by Gal, Reuven, and A. David Mangelsdorff, Wiley, New York, NY and Chichester, U.K., p. 411-429. Explored the behavioral complexity of Robert Quinn at Michigan. (Also in Hunt (ed), 1984, Leadership and Management - ?)
- Industrial College of the Armed Forces, (Ed.), 1999, Feb., Strategic Leadership and Decision Making, National Defense University, Washington, DC. (ICAF, Department of Strategic Decision Making and Executive Information Systems faculty.) Online textbook, twenty chapters long.
- Jacobs, Dr. T. Owen, 1972, Leadership and Exchange in Formal Organizations, Human Resources Research Organization, Alexandria, VA. [U.S. Army]. (1970?) An excellent history, overview and analysis of the state of research in leadership. See Bell book review 1973.
- Jacobs, Dr. T. Owen, 1979, Leadership and Exchange in Formal Organizations, U.S. Army, OE School, Fort Ord, CA. [A reprint? A revision of 1970? A typo?]
- Jacobs, Dr. T. Owen, 1983, “Cognitive Behavior and Information Processing Under Conditions of Uncertainty,” Chapter in Williams, Robert F., and Richard D. Abeyta, eds., Management of Risk and Uncertainty in Systems Acquisition: Proceedings of the Defense Risk and Uncertainty Workshop, Army Procurement Research Office, Fort Belvoir, VA, held 13-15 July 1983, AD-A136 230, p. 165-169. Also available from NTIS: ADP0023101, 15 July 1983, 5 pages. Earlier conceptualizations about the decision process were either overly simplistic or lacking in veridicality. The nature of the decision task, and the conditions under which it is performed have a profound influence on the decision process. These effects include the information processing strategies which the decision maker may be unaware of having chosen and the organizational level at which the decision maker is located, i.e., critical functions and the nature of the cognitive skills he therefore must bring to the task. (See Isaac and O’Connor 1975.)
- Jacobs, Dr. T. Owen, 1991, “Introduction to Section 4,” in Handbook of Military Psychology, ed. by Gal, Reuven, and A. David Mangelsdorff, Wiley, NY, NY and Chichester, U.K., p. 389-392.
- Jacobs, Dr. T. Owen, and Elliott Jaques, 1991, “Executive Leadership,” chapter 22 (p.431-447) in: Gal, Reuven, and A. David Mangelsdorff, eds., 1991, Handbook of Military Psychology, Wiley, New York, NY and Chichester, U.K., 780 p. Also published as: U.S. Department of the Army, Pamphlet 600-80, 19 June 1987. (Cited in Sternberg et al 2000 without author attribution.) *****
- Jaques, Elliott, 1945, “The Clinical Use of the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) with Soldiers,” The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, APA, US, Oct., 40(4):363-375. The TAT is helpful in a military hospital where speed is essential in diagnosis. (Reprinted in Studies in Motivation, David C. McClelland, ed., 1955, Appleton-Century-Crofts, NY, NY, 552 p.) Jaques was a Major in the Royal Canadian Army Medical Corps.
- Jaques, Elliott, 1976, A General Theory of Bureaucracy, Heinemann, London, UK, and Exeter, NH (1980); and Halsted/ Wiley, New York, NY, 412 p. Reissued 1981. Also, reprint, Gower, 1986 and 1993, Gregg Revivals, Aldershot, UK. Available from Cason Hall, Gloucester, MA. A reconceptualization of the Glacier theory on a higher level as “stratified systems theory (SST)” based on the discovery of a uniform and universal depth structure of stratification of work levels in the bureaucratic hierarchy. This was an expression of discontinuity in the distribution ofwork-capacity among people. A comprehensive account of the interconnections of the theory, their implications for social and economic issues, and its applications. (Sections were reproduced as chapters 15 and 19 in Jaques, Elliott, with Roland O. Gibson, and D. John Isaac (eds.), 1978, Levels of Abstraction in Logic and Human Action, Heinemann, London, UK.) (In libraries [as Jacques]: IRS, Pentagon, US Army SSI Media Ctr.) See page 194 ftnt for UK companies then using the theory: “Scott Bader Organization, Richard Baxendale & Sons [now Baxi Group], Limited, some Airport Authorities (from Brown’s service in government at the Board of Trade, see Turner 1976), the Glacier Metal Company, Stirling Industries” (Spelling: Sterling?). See p. ix, ftnt., as relating to his work and/or results on the civil service (see also Jaques 1972 and Hansard, 1969, House of Lords Official Report: 19th November 1969). Ch. 24 delineates the transactional competition in the goods and services market from the requisite employment relationship. When the two are confounded, transactional competition destroys the labor relationship and ends in exploitation. See book reviews by Abell 1977(?), Choice v. 13 (Jan. 1977) [with excerpt]; The Economist v. 261 (Dec. 4 1976) [with excerpt], and many others. Clio OffSite JS113 .J35 1976.
- Jaques, Elliott, 1985, “A Look at the Future of Human Resources Work Via Stratified Systems Theory,” Human Resources Planning, December, 8(4):223-237. SST in the US Army. *****
- Jaques, Elliott, 1985, “Stratification of Cognitive Complexity,” US Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Grant No. DAJA 37-80-c-007. Unpublished report. Cited in Gould 1987; Hunt et al 1992. Not seen. Ru. Jaques, Elliott, and Clement, Stephen, Rigby, Carlos, Jacobs, T. Owen, 1985, Senior Leadership Performance Requirements at the Executive Level, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Research Report 1420 [January 1986]. AD B103 760. Cited in Jacobs and Jaques 1990, p. 286-287. (Not yet declassified. Not available from NTIS as of Jan. 10, 2001.) Cited online at ONLINE BIBLIOGRAPHY OF MILITARY LEADERSHIP: http://www.west.asu.edu/vanfleet/milbib/milbibj.htm (accessed 2-1-04) Not seen.
- Jaques, Elliott, and Stephen D. Clement, 1990, Military Leadership: Who, How and Why, Cason Hall and Company Publishers, Gloucester, MA. ISBN 096107026.
- Jaques, Elliott, and Stamp, Gillian, 1990, Development of Stratified Systems Theory for Possible Implementation in the U.S. Army, Jul 1990, NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, US, 91p. Report: ARIRN-90-74, ADA2269108.
