Quick Turnaround Help Requested

***Please ensure assignment is Plagiarism Free; Active Voice***

DB Post Response # 1

In a minimum of 200 words, please provide a response to the post below, with at least one (1) cited source.

Note: Please review and use the attached Rubrics.

DB POST # 1:

Leadership and Culture in Military Operations

The Army is facing an operating environment that is challenging and dynamic hence making some elements of its culture outdated. I believe that changing some aspects of the Army culture is the most critical piece of advice for an Army to maintain its strengths (Haskins, 2009). In order to create a positive culture, the military should reinstitute the “power down” leadership strategy. This concept involves decentralization of leadership based on the autonomy of junior leaders and trust in subordinates in operation. Technology is increasingly enabling senior leaders to micromanage small units hence threatening the initiatives of junior leaders. For example, Army study conducted in 2014 showed that only 59 percent of junior Non-commissioned officers were contented with the freedom they had to work freely while 41 percent felt that they were not empowered to make decisions (Barno & Bensahel, 2016). This creates a room for battlefield failure since their understanding of the mission does not guide them but instead the paralleled autonomy. The concept of “power down” will help to reduce the level of micromanagement hence upholding the principles of mission command that the soldiers are expected to practice in a battlefield.

Secondly, I will encourage diverse ideas and welcome genuine dialogue with junior leaders as a way of portraying good leadership (Clarke, 2007). Military organizations are hierarchical with distinct ranks and authority and discourage new and divergent ideas, especially from junior officers. This culture limits disagreements within the Army, and therefore junior leaders do not have room to debate orders or argue with their commanders. Such restrictions prevent Army leaders from accepting views, which in turn could be used in making the right decisions in a dynamic environment.

Lastly, the military should strengthen its ethical standards and integrity, which are critical factors in any profession. Army leaders often compromise some of their core values due to its bureaucratic requirements. It is almost impossible for Army officers to meet the needs, and therefore they result in false reporting and dishonesty. I will, therefore, seek support from my subordinates to understand what promotes unethical decision making in the force. This will enable a systematic review of existing requirements and only uphold the ones which are realistic and achievable (Barno & Bensahel, 2016). However, some Army cultural aspects like warrior ethos and Army values should be maintained.

References

Barno, D.& Bensahel, N. (2016). Six Ways To Fix the Army’s Culture. War On the Rocks

Retrieved from https://warontherocks.com/2016/09/six-ways-to-fix-the-armys-culture

Clarke, F. S. (2007). Changing Army Culture: Creating Adaptive and Critical Thinking Officer Corps. Retrieved from https://apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA478309

Haskins, C. (2009). A Good Answer to An Obsolete Question: The Army’s Culture and Why It Needs to Change. Retrieved from https://renekogutudartiklid.blogspot.com/search?q=2009

RUBRICS.pdf

Form 1009C

Contribution to Group Discussion Assessment

Levels of Achievement

Criteria Failed Unsatisfactory Marginal Developing Proficient Exemplary

Quality and Scope of Posted Content

0 to 5 points

No or irrelevant discussion participation.

6 to 8 points

Initial posting is not on topic; the content is unrelated to the discussion question; post demonstrates superficial thought and poor preparation. No depth in response to classmates; response does not relate directly, either conceptually or materially, to classmate postings.

9 to 11 points

Initial posting demonstrates a lack of reflection and answers few aspects of the discussion question; Development of concepts is not evident. Provides questionable comments of fails to offer new information to other posts; Responses do not promote further discussion of topic.

12 to 14 points

Initial posting demonstrates legitimate reflection and answers most aspects of the discussion question; full development of concepts is not evident. Provides relevant comments and new information to other posts; not all responses promote further discussion of topic.

15 to 17 points

Initial posting reveals a clear understanding of all aspects of the discussion question; uses factual and relevant information; demonstrates proficient development of concepts. Demonstrates understanding of other posts; extends discussion by building on previous posts and offering perspectives.

18 to 20 points

Initial posting demonstrates a thorough understanding of all aspects of the discussion question; uses factual and relevant information from scholarly sources; demonstrates full and insightful development of key concepts. Demonstrates critical analysis of other posts; extends meaningful discussion by building on previous posts and offering alternative perspectives.

Collaborative Communication Skills

0 to 5 points

No or irrelevant discussion participation.

