RAF LEADERSHIP CENTRE
‘SPIRIT OF THE AIR’ - ARTICLES
EXPLANATIONS OF RAF LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES
The following paragraphs are intended to expand on the issues behind the Attributes
for RAF Leaders. They are not comprehensive and should be regarded as a guide.
WARFIGHTER FIRST – CAS
The Royal Air Force is a fighting service. Its purpose is to exploit air and space to
deliver military power in a range of environments and circumstances, and across the
full spectrum of operations up to and including warfighting. Every member of the
Royal Air Force, of whatever specialisation, supports this purpose. The raison d’être
of each person and each specialisation is, ultimately, the application of air power to
achieve precise campaign effects at range in time. It is crucial to our success that
we all understand this; and that we govern our actions and attitudes accordingly. It
is the duty of each one of us in the Royal Air Force to be, first and foremost, an
effective warfighter.
Warfighter, Courageous Being a warfighter first is important, as it is the core
business of the RAF to exploit the air environment for military purposes. All RAF
personnel must be focussed on the organisation’s core business - to create precise
campaign effects at range in time. There are more than 60 different career
specialisations in the RAF used to provide expeditionary air power and every person
engaged in those specialisations must contribute to the precise campaign effect at
range in time that is required – in other words, they must be a warfighter. To do that
well they will have to be highly skilled in their specialisation but focussed on the
purpose of the RAF. They must all be military minded with a knowledge of air power
and air warfare and of a determined fighting spirit, able to overcome the adversity of
circumstance that any member of the RAF may be called upon to face on operations.
The teams the RAF sends to carry out its mission cannot afford to have members
that are unable to look after themselves in the field or unable to defend themselves
should either circumstance be necessary. Furthermore, traditional RAF distinctions
between those who fight and those who support are breaking down. Not only is the
“support space” vital to the “battle space” but so is the “business space,” for example
by providing urgent operational requirements. NEC and the advent of UCAVs bring
personnel who are remote from the actual battlefield into direct contact with it. The
need to understand the people ‘at the other end of the technology’ and to build trust
within the extended teams to carry out the RAF core business has never been so
great.
Physical courage is necessary to face the circumstances of operations whether that
be the lonely ‘2 o’clock in the morning’ courage or the maintenance of the esprit de
corps of the close-knit team. The moral courage required of RAF leaders is linked to
the integrity and ethics that all personnel need to have to be part of a fighting force.
Those that live the core values of the RAF will find the moral courage to do the right
thing. That moral courage supports the trust that is vital to building effective teams
both in the immediate environment and in the wider defence community. Without the
deep and enduring trust, both up and down the command chain, Mission Command
cannot work. A person with moral courage must understand and have confidence in
their own moral framework and be able to recognise and intervene appropriately in,
for example, harassment incidents.
They must be able to provide constructive dissent at any level while understanding
that, once a decision has been made, no matter what that is, they must assume
personal responsibility for its implementation. This display of loyalty will be vital to
the retention of team cohesion. They must have the strength of character to not give
in to morally unjustified actions. Those who have moral courage will not only take
responsibility for their own actions but also for the situation around them. They will
act rather than avoid what may be uncomfortable. They will do the right thing rather
than the easy thing. They will not abrogate their responsibility as a leader.
Moral courage is linked to humility – the courage to admit one’s own mistakes and
learn from them, to know one’s own weaknesses and be able to work to improve
them. A leader with moral courage will have the humility to know and acknowledge
that results are the achievement of the team even if the leadership of the team
created the cohesion and vision that inspired it. Finally, moral courage is linked to
emotional intelligence – the awareness of others as well as self-awareness.