- Jaques, Elliott, and Giilian Stamp, 1995, Level and Type of Capability in Relation to Executive Organization, NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, USA. ARI, 99 p. Report: ARIRN-95-13, ADA2986214.
- Johnson, Edgar M., and Dr. T. O. (Thomas Owen) Jacobs, 1984, Perspectives on the Utility of Systems Science in the Army, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, Alexandria, Va., Special report; S-8, 14 pages, Microfiche, October. [Also available from: NTIS, 22 pages, ARI-SR-S-8; ADA1486083. Results of a conference on systems science and its potential for solution of Army problems. Conferees made a distinction between systems science (an emerging discipline) and systems approach (a body of systematic technologies). Areas of potential application were complexity (in systems of people, equipment, and missions), ongoing change (in structure or components), information flows, and decision making (especially where relevant information is imprecise, uncertain, incomplete, unreliable, partially inconsistent, or any combination of these). Two areas recommended for further work were: (a) The assessment of battalion operations/ effectiveness and (b) The design of complex systems. GMU Library has it. In Lehman lib. Kane, Thomas D., and Trueman R. Tremble, Jr., 2000, “Transformational Leadership Effects at Different Levels of the Army,” Military Psychology, 12(2):137-160. Tested the effects of transformational leadership (Burns, Bass) and compared them to transactional leadership. Identified the unique effects of transformational leadership on subordinate job motivation. Higher ranking officers were perceived as less passive than lower ranking officers. Cited Jaques 1986, Jacobs and Jaques 1991.
- King, Pearl, 2005, “Memories of Dr Elliott Jaques,” International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, Special Issue: Elliott Jaques 1: The Contributions of Elliott Jaques, Whurr Publishers (subsidiary of John Wiley), New York and London, December 2005, 2(4):327-331. King is a sychoanalyst and historian of psychoanalysis. Elliott Jaques studied medicine, and became a major in the Canadian Army during WWII. He acted as a liaison officer with the Psychiatric Division of the British Army. Several of these officers, along with Jaques and King, trained as psychoanalysts. After the war Jaques was one of the founder members of the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations. In 1961 he was elected Scientific Secretary of the British Psychoanalytic Society. In 1965 he was appointed Professor and Head of the School of Social Sciences at the newly established Brunel University. In 1967 he asked King to work as a part-time senior lecturer in the School. Jaques was a prolific writer and was recognized by organizations world-wide. He was a consultant both to institutions and governments, including the Pentagon. In 1980 he moved from London to the USA. email: Pearl King ([email protected]) Rp. Leadership Quarterly, Spring 2000, JAI Press, Stamford, CT, 11(1). This special issue is on leadership studies conducted by George Mason University faculty through MRI for ARI. Much of this research builds on SST work with the U.S. Army. [Winter 2000?] Also see: various issues of Leadership Quarterly 1991, 1993, 1995.
- Leed, Maren, 2001, Keeping the Warfighting Edge: An Empirical Analysis of Army Officers' Tactical Expertise, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, 116 pages, pbk. ISBN: 0-8330- 3130-9; MR-1378-A. Published version of Leed 2000 Ph.D., RAND RGSD-152, 2000.
- Lewis, Philip, 1993, Career Path Appreciation (CPA) Data Reduction Analysis, NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, USA, Aug 1993. 57p. Report: ARITR-983; ADA2732253. The Career Path Appreciation (CPA) is an assessment interview that theoretically gives insight into conceptual capacity. CPA interviews were conducted with 148 active-duty Army officers. The inter-rater reliability, based on 57 cases scored by two raters, was 0.81. Considering the quasi-clinical nature of the assessment interview, this was highly acceptable.
- Lucas, Kenneth W., and Joan Markessini, 1993, Senior Leadership in a Changing World Order: Requisite Skills for U.S. Army One-and Two-Star Assignments, NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, USA, Apr 1993, 102 p., Report: ARITR-976; ADA2698918. ARI Executive Development and Research Group, Alexandria, VA. For this report, as part of a larger effort, interviews were conducted with 48 Brigadier Generals and 26 Major Generals to identify key position performance requirements. The interviews were theory-based, exploring the correctness of Stratified Systems Theory (SST) formulations about the structure of work at senior and strategic levels. Content analysis of the tape-recorded interviews provided broad support for SST. As expected, complexity of performance requirements systematically increased with increasing position grade. (See Markessini and Lucas 1992
- Macdonald, Ian, Lt. Col. Roderick Macdonald, and Karl W. Stewart, 1989, “Leadership: A New Direction,” British Army Review, December, UK, 93:31-37. [1990:00957] Examines leadership from the viewpoint of group mythologies, group culture and the leader's capability. Good leaders are able to create and change cultures, communicate through symbols and understand the nature of the system they are running. Identified six core values and their opposites that are necessary for social co-operation: Honest v Dishonest; Loving v Unloving; Fair v Unfair; Courageous v Cowardly; Dignifying v Undignfying; Trustworthy v Untrustworthy. Available online at maconsultancy.com
- Magee, Roderick R., ed., 1998, Strategic Leadership Primer, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle, PA. A book of readings for the War College’s officer-students built from the Jacobs and Jaques 1990 model.
- Malone, Dandridge M., Col. (rtd), and Maj. Michael L. McGee, 1985, “Jazz Musicians and Algonquin Indians,” Military Review, Dec. 1985, 65(12):52-61.
- Malone, Dandridge M., Col. (rtd), and Maj. Michael L. McGee, 1987, “The Orchestrators,” Army, Washington DC, Aug. 1987, p. 18-24, (1987:05842). Successful co-ordination of fire and movement between individuals within the platoon and between platoons can be called ‘orchestrating’. “It only occurs when all the individuals are orchestrating, each thinking of himself not as an individual but as one of the critical parts of the fire team”. [Category Codes: F2, F9]. Based on application of ongoing ARI research. See McGee and Dandridge 1987. NYPL HUM Microfilm *ZAN-3164. Butler Microfilm FN 764. D.
- Mangelsdorff, A. David, 2005, “Factors Affecting Selection for Promotion to Lieutenant Colonel (05),” U.S. Army Medical Department Journal, Jan.-Mar. 2005, p. 21-23. Cited J&J 1991. W.
