Military leadership : critical constructivist approach to conceptualizing, modeling and measuring military leadership in the Finnish Defence Forces

摘要

The purpose of the study was to illustrate the theoretical framework of the new leadershiptraining program in the Finnish Defence Forces (FDF). This theoretical framework hasserved as a foundation for the current FDF leadership training curricula and it createspreconditions for leadership training practices at all levels of military education in Finland.Therefore this research is both descriptive and prescriptive.The framework is in accordance with the new leadership paradigm, and it uses the criticalconstructivist approach. The critical constructivist approach combines mind-centered,interaction-centered and experience-centered theories into one framework of leadershipbehavior. Depending on individual preferences, situational factors and the phase of thelearning process, experiential, interactive and transformative learning methods can andshould be applied. Although the practices of leadership training are not the focus of thisstudy, the critical constructivist approach ensures that the frameworks, concepts andmodels presented here can optimally support learning and effectiveness of training.From the starting points of the new leadership paradigm, the following basic assumptionshave been formulated: 1) there exists a phenomenon called "excellent leadershipbehavior"; 2) excellent leadership behavior can be modeled in any operationalenvironment; 3) an efficient leadership training program with supplementary frameworkscan be built around modeled leadership behavior; 4) leadership behavior can be crediblyand reliably measured with a questionnaire constructed on the basis of the modelfollowing the principles of full range feedback and 5) the development of leadershipbehavior is based on the development of the capabilities of an individual, which is to beseen as a life-long process.The concept of military command is an attempt to justice to the complexity of thisc:iargeand multi-dimensional concept. Military leadership is a sub-concept of military commandand leadership behavior, in turn, is a sub-concept of military leadership. The complexity ofthe concept of military command is caused by its variable operating environment. Thechanges in operating environment affect the balance of the respective sub-concepts, andmaintaining an optimal balance is the key challenge of military leaders on all levels ofleadership. "Leadership paradox" is a term that has been used in the literature in order todescribe situations and perspectives in which this balance is missing.When all the theoretical elements and practical efforts are unified in a militaryorganization, the result is a large-scale leadership training program. Because of its strongconnection to the civilian education and leadership practices of the whole society, this kindof program is actually an educational system. ln order to function well, it has to be able todevelop systematically according to the feedback information produced by an on-goingevaluation process. Considering the modeling of excellent leadership behavior, a review ofprevious research suggests that the model and the respective questionnaire have to beconstructed to fit the Finnish society and military culture.The model has to be supported by the larger frameworks. On the basis of previousresearch on transformational leadership and Finnish military leadership culture, the DeepLeadership Model (DLM) was formulated. The corresponding questionnaire is the DeepLeadership Questionnaire (DLQ), which is primarily a developmental feedback tool forindividual leaders. The experiences, feedback and research concerning the application ofthe concept of deep leadership to military leadership training have been used for theevaluation and development of the whole leadership training program. The results of the empirical part of this study support the basic assumptions and thestructure of the model. According to a confirmatory factor analysis that was carried outwith EQS program, the structure of the DLM as well as the six-factor structure ofleadership behavior are consistent with the data. Considering the reliability of the DLQ, themain concern is the controlling and corrective leadership (CL) factor. The analysis ofoverall validity did not reveal any serious threats to the applicability of the DLM.The review of individual leadership profiles suggest that the profiles generally progresstowards deep leadership along leader selection, education, training and overallexperience. This observation leads to the conclusion that the new leadership trainingprogram in the FDF does not have to change the organizational culture. lnstead, the taskfor the program is to set some basic standards and to enhance the positive aspects thatalready exist.On a level of scientific theory, aisa some elements and starting points for the constructivetheory of leadership have been identified. On the level of theoretical frameworks, twoessential frameworks have been defined and analyzed:1. The general framework of leadership.2. The constructivist framework for leadership behavior.On the level of concepts, several core concepts have been studied and defined:1. The concept of scientific paradigm.2. The concept of military leadership.3. The concept of individual potential.4. The concept of leadership behavior.On the level of models, two essential models have been created:1. The conceptual model of military command.2. The Deep Leadership Model (DLM), which has aisa been statisticallytested.On the level of measurement tools, a tool for evaluating persona! leadership behavior hasbeen developed and statistically tested. The tool - the Deep Leadership Questionnaire(DLQ) - has been built in an analogical process according to the respective models,concepts and frameworks.Thus I see my research as an entity, each part supporting the other elements (parts 1, 11,and 111) and on the other hand creating the basis for lower-level analysis in the hierarchy ofthe tools of science. 1 consider the results of the empirical part of my work to be important,but personally I think that even more important is the development of the meta-science ofleadership and the effectiveness of the leadership training in the training system of theFDF.There are several needs for further research. ln methodology, the use of soft computingmethods is a relevant challenge. Theoretically, it is be possible to formulate a constructivetheory of leadership in which the concepts of learning and leadership tend to merge andcoincide. This remains an inspiring challenge for the future. The new leadership trainingprogram should be studied from the point of view of scientific paradigms other than thenew paradigm of leadership.