Relationships matter. This oft-cited platitude is heard echoing through almost every leader professional development session that has happened in recent years. There is perhaps no nascent relationship more important in the Army than leaders at the small unit level. How officers and their Non-Commissioned counterparts interact professionally has been examined thoroughly in Army literature, although not perhaps as comprehensively as some may think. Surprisingly little examination of interpersonal interactions and organizational history as vehicles to further relationships has been completed. The relationships developed between the senior non-commissioned officer (NCO) and the senior officer of company grade formations are key indicators of initial success.

Pathways Towards Success

Pathways towards nurturing this Company Grade Officer and NCO relationship include mentorship, counseling, and incorporation of training within professional schooling. The baggage that comes with each individual officer’s and NCO’s past experiences causes further complexity. Although more prevalent at the battalion level and higher, there is often a parity of experience that exists between senior leaders of these higher echelons. The disparity in experience between company level officer and NCO counterparts makes these thoughts on leadership issues most applicable to company level and below.

Mentorship at Echelon

Organizational history has been examined as a method with which to base critical decision-making. Taking this thought one step in reverse, once can use individual memory as a lens to understand decisions. Upon entry to service, a new 2nd Lieutenant is typically assigned as a platoon leader, and paired with a Sergeant First Class or Staff Sergeant who usually has anywhere from 7-10 years of experience in the Army. Although the officer may not know this (as experienced by one author in particular), a 2nd Lieutenant is very much a learning rank. The initial experiences of commissioning source training and Basic Officer Leadership Courses can give a framework for this new officer to experience the Army, however, most have very little practical experience within tactical formations. NCOs complement this lack of knowledge nearly perfectly.

Without a guidebook, NCOs and officers must individually figure out their competencies, and through communication, establish effective procedures for the leadership of their platoon. This same dichotomy is present at the company level, albeit with an officer that is not brand new to the Army. Individually, it may seem more like a daunting leadership competition for the 2nd Lieutenant, and perhaps as another cog in the machine for the NCO. More importantly, and less perceptible, each of these respective leaders color the opinion of the other with respect to their entire cohort of peers. 

Stereotypes between Officers and NCOs: The Ever-Present Challenge

Do stereotypes pollute the relationships before the pair even begin their work together? The answer to this question seems self-evident. Is the West Point officer exhibiting behaviors that most in the Army usually associate with the academy in derogatory terms? Are NCOs lacking in some expertise or attention to detail required for a task? Is the Officer Candidate School (OCS) graduate trying to do both jobs because he or she used to do them as an NCO? Any such step in the wrong direction for either party will add to the effect of the confirmation bias and further such beliefs in the affected party. Soon, “all” West Point officers are solely career driven sociopaths, “all” NCOs are underachievers, and “all” OCS officers can do everything themselves.

At this portion of the relationship, organizational history and individual history combine with confirmation bias to negatively impact the formation. Any of these instances may pollute the relationship between both parties, and further poison any future interactions either party will have with members of the “detrimental” group. This individual bond, extrapolated across a career, can have vastly positive or negative aspects for either the officer or the NCO. Without a doubt, any general officer can name their first platoon sergeant, and any command sergeant major can name their first platoon leader while serving as a platoon sergeant. The fondness of these memories is based on the relationship each established during their tenures together. f

Counseling: The Solution We Already Have

A way to address the presentation of these problems is to have earnest counseling between both parties. In fact, this is mandated by the Army through ATP 6-22.1, but, as other tasks arise, it is commonly pushed aside for other more pressing concerns. Both parties must seek out the other to begin to build the relationship and understanding that will enable further growth. NCOs can promote the upward flow of mentorship to the officer more easily when they’ve built a relationship, and the officer can grow into a more effective leader. Both parties must realize that their success is best when the other is successful. From here, game theory tells us that both parties will then work hard to ensure the other one is successful. 

Professional Schooling should teach professional Mentorship

Teaching some of these finer points of mentorship should begin to be instructed at least at the Advanced Leader Course level. More often than not, units thrust Staff Sergeants into platoon sergeant positions. Even at this junior rank, they must have some baseline understanding of how to best mentor the Platoon Leader. While officers are ultimately responsible, NCOs recommend and execute courses of action to ensure mission success. Similarly, commissioning sources must better coach and inform officers on what NCOs typically bring to the table. Basic Officer Leadership Course devotes a small section of time to this valuable topic. However, given its outsized importance, it should probably add more.

What NCOs and Officers Owe to Each Other

Trust is not freely-given or maintained. NCOs must understand that, right or wrong, failure often results in more oversight. These interactions, over time, might result in the “officers micromanage” stereotype. A couple of dropped tasks or poor recommendations could result in an officer labeling NCOs as untrustworthy. The inverse of these statements is also true. Officers who continually fail to learn or repeatedly display a headstrong attitude toward their NCO will likely ensure that that NCO will have a bad taste of officers for the rest of their career. This two-way street of conceptions and misconception can only be resolved through communication and emotional intelligence from both parties.

Back to Basics – Do the Counseling!

Although seemingly redundant, it bears repeating. We must view counseling through the lens of organizational and cultural norms. Without a relationship, established through counseling, each leader will be less receptive to the other’s ideas. Is this the second or third platoon for the officer? Has the NCO had four or five previous platoon leaders? Knowing yourself and your fellow leaders builds shared understanding and a relationship founded on each other’s strengths and weaknesses. This is the foundation for a successful experience at the company level.

Final Thoughts

The initial experiences that officers and NCOs share with one another color the rest of the careers of these individuals. Further, these initial impressions become the baseline that officers/NCOs use to evaluate the other for the rest of their careers. Mentorship, flowing in both directions, counseling, and reinforcement of this knowledge through professional military education are the first steps. These actions cement this understanding within the echelons of junior leadership throughout the Army. On a personal note, we – the authors – are thankful for the officers and NCOs with whom we have worked. Their example, professionalism, and extensive knowledge provide the foundation for our continued service. 

Complete archive of The Company Leader Posts

Subscribe to The Company Leader!

Back to Home