Self
Others
Awareness
Self
Awareness
Social
Awareness
Action
Emotional Intelligence Emotional intelligence may be represented by the simple
table below:
Self
Management
Social
Skill
Positive
Impact on
Others
Expressed differently, it may be thought of as knowing what makes yourself tick,
knowing what makes others tick, knowing how you affect others and being able to
manage relationships by using that knowledge. Emotional intelligence will be enable
leaders to build teams which are inherently strong with the best being delivered by
every member. Emotionally intelligent leaders focus on personal development,
recognising areas in others and themselves that need improvement and doing
something about it. This directly supports those aspects of transformational
leadership that deal with individual and team development. Emotional intelligence
requires good interpersonal and communication skills to understand the needs of
others; in particular, it requires an open mind and good listening skills. Listening to
understand, not immediately mentally imbuing the speaker with your own opinion.
Understanding the effect of your communication on them; not talking over them or
finishing their sentence with your view and so intimidating them into silent agreement
with you. By understanding others, an emotionally intelligent leader is able to use
their strengths for the benefit of the team and the organisation. This is the basis of
understanding diversity. The ability to develop a team that can create best effect,
and not a team of likeminded individuals who may all fall into the same trap, takes
emotional intelligence. An understanding of others combined with greater self
control, allows a leader to create a supportive and productive working environment.
One where the atmosphere does not depend on the mood of the leader and where
everyone is valued for their contribution. Equally, an emotionally intelligent leader
will ensure the accurate communication of their intent both up and down the
command chain. Emotional intelligence supports the trust that it is necessary to
engender to make Mission Command work; it helps in understanding what is a
genuine mistake and in how to deal with that mistake in order not to destroy trust in
the leader. Emotional intelligence is also linked to leading tomorrow’s recruit.
Flexible and Responsive The need for flexibility and responsiveness on
operations is axiomatic, but the attributes are also linked to the leadership of change.
Change, large and small, is now a permanent part of our lives as the RAF
determinedly meets the challenge of remaining relevant in a world that itself is
rapidly changing politically, economically, socially and technically. RAF leaders need
a flexible and responsive approach, both seeing the needs of their own organisation
and recognising, and even anticipating, the needs of the higher organisation for
which they work. Aligning their own organisation to those higher needs and to the
overall vision for the RAF may sometimes be difficult and uncomfortable, yet leaders
need to be flexible enough to work with the higher vision in mind. They need to be
responsive to the demands of their superiors and to understand their intent. The
attribute is also linked to innovation and mental agility, to the creativity and “right
brain thinking” required for imaginative solutions. Not all leaders will always have the
innovative skills themselves to find the solutions but they must be flexible enough to
exploit the innovation of their team and be responsive to others’ ideas rather than
suppressive of them. [Dowding’s abnegation of self-sealing fuel tanks for fighters in
the Battle of Britain1 is a good case in point from a man who otherwise made good
use of other’s innovative ideas in nurturing radar and setting up the world’s first
integrated air defence system based on network principles.] Leaders also need to
be responsive to the needs and goals of those for whom they are responsible to
continue to be able to align personal aspirations with organisational goals which are
clearly linked to emotional intelligence and transformational leadership. They must
also be prepared to see the opportunities that change brings and be able to deal with
the discomfort that is associated with it. They must be responsive to those who are
averse to change but prepared to deal firmly with them.
Willing to take Risks RAF leaders constantly need to make decisions in all facets
of RAF business, on operations as well as in the office or in the hangar.
Understanding risk and the management of risk is vital to good decision-making.
Since information is being received all the time, judgement is needed to choose the
Twelve Legions of Angels – Air Chief Marshal Lord Dowding, Chap VII Why are Senior Leaders so Stupid?
Published by Jarrolds 1946.
1
moment for the decision. The decision must be made within the time that is
necessary for it to be effective but it would be foolhardy to take a quick decision on
poor quality information when more time is available. This is, in itself, a risk
management process. Without taking risks, little can be achieved therefore the RAF
needs those who are willing to take risks. Yet to take a risk without understanding
the consequences is to take an unnecessary gamble. Leaders need to understand
the consequences of failure if risks are to be taken. Account must be made for other
stakeholders in the consequences of risks coming home to roost. Risks are
addressed by the management techniques of Treat, Tolerate, Terminate or Transfer
and must be managed at the appropriate level. Inevitably, there will be times when
leaders will have to make decisions based upon incomplete information. At these
times they must understand the use of intuition, that subtle blend of professional
knowledge and experience that allows them to make decisions based upon their
feelings. This is strongly linked to emotional intelligence and accurate knowledge of
themselves and the others upon whose opinion they will have to rely.