6 to 8 points

Rarely provides useful ideas when participating in group discussions. Does not effectively engage with classmates by acknowledging and accepting other points of view. Publically critical of the work of others. Often displays unproductive communication that instigates a negative response rather than promotes collaboration.

9 to 11 points

Rarely provides useful ideas when participating in group discussions. Publically critical of the work of others. Rarely displays a positive narrative. Rarely shares with and supports the efforts of others. Sometimes causes undue tension or issues in the discussion forum.

12 to 14 points

Usually provides useful ideas when participating in group discussions. Rarely publically critical of the work of others. Often displays a positive narrative. Usually shares with and supports the efforts of others. Does not cause undue tension or issues in the discussion forum.

15 to 17 points

Routinely provides useful ideas when participating in group discussion. Never publically critical of the work of others. Always displays a positive narrative. Regularly shares with and supports the efforts of others. Maintains a productive and collaborative discussion with classmates.

18 to 20 points

Always provides creative ideas when participating in group discussion. Supports the work of others while keeping discussion on topic. Always displays a positive narrative. Regularly shares with and supports the efforts of others. Leads a productive and collaborative discussion with classmates.

Critical and Creative Thinking

0 to 5 points

No or irrelevant discussion participation.

6 to 8 points

Demonstrates a lack of proficiency in conceptualizing the problem; viewpoints and

9 to 11 points

Demonstrates limited or poor proficiency in conceptualizing the problem; viewpoints and

12 to 14 points

Demonstrates developing proficiency in conceptualizing and providing

15 to 17 points

Demonstrates considerable proficiency in conceptualizing the problem

18 to 20 points

Demonstrates mastery in conceptualizing the problem and presenting

Name

Description

Rubric Detail

Page 1 of 2

Levels of Achievement

Criteria Failed Unsatisfactory Marginal Developing Proficient Exemplary

assumptions of experts lack analysis and evaluation; conclusions are either absent or poorly conceived and supported.

assumptions of experts are not sufficiently analyzed, synthesized, and evaluated; conclusions are either poorly conceived and supported.

context to the problem; viewpoints and assumptions of experts are not sufficiently analyzed, synthesized, or evaluated; conclusions lack clear rationale.

and presenting appropriate perspectives; viewpoints and assumptions of experts are accurately analyzed, synthesized, and evaluated; conclusions are logically presented with applicable rationale.

logical perspectives; viewpoints and assumptions of experts are superbly analyzed, synthesized, and evaluated; conclusions are logically presented with detailed rationale.

Reference to Supporting Sources

0 to 5 points

No or irrelevant discussion participation.

6 to 8 points

Does not refer to assigned readings or other sources; fails to cite properly and/or cites questionable sources.

9 to 11 points

Refers to questionable sources. Attempts to cite sources with major deficiencies in citation format; fails to use two or more sources in initial post. Fails to use any source in response to classmates.

12 to 14 points

Refers to scholarly sources from assigned or outside reading and attempts to cite sources with few deficiencies in citation format; fails to use two or more sources in initial post.

15 to 17 points

Refers to and properly cites scholarly sources from assigned or outside reading and research with two or more sources cited in the initial post and at least one source cited in response to classmates.

18 to 20 points

Refers to and properly cites recent and relevant scholarly sources from assigned or outside reading and research with two or more sources cited in the initial post and at least one source cited in response to classmates.

Style and Mechanics

0 to 5 points

No or irrelevant discussion participation.

6 to 8 points

Writing contains numerous wordy, vague, or poorly constructed sentences. Frequent instances of grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation errors.

9 to 11 points

Writing contains few wordy, vague, or poorly constructed sentences. Occasional instances of grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation errors.

12 to 14 points

Writing displays a developing sense of academic writing with structurally sound sentences. 5-10 errors in grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation.

15 to 17 points

Writing displays a proficiency of academic writing with clearly written and structurally sound sentences. Less than 5 errors in grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation.

18 to 20 points

Writing displays a mastery of academic writing with clearly written and structurally sound sentences. No errors in grammar, spelling, and/or punctuation.

Assignment Requirements

-31 to -31 points

One or more posts contain plagiarism.

-15 to -15 points

Failed to meet assignment requirements and one or more submissions after due date.

-10 to -10 points

Failed to meet assignment requirements.

-5 to -5 points

One or more submissions after due date.

0 to 0 points

Met all requirements.

0 to 0 points

Met all requirements.

Page 2 of 2