ANNEX A TO
PTC/10/1/4/AMP(451/04)
DATED JUN 05
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, 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.
1
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
2
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 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
Twelve Legions of Angels – Air Chief Marshal Lord Dowding, Chap VII Why are Senior Leaders so Stupid?
Published by Jarrolds 1946.
1
3
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
4
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 up-to-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-to-date 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.
5