- Markessini, Joan, T. Owen Jacobs, and Z. M. Simutis, 1990, Leadership in a Changing World Order: Requisite Cognitive Skills. A Taxonomy of Cognitive Capabilities for Executives, CAE-Link Corp., Falls Church, VA. Sponsor: U.S. Army Research Institute, Alexandria, VA. 16 Nov 1990. NTIS, Springfield, VA, Report PB95174439. This taxonomy is based upon deduction and synthesis of the literature on leadership and cognitive psychology and on interview data concerning intellectual performance from 39 incumbent Three- and Four-star U.S. Army General Officers. The generic cognitive tasks and higher-order cognitive processes are presented and compared in terms of component cognitive processes and skills. The prime objective of the research underlying this taxonomy of cognitive capabilities is enhancement of Army leadership development. [See Markessini, 1996 (drafted in 1990) and 1995 (1992).]
- Markessini, Joan, 1992, Leadership in a Changing World Order: Manual for the Cognitive Skills Content Analysis of Interview Data. Construct Definitions and General, Excerpting, and Scoring Criteria, CAE-Link Corp., Falls Church, VA. Sponsor: Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA. NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, USA, 31 Oct 1992, 9 p., PB95178877. Abstract: This Manual contains general, excerpting, and scoring criteria for the analysis of interview data concerning cognitive skills. It also contains construct definitions for a particular set of cognitive capabilities. The method of content analysis described in the Manual construes the assertions of respondents as text that needs to be decoded, and it seeks to exploit the way language unintentionally and intentionally expresses the structure of individual subjective reality. In its view of interview data as text that needs to be decoded, the method is a type of hermeneutics.
- Markessini, Joan, and Kenneth W. Lucas, 1992, Leadership in a Changing World Order: Prediction of Promotion for U.S. Army Three- and Four-Star Generals by Frequency of Mention, Cognitive Skill Content Areas, CAE-Link Corp., Falls Church, VA. Sponsor: Army Research Inst. for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA. NTIS, Springfield, VA, 31 Oct 1992, 18p., Report PB95178976. (See also AD-A280 536 and AD-A269 891.) This report describes an analytic method that proved to accurately identify the promotability - and promotion - of a set of Three-star Generals to Four-star rank. The measure was the frequency with which certain cognitive skills were cited in interviews by five behavioral scientists with 114 U.S. Army General Officers at all ranks. (See Lucas andMarkessini 1993.)
- Markessini, Joan, and J. W. Gormly, 1993, Leadership in a Changing World Order: Requisite Cognitive Skills. Decision Making, Planning, and Innovation. A Qualitative Analysis of the Opinion and Judgment of U.S. Army General Officers, CAE-Link Corp., Falls Church, VA. Sponsor: Army Research Inst. for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA, 23 Feb 1993, 222 p., Report PB95174421. Sponsored by Army Research Inst. for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA. This report addresses the cognitive tasks of decision making, planning, and innovation. It is based on in-depth analyses of 39 Three- and Four-star U.S. Army General Officers on leadership development. Identified six broad themes: the importance of the task, how performance of the task distinguishes ranks, the nterrelationships between and among the tasks, perplexity about the task and how it should be carried out, constraints on performing the task, and the need for additional development in each cognitive areas.
- Markessini, Joan, and Kenneth W. Lucas, 1993, Mind in Command: Decision Making for Leadership. A Blueprint and Sample of Instructional Content, CAE-Link Corp., Falls Church, VA. Sponsor: Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA. Aug 1993. 152 p. Report PB95197588. A blueprint for teaching higher order cognitive skills based on observations and opinions by 101 U.S. Army General Officers at all ranks about higher-order cognitive skills development for students in leadership positions.
- Markessini, Joan, T. Owen Jacobs, and Z. M. Simutis, 1993, Logic of Cognitive Tasks: With Narrated Problem Management Strategies, CAE-Link Corp., Falls Church, VA. Sponsor: Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA., 31 Oct 1993, 43 p., Report PB95174934. How do military executives actually and by their own account go about problem management? Interviews with active-duty U.S. Army Three- and Four-star Generals focused on questions of organizational structure and on the behavioral aspects of job performance with entre to cognitive capabilities. Planned and problem management, viewed as goal-directed mental behaviors, differ importantly, yet share key elements.
- Markessini, Joan, Kenneth W. Lucas, N. Chandler, and T. Owen Jacobs, 1994, Executive Leadership: Requisite Skills and Developmental Processes for the U.S. Army's Civilian Executives, NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, USA. Jul 1994. 42 p. Report: ARIRN-94-26, ADA2841278. Analysis of interviews with 27 civilian members of the Executive Service (ES) and Senior Executive Services (SES). General indings were that members of the SES reported similar task performance requirements and the need for similar skills and abilities as their General Officer counterparts. Nearly half of the sample was performing duties judged to be strategic in scope and scale. TSD. *****
- McGee, Michael L., Maj. U.S. Army, (undated), “The Test,” Washington Army Guard, online website. Accessed 4/18/2004. A case. How mutual trust is earned and established among officers. www.washingtonarmyguard.com/thetest.html
- McGee, Michael L., Maj., and Col. (rtd) Dandridge M. Malone, 1987, “Peer Ratings,” Army, Washington DC, Sept. 1987, p. 40-44; (1987:05948). Peer ratings are an important and accurate indicator of soldiers' ability which should be integrated into the Army training and education system. Not only are they useful in assessment, but they also have a role in building and fostering unit cohesion. (On the same topic, see 1987:03842.) [Category Codes: G3, L3]. Based on application of ongoing ARI research. See Malone and McGee 1987. NYPL HUM Microfilm *ZAN-3164. Butler Microfilm FN 764. D.
- McGee, LTC Mike, 1993, “Measuring Up: A Systemic Technology for Developing Leaders,” U.S. Army Research Fellow Report, National Defense University Press, Ft. McNair,Washington, DC, 91 p., July 15. A comprehensive review of the current military leadership development process, including the Strategic Leadership Development Inventory (SLDI).
