New Products

The purpose of the Army Training and Leader Development Strategy (ATLDS) is to identify priorities and outcomes needed to achieve the Army Vision and the Army Strategy (2018), across the near- and mid-term periods of the Army Campaign Plan (ACP) for fiscal year 2020-28 (FY20-28), and to synchronize these Armywide training efforts.

Army Profession Forum Noncommissioned Officer panel members discussing Leadership at the direct level and fears associated with being a junior leader.

Leadership is the activity of influencing people by providing purpose, direction, and motivation to accomplish the mission and improve the organization.

Army leaders are entrusted to provide others with purpose, direction, and motivation to accomplish the mission and improve the organization.

Leaders build cohesive teams by setting and maintaining a collective mindset among team members and enabling successful performance.

Addressing issues that impact readiness is a priority for the Army and its senior leaders. The Army has identified toxic leadership as one issue that negatively impacts readiness. However, the term “toxic” has become a buzzword, and there is a lack of shared understanding about its meaning. Therefore, the Army coined the term “counterproductive leadership,” which is more comprehensive than the label of toxic leadership and emphasizes observable behaviors (versus leader intent). CAPL has developed self-study materials to equip learners with the knowledge and skills to identify when counterproductive leadership is occurring, assess why and when it occurs, and address it productively.

The mission command philosophy is the U.S. Army’s approach to command and control. It empowers subordinate decision-making and decentralized execution, using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative in accomplishment of the commander’s intent. On this score, there is good news and bad news. The bad news is many in our Army find the idea of mission command confusing or insincere. For some, there is a significant difference between what mission command should be versus what actually happens. Over the past decade, leaders at various levels routinely cited their personal experience in garrison, during field training, and while operationally deployed as at odds with our mission command philosophy. The good news is leaders at every level, from warfighters to doctrine writers and squad leaders up to general officers, are talking about mission command.