Leaders must encourage a culture that is not risk averse, that leads to acceptance of
the 80% solution in 20% of the time and that moves away from unnecessary ‘gold
plating’. The culture must support the trust that allows and encourages subordinates
to act rather than to consult, knowing that a failure to act is a more serious fault than
making a genuine mistake. This is fundamental to Mission Command. Leaders must
also be able to devolve decision making to lower levels without abrogating their
responsibility for the decisions; this support to subordinates is vital for Mission
Command to work effectively. They must also be able to deal with the
consequences of risk – failure – in a reasonable way that does not break down the
trust necessary for Mission Command to work. Even with the advent of NEC,
leaders must understand that the trust they place in their subordinates’ ability to
make decisions will remain fundamental in the quest to increase the speed of the
decision-making cycle which will give the RAF the battle-winning edge. Willingness
to take risks is linked to the ability to handle ambiguity.
Mentally Agile, Physically Robust Mental agility links strongly to flexibility and
responsiveness. Innovation is necessary to stay ahead of the competition, to adapt
to meet the challenges of a changing world, to accept the changes made necessary
by new technology, even to see the potential of new technology. Mental agility is
necessary to recognise innovation in others rather than dismissing good ideas as too
‘wacky’ to work. The wacky idea may just be the best one; Barnes Wallis’ idea to
bounce a heavy bomb off the water is familiar to us all today but must have stretched
the imagination of those who first heard it. Those who suppress innovation by their
own lack of imagination or because they themselves did not think of the idea, will
stifle the organisation for which they work. Mental agility is also strongly linked to
problem solving and decision-making and, in turn, to the ability to take risks.
Leaders need the mental agility to move confidently between concepts and to be
able to apply those concepts to the physical world. They must understand the need
for doctrine and be able to apply it, without allowing it to become dogma. The mental
agility to see things differently also links to leading tomorrow’s recruit and to the
ability to handle ambiguity. Particularly in the latter case, to have the mental agility
to work through ambiguity and see the paths that others cannot and to be able to use
ambiguity to your advantage is a major attribute for a leader.
Physical robustness is a necessity for all military leaders as they must be able to
withstand the physical rigours of operations without loosing their mental capacity;
this links clearly to the warfighter attribute. The physical rigours of operations are not
the only physical demands on a leader. Any leader in any sphere can find that the
demands on their time wearing, they may have to be constantly available to give
direction, to reassure their team or members of their wider organisation and feelings
of constant responsibility can be draining. In short, the pressures of leadership can
be very stressful and are often faced alone. In operations these problems can be
increased tenfold. A leader who is not physically robust will not long survive his
tenure in good health. [ The example of Sir Peter de la Billiere during the first Gulf
War. He exercised for 30 minutes every morning prior to starting work.]
Able to Handle Ambiguity The ability to handle ambiguity is clearly linked to
flexibility and responsiveness, mental agility and the willingness to take risks. It is
also vital in being politically astute. The operational friction that causes the fog of
war is reasonably well understood; this creates ambiguity. The pace and complexity
of modern warfare can also create ambiguity of its own. Consider the battle-space of
the Gulf War in 2003; warfighting, peacekeeping and peace support operations were
being carried out in one battle-space. This can create immense ambiguity for a
leader who has to work within the moral framework expected of his forces in each of
those types of operation, and they can be very different with very different
imperatives. Certainly decisions will rarely be clear-cut in such a situation. Equally,
politics, whether international or national, within a large organisation or in the office,
are seldom straightforward. A leader must steer a path through the ‘shades of grey’,
the ambiguity, that is morally acceptable and will gain the support of his or her team.