- McGee, Michael L., T. Owen Jacobs, Robert N. Kilcullan, and Herbert F. Barber, 1999, “Conceptual Capacity as Competitive Advantage: Developing Leaders for the New Army,” Chapter 11, p. 221-237, in Hunt, James G., George E. Dodge, and Leonard Wong, eds., 1999, Out-of-the-Box Leadership: Transforming the Twenty-First-Century Army and Other Top-Performing Organizations, JAI Press, Stamford, CT. Monographs in Leadership and Management, Vol. 1 (q.v.). (Paper presented at the U. S. Army Leadership Symposium, March 27-29, 1996, Cantigni Conference Center, Chicago, IL.)
- McHenry, Jeffrey J., Leaetta M. Hough, Jody L. Toquam, Mary A. Hanson, et al, 1990,“Project A Validity Results: The relationship between predictor and criterion domains,” Personnel Psychology, APA, Washington, DC, Sum 1990, 43(2):335-354. Administered a predictor battery of cognitive ability, perceptual-psychomotor ability, temperament/ personality, interest, and job outcome preference measures to 4,039 enlisted soldiers in nine Army jobs. These predictor measures were derived from the US Army Selection and Classification Project (Project A). Relationships between predictor composite (COM) scores and five components of job
- McIntyre, Robert, and T. Owen Jacobs, 1993, “Brief Summary of ‘The Construct Validity of the CPA: Report on Three Investigations’.” Authors at: Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, and U.S. Army Research Institute. Available online at bioss.com. Three-page summary with comments by Gillian Stamp, 1998. She noted the CPA may tap fluid but not crystallised intelligence. The cost of administering the CPA is high and this may block any extensive use for selection in the military. CPA is also potentially vulnerable to compromise. But it is reliable and theoretically sound. Looked at Wonderlic also. (See entries below.)
- McIntyre, Robert M., P. Jordan, C. Mergen, L. Hamill, and T. Owen Jacobs, 1993, “The Construct Validity of the CPA: Report on Three Investigations,” U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA. (See above AND below)
- McIntyre, Robert M., A. Yanushefski, and L. Hamil, 1994, “Toward a Theory of Leadership: the Place of Cognitive Skills,” Scientific Services Program, Army Research Institute, Alexandria, VA. Performer: Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA. Cited by Stamp, Sept. 2000. Cited by Kitching 2005 thesis. Not seen. On the CPA. (Bioss So Af has it?) Rp.
- McNally, Jeffrey A, Stephen J. Gerras, and R. Craig Bullis, 1996, “Teaching Leadership at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point,” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Arlington, VA, June 1996, 32(2):175-188. A description and analysis is presented of how leadership is taught to more than 1,000 cadets each year at the US Military Academy at West Point. These cadets, upon graduation and commissioning as second lieutenants, are the future leaders of the US Army. The organizational and institutional context of this work has contributed to the development of a unique methodology for teaching organizational leadership. This methodology has recently been extended to the development of leaders in the Los Angeles Police Department and in various police departments throughout New Jersey. The success of this experience over several years has proven the merit of the approach for teaching leadership to both aspiring and practicing leaders across military and civilian organizational contexts. The title of the course is Military Leadership; it is taught to all cadets in their junior year. The present authors have taught this course for a combined 17 years. This method of moving students to higher cognitive levels in their scientific study of leadership distinguishes this course from other leader development activities at West Point. The process requires cadets to use higher order cognitive skills such as the identification of ambiguity, the discovery of assumptions and value conflicts, the evaluation of evidence, the application of logic, the generation of alternative inferences, and development of reasoned judgment (e.g., Jacobs and Jaques 1987). MS. A
- Meyer, Edward C., 1980, “White Paper 1980: A Framework for molding the Army of the 1980s into a disciplined, well-trained fighting force,” Dept. of Army, Washington, DC, 1980, 17 pages. “Shy” Meyer was then Chief of Staff, U.S. Army. GovDoc: D 101.2:Ar 5/23; LC: UA10; Dewey: 355.3/0973. (WHERE: Carlisle, NDU, SUNY Binghamton, Safti.) In Meyer 1984?
- Meyer, Edward C., 1984, E.C. Meyer, General, United States Army Chief of Staff, June 1979- June 1983, Dept. of the Army, Washington, DC, 406 p. A history of his term in office. A chronological extract of documents from Meyer's term. Material was drawn from speeches, articles, Congressional testimony and selected correspondence. Shifted the focus of the Army personnel function from the individual to the unit level (company). No mention of Jaques.
- Miller, J., S. Clement, C. Hoskins, H. Schloss, under Russ Zajtchuk, BG, MC, 1995,United States Army Medical Department Reorganization. (3 Volumes). NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, USA. Office of the Surgeon General (Army), Falls Church, VA, 16 Jun 1995. This report provides a synopsis of the work surrounding the Army Medical Department (AMEDD) reorganization during the period January 1993 to June 1995. In five volumes. Volume I documents the formation of Task Force Aesculapius; the role of Organizational Design, Incorporated; and the impact of the reorganization on other AMEDD activities, background for the reorganization, the analytical process, concept plan development, and implementation of the concept plan. Volumes II, III, IV, and V contain the MEDCOM Concept Plan, Task Force charters, briefings, and command reviews. Only Volumes I-III are published. This was Stephen Clement’s SST/ RO project:
- Moskos, Charles C., and John Sibley Butler, 1996, All That We Can Be: Black Leadership and Racial Integration the Army Way, Basic Books, New York, NY, 198 p. An examination of the success of blacks in the Army as a refutation of the “paradigm of black failure” in civilian economic life. (“Be All You Can Be.”) Authors are pessimistic that their message will not be heard and accepted since many socially reform-minded civilians do not like the military (authority, uniforms and all that).There were many sources for the Army’s success dating back to Harry Truman. Jaques played a role but the authors missed it, so cannot extend the current model into civilian recommendations. (Review by Paul Burstein 1997, not included).
