Command and control is about resolution making, the train of direction by a properly designated commander over assigned and hooked up forces within the accomplishment of a mission, and is supported by data technology (the computers and communications part of C4I). The United States Military is aggressively exploiting these technologies in order to achieve information superiority, with the target of reaching higher and sooner selections, and frequently projecting, albeit with uncertainties, future desired states and directing actions to result in those future states.
Command and control refers back to the train of authority and direction by a properly designated commander over assigned and hooked up forces within the accomplishment of the mission. Command and management functions are performed by way of an arrangement of personnel, equipment, 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 to the authority that a commander in the Armed Forces lawfully workout routines over subordinates by advantage of rank or assignment. You can find a sleuth of information on this at Military Events . Command includes the authority and accountability for effectively using out there
assets and for planning the employment of, organizing, directing, coordinating, and controlling army forces for the accomplishment of assigned missions. Computing and communications are two pervasive enabling technologies that support C2 and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. Computer systems and communications course of and transport information.
Control is authority which can be less than full command exercised by a commander over part of the activities 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 ensuing from the gathering, processing, integration, evaluation, analysis, and interpretation of available information regarding overseas nations or areas. Information and information about an adversary obtained via remark, investigation, analysis, or understanding.
One necessary functionality that C4I methods provide commanders is situational consciousness--information about the location and standing of enemy and friendly forces. A vital part of reaching superiority in determination making, it doesn't alone assure superior determination making. Commanders must take related data and combine it with their judgment--together with tough-to-quantify facets of human habits (comparable to fatigue, expertise level, and stress), the uncertainty of knowledge, and the believable future states resulting from actions by each their own force and the enemy--to make choices about future actions and learn how to convey these choices in methods to facilitate their correct execution. In doing so, commanders are supported by tools to allow and accelerate the planning and decision-making course of, to realize the choice-making superiority envisioned by DOD. This is also necessary for all Maritime Security concerns.
And, in fact, to be effective, command choices must be implemented, a process to which C4I technologies are additionally related (e.g., in rushing up the hyperlink by means of which focusing on data is handed to weapons, the so-referred to as sensor-to-shooter link). The development and use of the correct instruments permit the commander to focus better on those points related to the essence of command--the art versus the science. As extra and better-automated tools are developed and individuals are trained to make use of them, it should develop into even more essential to recognize the art of command as distinguished from the mechanics of the instruments used to provide 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. Now, if the gurus and experts are right, leadership is increasingly concerned with soft skills - teamwork, communication and motivation.
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 Umich 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.
If they are adept at hard skills, they surround themselves with people who are proficient with soft skills. They strike a balance.
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 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.