At junior levels ambiguity has been ‘managed out’ of the system in the military for
many years giving clear, unambiguous direction to our junior officers and NCOs that
they could follow with impunity. That is no longer the case. Tactical decisions can
have strategic effects and the junior personnel who make them must be aware of
those effects. To make matters more complicated, actions that may be acceptable
at one level of operations may not be at another. Certainly, in this age of open,
media-examined military operations all personnel, no matter what their rank, will be
held accountable. Though there should be less ambiguity at junior levels, leaders
should not always attempt to remove it completely as to do so would risk the process
becoming more important than the results. Furthermore, awareness of ambiguity at
lower levels should lead to those who rise up the ranks being comfortable with it at
the higher levels and so being able to exploit it when the opportunity arises.
Ambiguity links strongly to ethical and moral issues, to integrity and moral courage
and, hence, to the core values of the RAF.
Politically and Globally Astute The Oxford English Dictionary defines politics as:
‘the activities associated with governing a state and with the political relations
between states’ as well as ‘activities concerned with using power within an
organisation or group’. This is not the Machiavellian or sinister manipulation of
power but the legitimate and proper influence in their workplace that every RAF
leader must have. They must understand the application of air power, its
advantages and limitations and be able to articulate that to their subordinates in a
single Service environment and to their colleagues and superiors in a tri-Service
environment, whether that be at the operational level of PJHQ, the political and
strategic level of MOD or in the business space of DPA or DLO. To be able to be
competitive for Joint appointments, RAF officers need knowledge and experience of
the Joint arena. If RAF leaders do not have the proper understanding of air power
and air warfare and the influence, mental agility, flexibility and innovation to apply
that understanding in their workplace, RAF leaders and the RAF itself risks
becoming irrelevant. Equally clearly, in the wider sense of national and international
relations, RAF leaders increasingly need awareness of political issues. They need to
be able to relate and articulate the advantages, disadvantages and limitations of air
power to the context of the political circumstances being considered. But more
importantly any RAF leader may find him or herself having to explain to others
including, on occasion, the press, the use of air power and its consequences. An upto-date awareness of global issues is vital as time may not be available to become
an expert. Political and global astuteness links strongly to the understanding of air
power and air warfare doctrine as well as Joint doctrine. It links to continual personal
development and through-life learning and allows leaders to engage in
transformational leadership through idealised influence and intellectual stimulation.
Technologically Competent Air power is technologically driven. The RAF’s past
successes have been based, at least in part, on the innovative use of the most up-todate technology and all our specialists rightly take pride in their expertise in their
chosen areas. RAF leaders need to go beyond this; they must be able to see the
uses to which new technology can be put. They must not be seduced by the Luddite
tendencies that wish to preserve the comfort of the status quo, nor must they risk
everything on unproven technology that does not deliver. The technological
competence of an RAF leader must allow them to see the use and application of
technology even if it is not in their sphere of expertise. They must see the risks
involved in its adoption yet always be open to innovative and unusual, but
nevertheless effective, uses of that technology. NEC may be the greatest challenge
in the near to medium future in that it will stretch all RAF leaders’ ability to harness
its potential. In this way technological competence is clearly linked to the
management of risk, mental agility, flexibility and the leadership of change. To
remain technologically competent, an RAF leader must embrace lifelong learning
and personal development.
Able to Lead Tomorrow’s Recruit The new generation of personnel recruited into
the RAF may have different experiences and expectations but they have every bit as
much potential as those who have gone before. It is the RAF leader’s responsibility
to unlock that potential for the benefit of the individual and the organisation. Leading
tomorrow’s recruit will require leaders to adapt and broaden their leadership style
and approach to be able relate to a wider section of society than has been evident to
date. It will require emotional intelligence, flexibility and mental agility as well as
exemplifying the core values of the RAF.