- Mumford, Michael D., S. J. Zaccaro, F. D. Harding, E. A. Fleishman, and R. Reiter-Palmon, 1993, Cognitive and Temperament Predictors of Executive Ability: principles for developing leadership capacity, NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, USA, Army Research Inst. for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA. Management Research Inst., Inc., Bethesda, MD. May 1993. 149 p., Report: ARITR977; ADA2675890. This report completes phase I of a small business innovative research effort to measure and enhance cognitive skills. A taxonomy was developed that had 13 leadership behavior dimensions related to discretionary and creative problem solving. Sixty-five cognitive and temperament predictors of executive ability were derived from the taxonomy and organized into 11 dimensions: general cognitive intelligence, creativity, crystallized cognitive skills, adaptability/ego resiliency, openness/ curiosity, self-awareness, achievement, need for dominance, commitment to social systems, practical intelligence, and social intelligence. The report provides the infrastructure required for programmatic interventions targeting the development of these capacities and follow-up research to evaluate the interventions. Cited in Mehltretter 1995 PhD.
- Mumford, Michael D., Michelle A. Marks, Mary Shane Connelly, Stephen J. Zaccaro, and Roni Reiter-Palmo, 2000, “Development of Leadership Skills: Experience and timing,” Leadership Quarterly, Elsevier Science, Greenwich CT, Spring 2000, 11(1):87-114. Army-US (NAICS: 928110, Sic: 9700). To develop organizational leaders we need to understand how requisite skills are acquired over the course of people's careers. Differences in leadership skills were assessed across 6 grade levels of officers in the US Army. Increased levels of knowledge, problem-solving skills, systems skills and social skills were found at higher grade levels. Certain skills and experiences were found to be particularly important at certain phases of leaders’ careers. Proposed an organization-based model of skill and leader development. Cited Lewis and Jacobs 1992, Day and Lord 1988. Rp.
- Myers, Susan R., 2008, “Senior Leader Cognitive Development Through Distance Education,” American Journal of Distance Education, Taylor and Francis, UK, April, 22(2):110-122. Senior executives who completed the two-year distance education program of the United States Army War College showed significant development of their strategic-level cognitive skills. The Modified Career Path Appreciation (MCPA) survey was administered to seventy participants at the beginning of their graduate program in strategic studies and at the completion of the program. These senior officer leaders showed a significant increase in their appreciation for strategic-level thinking as measured by the MCPA survey, focus group, and individual interviews. Focus group and individual interviews showed that senior officer leaders increase their ability to synthesize information by using online information networks, threaded discussions, and the application of course material to their current leadership experiences. From Myers’s 2007 PhD at Penn State. At U.S. Army War College. Abstract seen. Rp. PJ.
- Osborn, Richard N., 1985, "Research Implications of Army Leadership Doctrine,” chapter in Hunt, J. G. (Jerry), and Blauner, J. D., 1985, Leadership on the Future Battlefield, International Defense Publications, Washington DC. Questions for the patterning of attention, action, and reinforcement. See Stamp. Cited in Popper and Gluskinos 1993. Rp.
- Osborn, Richard N., Jacobs, T. Owen, and Simutis, Zita M., 1994, “Principles of design for high performing organizations: a suggested research program,” U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA, and School of Business Administration, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI. ARI research note 94-16. March 1994, 32 pages. Report No: AD-A278 634. In Naval War College library. Not seen. NTIS ???.
- Osterberg, D. A., 1997, Information Age Decisionmaking: Developing a Tool Kit for Future Leaders, Army War Coll., Carlisle Barracks, PA, Apr 1997, 46 p. NTIS Accsn No.: ADA3267861. Critically questioned the Army's educational system and the wisdom of maintaining a purely analytical decisionmaking model for the military in light of emerging information technologies and organizational changes. Study concluded that future decisions can best be made through a combination of several decisionmaking models ranging from analytical to intuitive, with emphasis on thepotential of intuitive models. (Not clear if this is on the theory.) Abstract seen. Misc.
- Paparone, Colonel Christopher R., 2001, "US Army Decisionmaking: Past, Present and Future," Military Review, Carlisle, PA, July-August. See related PhD 2003.
- Paparone, Christopher R., and James A Crupi, 2002, “Janusian Thinking and Acting,” Military Review, Department of the Army Headquarters, Jan/Feb, 82(1):38- . ISSN: 0026-4148
- Paparone, Christopher R., 2002, "The Nature of Soldierly Trust," Military Review, Carlisle, PA, Nov-Dec, p. 45-53. See related PhD 2003. Not seen.
- Paparone, Christopher R., 2003, “Is hope the only method?” Military Review, Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company, 1 May 2003, 83(3):47- . 6,382 words.
- Paparone, Christopher R., Ruth A. Anderson, and Reuben R. McDaniel, Jr., 2003, “The United States Military: Where Professionalism Meets Complexity Science.” Unpublished Manuscript. On organizations as complex adaptive systems. (From CRP 2004)
- Paparone, Christopher R., 2004, “Deconstructing Army Leadership,” Military Review, Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company, 1 Jan/Feb 2004, 84(1):2-10 (9). Strategic Leadership Conference Proceedings edited by Herbert F. Barber and T. Owen Jacobs, 280 pages, February 1991, eight papers mostly by military heavyweights
- Phillips, Robert L., and James G. (Jerry) Hunt, eds., 1992, Strategic Leadership, A Multiorganizational-Level Perspective, Afterword by Robert J. House, Quorum Books/ Greenwood Publishing, Westport, CT and London, UK, 336 pages. This anthology is one of two books that came out of a four-day 1991 conference sponsored by the U.S. Army ARI and the War College at Carlisle Barracks, Feb. 11-14. (See Strategic Leadership Conference Proceedings edited by Herbert F. Barber and T. Owen Jacobs, 280 pages, February 1991, eight papers mostly by military heavyweights.) These original essays by well-known academics begin from Jacobs and Jaques’ 1987 formulation of SST and apply it to their specialties and civilian organizations. The editors have translated the military terms into plain English for the rest of us, so anyone in business or academia can read this book with profit. The hint: The US Army wants YOU to pay attention to SST. (Because Jaques and Brown failed to connect the theory to the rest of academic research, this appears to be the reverse approach - get others to connect their work to the theory. See book review by Meindl 1994 in AMR.) (Since academics still refused to get it, the Army held other conferences in 1994 and 1996. See olumes: Cage 1994; Hunt, Dodge, and Wong, 1999.)
- Powell, Colin L., 1993, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff report on the roles, missions, and functions of the Armed Forces of the United States, Dept. of Defense, Washington, D.C., 1 v. (various pagings, c. 120 p.), 10 Feb 1993.
