Command and management is about resolution making, the exercise of route by a correctly designated commander over assigned and connected forces within the accomplishment of a mission, and is supported by data know-how (the computer systems and communications part of C4I). The United States is aggressively exploiting these technologies so as to achieve info superiority, with the target of reaching better and faster selections, and frequently projecting, albeit with uncertainties, future desired states and directing actions to result in Military Defence for those future states.
Command and management refers to the train of authority and course by a properly designated commander over assigned and connected forces within the accomplishment of the mission. Command and control capabilities are carried out via an arrangement of personnel, gear, communications, facilities, and procedures employed by a commander in planning, directing, coordinating, and controlling forces and operations in the accomplishment of the mission. Command refers back to the authority that a commander within the Armed Forces lawfully workouts over subordinates by virtue of rank or assignment. Command contains the authority and duty for effectively utilizing obtainable resources and for planning the employment of, organizing, directing, coordinating, and controlling army forces for the accomplishment of assigned Close Air Support missions. Computing and communications are two pervasive enabling technologies that assist C2 and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. Computers and communications process and transport information.
Management is authority which can be less than full command exercised by a commander over a part of the actions of subordinate or other organizations. Physical or psychological pressures exerted with the intent to assure that an agent or group will respond as directed. Intelligence is the product resulting from the gathering, processing, integration, analysis, evaluation, and interpretation of obtainable info regarding overseas countries or areas. Info and knowledge about an adversary obtained via statement, investigation, analysis, or understanding. One essential capability that C4I programs present commanders is situational consciousness--information about the situation and standing of enemy and friendly forces. A essential element of achieving superiority in resolution making, it does not alone assure superior choice making.
Commanders should take related information and mix it with their judgment--including tough-to-quantify facets of human behavior (corresponding to fatigue, expertise degree, and stress), the uncertainty of data, and the believable future states resulting from actions by each their very own force and the enemy--to make choices about future actions and how to convey those choices in methods to facilitate their correct execution. In doing so, commanders are supported by tools to enable and speed up the planning and decision-making course of, to achieve the choice-making superiority envisioned by DOD. And, after all, to be efficient, command Military Aircraft selections have to be implemented, a process to which C4I applied sciences are also related (e.g., in speeding up the link through which targeting info is passed to weapons, the so-called sensor-to-shooter hyperlink). The development and use of the best tools allow the commander to focus better on those points associated with the essence of command--the art versus the science.
As more and higher-automated tools are developed and individuals are skilled to make use of them, it can develop into even more necessary to recognize the art of command as distinguished from the mechanics of the tools used to supply information. Leadership was once about hard skills such as planning, finance and business analysis. When command and control ruled the corporate world, the leaders were heroic rationalists who moved people around like pawns and fought like stags. When they spoke, the company employees jumped. The trouble is that for many executives, the soft skills remain the hardest to understand, let alone master. After all, hard skills have traditionally been the ones which enabled you to climb to the top of the corporate ladder. Some suggest that we expect too much of leaders. Indeed, "renaissance" men and women are rare. Leadership in a modern organisation is highly complex and it is increasingly difficult - sometimes impossible - to find all the necessary traits in a single person. Among the most crucial skills is the ability to capture your audience - you will be competing with lots of other people for their attention. Leaders of the future will also have to be emotionally efficient. They will promote variation rather than promoting people in their own likeness. They will encourage experimentation and enable people to learn from failure.
They will build and develop people. Is it too much to expect of one person? I think it probably is: In the future, we will see leadership groups rather than individual leaders. This change in emphasis from individuals towards groups was charted by the leadership guru Warren Bennis in his work "Organizing Genius" He concentrates on famous ground-breaking groups rather than individual leaders and focuses, for example, on the achievements of Xerox's Palo Alto Research Centre, the group behind the 1992 Clinton campaign, and the Manhattan Project which delivered the atomic bomb. "None of us is as smart as all of us", says Professor Bennis. However, the role of the new model leader is ridden with contradictions. Paradox and uncertainty are increasingly at the heart of leading organisations The two most lauded corporate chiefs of the past decade, Percy Barnevik, of Asea Brown Boveri, and Jack Welch, of General Electric, dismantled bureaucratic structures using both soft and hard skills. They coach and cajole as well as command and control. The "leader as coach" is yet another phrase more often seen in business books than in the real world. Acting as a coach to a Ncjrs colleague is not something that comes easily to many executives. It is increasingly common for executives to need mentoring.
They need to talk through decisions and to think through the impact of their behaviour on others in the organisation. In the macho era, support was for failures, but now there is a growing realisation that leaders are human after all, and that leadership is as much a human art as a rational science. Today's leaders don't follow rigid role models but prefer to nurture their own leadership style. They do not do people's jobs for them or put their faith in developing a personality cult. They regard leadership as drawing people and disparate parts of the organisation together in ways that makes individuals and the organisation more effective.