- Powell, General Colin, 1995, My American Journey, Ballantine Books, New York, NY, pp. 398-399.
- Powell, Walter W., 1990, “Neither Market Nor Hierarchy: Network Forms of Organization,” in Research in Organization Behavior, Vol. 12, JAI Press, Stamford, CT, pages 295-336.
- Ree, Malcolm James, James A. Earles, and Mark S. Teachout, 1994, “Predicting job performance: Not much more than g,” Journal of Applied Psychology, APA, Washington, DC, 1994 Aug, 79(4):518-524. The roles of general cognitive ability (g) and specific abilities or knowledge (s) were investigated as predictors of work sample job performance criteria in seven jobs for US Air Force enlistees. Both g and s (the interaction of general ability and experience) were defined by scores on the first and subsequent principal components of the enlistment selection and classification test (the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery). Multiple regression analyses, when corrected for range restriction, revealed that g was the best predictor of all criteria and that s added a statistically significant but practically small amount to predictive efficiency. These results are consistent with those of previous studies, most notably Army Project A (J. J. McHenry et al, 1990-27146-001). The study also extends the findings to other jobs and uses traditionally more acceptable estimates of g, application of effective sample size in cross-validation estimation, and new performance criteria. (If this is all there is, what’s the fuss about?) See McHenry 1990. MS. A.
- Reisweber, Deborah, 1997, “Battle Command: Will we have it when we need it?” Military Review, Fort Leavenworth, KS, Sep/Oct 1997, 77(5): 49- (7 pgs.).
- Ricks, Thomas E., 1995, “Battle Plans: In Wake of Cold War, An Intellectual Leads the Army in New Missions,” Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Co., New York, NY, October 2, page A1. Reprinted as chapter 24 (p. 230-235) in Taylor, Robert, and William Rosenbach, (eds.), 1996, Military Leadership: in pursuit of excellence, Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
- Ricks, Thomas E., 1997, “Army Devises System To Decide What Does, And Does Not, Work,” Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Co., New York, NY, May 23, page A1, A10.
- Rumsey, Michael G., and Tonia Heffner, 2002, “Finding the Right Noncommissioned Officers for the Objective Force,” Fact Sheet, US Army, ARI, Arlington, VA, 2 p. Found future NCOs were also identifiable as J+J 1987 predicted. Cited Jacobs and Jaques 1987. (And ARI: Ford, L. A., et al 2000; Knapp, D. J., et al 2002.) Rp. NJ.
- Schlemenson, Aldo, 2009, “Elliott Jaques, La Trayectoria de un Pionero,” Ergo, Buenos Aires, AR, Julio 2009, p. 77-80. In Spanish. A short article summarizing Elliott’s career, the Tavi, psychoanalysis, Glacier Metal, Wilfred Brown, Brunel University, BIOSS, the US Army, CRA/ RTZ (Rio Tinto), etc. D. Pro.
- Scott, William G., 1965, The Management of Conflict: appeal systems in organizations, Irwin: Dorsey Press, Homewood, IL, 129 p. Described (p. 12-13) the Glacier Metal appeals system model depicted in Brown 1960 (p. 250-273), as well as IBM, Western Electric, UAW, Catholic Church, and U.S. Army. Noted that industrial humanists stress participation and democratic leadership that bypasses the superior-subordinate relationship. Felt a more realistic target was to constitutionalize the corporation and the due process appeals system (as did Brown). See Stockman, 1966 MA at SIU. See positive Newman 1966 book review in BJIR. Cited in Newman and Rowbottom 1968, in Hampton, Summer and Webber 1973, and in Dayal 1973.
- Stamp, Gillian P., 1988, Longitudinal Research into Methods of Assessing Managerial Potential, NTIS Springfield, VA, 22161, USA. Oct 1988. 48p. Report: ARITR-819, ARITR819; ADA2048783, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA. An assessment technique of measuring “discretion in action” to predict executive potential, the Career Path Appreciation (CPA), was developed based on the logic of Jaques' Stratified Systems Theory. CPA is a two-hour interview with three components: M. Featherstone’s card-sorting task, a comprehensive work history, and a set of phrase cards to be sorted according to the person’s preferences, all of which are then discussed with the assessee. Follow-up studies 4-11 years later were conducted (1984-1988) on earlier CPAs to compare predicted versus actual organization levels attained. Predictive validities ranged from 0.79 to 0.89. The growth process was reliably predicted. But the pool of trainable assessors was small (S-IV level). (So the MCPA was developed.) Described in Jacobs and Jaques 1990, p. 284-286; and Bishop, Ph.D. 1989, p. 123-130. (???) See Neal and Johnson 1996 (?).
- Stamp, Gillian P., 1986, “Some Observations on the Career Paths of Women,” Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Sage / JAI Press, Stamford, CT, 22(4):385-396.
- Stewart, Steven R., 1987, “Leader development training assessment of U.S. Army TFLADOC brigade commanders,” U.S. Army Research Institute, Washington, DC, Research Report 1454. Cited in Vandergriff 2006. Rp.
- Stewart, Steven R., and Angle, D.C., 1992, Correlates of Creative Problem Solving, NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, USA. Army Research Inst. for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA, Oct. 1992, 193 p., Report: ARI-RN-93-01; ADA2587202. The purposes of this research were to (a) identify individual differences related to unstructured problem-solving capability and (b) evaluate the effectiveness of a training course designed to enhance performance in solving unstructured problems.One group was taught thinking process skills. The second group underwent instruction about thinking and problem solving that was content (not process) oriented. Four predictors accounted for 60% of the criterion's variance. They were, in order of importance, mental rotations, use of intuition, use of introversion (both as assessed with the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator), and risk-taking propensity. Students taking the thinking process training significantly outscored those taught only about problems and errors in human judgment and decision making.
- Stewart, Steven R., and Angle, D.C., 1992, Leader Development Training Needs Assessment of U.S. Army Battalion Commanders, NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, USA. Army Research Inst. for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA, Nov. 1992, 26p. Report: TR-969; ADA2592061. Twenty-nine battalion commanders and their immediate supervisors (19) participated in this study to identify their training needs. Researchers used a structured interview to obtain information about the strengths and weaknesses of battalion commanders and about 'mentoring' and life experiences. Major findings were (1) commanders were not conceptually prepared for the requirements of the job, (2) decentralization of control is one of the most difficult battalion and brigade command requirements, (3) risk aversion caused by high levels of insecurity leads to inability to decentralize control, (4) failure to decentralize at battalion level may not result in disaster, but failure to do so at brigade level will, (5) battalion commanders need more preparation in Leadership, (6) mentoring is a poorly understood concept often confused with related activities - coaching, counseling, and sponsoring, and (7) conceptual and emotional development appear to be major and interacting components of the maturation process and should be given equal attention in training.
- Stewart, Steven R., and Hicks, J. M., 1987, Leader Development Training Assessment of U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Brigade Commanders, NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, USA. Army Research Inst. for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA, Oct. 1987, 30 p., ARI-RR-1454; ADA1906288. Participant evaluation of a Leader Development Course taught to Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Brigade Commanders. After attending the course, 25 brigade commanders received questionnaires to determine (1) what the contribution of the course to enhancing job proficiency relative to costs was and (2) at what stage(s) of an officer's career should such a self/leader development experience occur. Findings included: (1) A leadership development course akin to that provided by the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) is viewed very positively; (2) the Leader Development experience should be given to battalion commander designees; (3) the CCL course as now constituted would not be acceptable for general use in the Army; (4) mentoring as a methodology for developing human resource potential within the Army is not well understood; (5) the most significant mind-broadening experience for senior officers appears to be the Army War College; and (6) communication across field grade and general officer rank boundaries appears to be limited.
- Stone, Michael P. W., 1987, “Army Headquarters Trimmed, Realigned,” Army, Washington DC, October 1987, p. 235-237. Described the initial round of planning, targets and actions to implement the Goldwater-Nichols Act (PL 99-433) by the October 1, 1988 deadline and the new responsibilities of the chief of staff. Stone was assistant secretary of the Army overseeing the process. D.
- Sullivan, Gordon R., Gen., 1994, “Ulysses S. Grant and America’s Power-Projection Army,” Military Review, Command and Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, KS, (1994:01125), Jan. 1994, p. 5-14. Chief of staff, US Army.
- Thurman, Maxwell, 1991, "Strategic Leadership," presentation by the General at the Strategic Leadership Conference, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, PA, February 1991. Published as a chapter (p. 5-52) in Barber, Herbert F., and Jacobs, T. Owen, 1991, Strategic Leadership Conference Proceedings, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, PA, and U.S. Army Research Institute, Alexandria, VA, 261 pages. (Distributed on microfiche to 85 depository libraries - CW Post, SUNY Buffalo, SUNY Binghamton, Princeton). Worldcat and Merln Catalog.) Not seen yet.
- Thurman, General Maxwell R., and Col. Stephen D. Clement, 1992, “Strategic Vision,” Festschrift for Elliott Jaques, Cason Hall, Gloucester, MA, p. 415-422. Thurman was known as the “father of the modern Army.” A strong adherent of Jaques. Introduced the slogan: “Be All You Can Be.” He was CinC Southern Command and commanded Operation Just Cause in Panama. He was the music man. *****
- Toynbee, Arnold J., 1958, “Thinking Ahead,” Harvard Business Review, Sept.-Oct., p. 23-38, 164-170. [In observance of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the founding of the Harvard Business School.] The great majority of businessmen today [in 1958] are employees and, “in this respect, are in the same position as their fellow employees, the workers in the factory.” In Roman times businessmen were predatory and parasitical, operating for personal profit by following the Roman army, grabbing land on the cheap, and introducing cattle ranching and plantation farming using the conquered people as slaves. Most state functions were contracted out to private businessmen, even tax collection, so the government was in no position to protect its subjects from its own agents. Augustus stopped the expansion of the Empire, thus cutting off the slave trade, and created a civil service tax collection agency, thus bringing the tax collectors into the government where he could control them. He also froze all innovations. No inventions were implemented, including the steam turbine which Heron of Alexandria discovered (q.v. James Watt, circa 1750). Eventually this placidity simply failed to gather defenders and Roman civilization collapsed. So, what will the next fifty years be? Will business become a form of civil service with innovation crushed out? Personal profit is no longer part of the equation for most businessmen. The need for security in the dangerous modern age has driven it out. “We shall defeat our own purposes in the long run if, in the cause of security, we try to close all outlets for enterprise, ambition, and creativity in any field of human activity.” Over the next fifty years how do we foster freedom in some fields when we are compelled to restrict it in others? [Or has the reverse taken place - frenzy rather than boredom?]
- Tremble, T. R.., Thomas D. Kane, and Steven R. Stewart, 1997, Note on Organizational Leadership as Problem Solving, NTIS, Springfield, VA, 22161, USA, 37 pages, Jan., ARI-RN-97-03; ADA3283306. Approximately 780 officers in the chains of command of 53 U.S. Army battalions tested the replicability of earlier results on a model which links effective leadership to problem solving abilities. This replication included subordinate and superior assessments of leadership behavior/ performance as well as career achievement (rank and awards). Limited replication of the earlier results was obtained and strengths of relationship were appreciably less than reported earlier. [What happened?]
- Turlington, J. E., 1987, “Truly Learning the Operational Art,” Parameters, Journal of the U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, PA, 17:51-64. This is a U.S. Army publication. Appears to use the same concepts as Jaques regarding the need to employ progressively more complex causal maps to pattern (and thus understand) the greater complexity encountered at successively higher organizational levels. This is how to develop strategic thinking skills. Summarized in Jacobs and Jaques 1990. Not seen.
- Ullman, Harlan K., and James P. Wade, with L. A. "Bud" Edney [et al.], 1996, Shock and Awe: achieving rapid dominance, National Defense University, Center for Advanced Concepts and Technology, Washington, DC. GovDoc: D 5.402:SH 7
- Ulmer, Walter F., Joseph J. Collins, and T. Owen Jacobs, 2000, American Military Culture in the Twenty-First Century: A Report of the CSIS International Security Program, 116 pp., Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, DC. (UA23 .A65 2000)
- U.S. Military Academy, 1993, “West Point 2002 and Beyond: Strategic Guidance for the U.S. Military Academy,” West Point, NY: Author. October 1993. Pamphlet. Cited in McNally, Jeffrey A, Stephen J. Gerras, and R. Craig Bullis, 1996. Not seen.
- U.S. Department of the Army, 1987, Executive Leadership, [aka: Personnel - General Executive Leadership], Pamphlet 600-80, Washington, DC, 19 June 1987. This was later published as Jacobs and Jaques, 1991, “Executive Leadership” (q.v.). Cited in Sternberg et al 2000 without personal author attribution (p. 168). Noted the definition of leadership in each of these three publications was slightly different due to the difference in executive levels. Cited in several USAF 1998 master’s required research reports at Maxwell AFB, Air University, as confirming Jacobs and Jaques 1987 and 1990: Lista M. Benson and Kerry P. Phelan.
- U.S. Department of the Army (DA), 2001, Operations, (Field Manual No. FM 3-0, 14 June 2001), Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington, DC, 14 June 2001. (Supercedes FM 100-5, 14 June 1993.) Introduced the concept of Battle Command. See Bradford 2001 for an illustrative article. See Ricks 1995 on author of FM 100-5, Col. James McDonough. Online at http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/3-0/toc.htm#version
- U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, 1992, Leadership and Command on the Battlefield: Operations UST CAUSE and DESERT STORM, TRADOC Pamphlet 525-100-1, Fort Monroe, VA.
- U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, 1993, Leadership and Command on the Battlefield: Battalion and Company, TRADOC Pamphlet 525-100-2, Fort Monroe, VA. Cited in Leed 2001.
- U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, 1997, “Institutional Leader Training and Education,” TRADOC Regulation 351-10, Fort Monroe, VA, 1 May. Cited in Leed 2001. http://www-tradoc.army.mil/tpubs/regs/r351-10.html
- Vandergriff, Donald E., 2002, Path to Victory: America's army and the revolution in human affairs, Presidio Press, Navato, CA, 356 p. A history of the Army since WWII. The big changes in the 1980s. Problems emerged in recent years that still need attending to. Cited Gen. Maxwell Thurman, TRADOC, COHORT, Panama, Kuwait. Not mentioned: Goldwater-Nichols, Jaques. Rp.
- Vandergriff, Donald E., 2006, “From Swift to Swiss,” Performance Improvement, Silver Spring, MD, Feb 2006, 45(2):30-40. Major, U.S. Army retired. The proposal outlined here is one part of a holistic solution to teach adaptability. In turn, this can impact the way the Army recruits (markets), evelops, educates, and trains its future ROTC leaders. One tool is the Tactical Decision Game (TDG), which provides an efficient and effective way to teach intuitive decision making in aspiring leaders. TDGs provide an educational approach for building a cadet's strength of character. Cited J&J 1987, Wilbur 2000, Stewart 1987, Laske 2001, Wong 2004, Vandergriff 2002. Rp.
- VanDevender, J. Pace, and James R. Barker, 1999, “Leadership and Decision Processing in Twenty-First Century Technical Organizations,” Chapter 5, p. 91-107, in Hunt, James G., George E. Dodge, and Leonard Wong, eds., 1999, Out-of-the-Box Leadership: Transforming the Twenty-First-Century Army and Other Top-Performing Organizations, JAI Press, Stamford, CT.
- Vernon, Philip E., and John B. Parry, 1949, Personnel Selection in the British Forces, University of London Press, London, UK. This was on assessment centres, the activity Major Jaques was engrossed in during his service with the Canadian Army in WWII and also while acting as liaison to the British and US forces in London. Cited by de Monchaux and Keir 1961. Not in Clio. NYPL offsite. Not seen.
- Wallis, M. Reid, and T. Owen Jacobs, 1984, “Leadership job dimensions and competency requirements for commissioned and noncommissioned officers: task IIA, remediate inadequacies in existing data bases,” Advanced Research Resources Organization, Bethesda, MD; U.S. Army Research Institute, Alexandria, VA; June 1984, 166 p. With Joyce L. Shields. Report No: AD-A142 514. US Army War College Library has it. Not seen. Misc.
- Wong, Leonard, Paul Bliese, and Dennis McGurk, 2003, “Military Leadership: A context specific review,” Leadership Quarterly, 14(6):657-692. Wong, Leonard, 2004, Developing Adaptive Leaders: the crucible experience of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Carlisle, PA, US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, Yuma, Arizona.
- Worth, David A., and Lawrence D. Brooks, 1983, Application of Time Span Boundaries and Managerial Strata to Military Organizations, Industrial College of the Armed Forces, National Defense University, Washington, DC., May 1983, 26 pgs.
- Yukl, Gary, 1999, “Leadership Competencies Required for the New Army and Approaches for Developing Them,” Chapter 13, p. 255-276, in Hunt, James G., George E. Dodge, and Leonard Wong, eds., 1999, Out-of-the-Box Leadership: Transforming the Twenty-First-Century Army and Other Top-Performing Organizations, JAI Press, Stamford, CT. Cited Jaques.
- Zaccaro, Stephen J., 1999, “Social Complexity and the Competencies Required for Effective Military Leadership,” Chapter 7, p. 131-151. In Hunt, James G., George E. Dodge, and Leonard Wong, eds., 1999, Out-of-the-Box Leadership: Transforming the Twenty-First-Century Army and Other Top-Performing Organizations, JAI Press, Stamford, CT. Monographs in Leadership and Management, Vol. 1 (q.v.).
- Zaccaro, Stephen J., Richard J. Klimoski, L. A. Boyce, C. Chandler, and D. Banks, 1999, Developing a tool kit for the assessment of Army leadership processes and outcomes: version 1.0, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, VA, Sep. 1999, George Mason Univ., Fairfax, VA, Dept. of Psychology. NTIS Accession No.: ADA368448.
- Ziemak, John P., Dugan, Beverly A., Rigby, Carlos K., Jacobs, T. Owen, Simutis, Zita M., 1994, “First-level supervisor job analysis follow-up: identification of KSAO-task linkages,” U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, National Technical Information Service, ARI research note 94-31. 4 microfiches. Identification of knowledge, skills, abilities, other characteristics.