Some years ago, I was speaking with a distinguished scholar and former university president. Over coffee he lamented, “Where are the Marshalls of today?” I knew to whom he was referring. General George Catlett Marshall, a 1901 graduate of the Virginia Military Institute, former Chief of Staff of the Army, former Secretary of State, and former Secretary of Defense. He achieved in the span of one lifetime more than a brigade of modern CEOs of today’s era could ever hope to attain. He was a remarkable leader who not only understood how to lead, but how to garner the respect of others as he set the path for whatever endeavor had his attention.
In 1939, he assumed the role of Chief of Staff of the Army from General Malin Craig (US Army). Marshall was instrumental in building on Craig’s work to bring the US Army into a posture to defeat our enemies in WWII.
Marshal was a straight talker. In WWI, as the Chief of Staff of the 1st Infantry Division, he looked on as General John J. Pershing berated the division’s commander for what Pershing assessed was poor preparation. When Pershing turned his sights on Marshall, Marshall snapped back making clear to his superior that there were serious logistical factors that impacted the readiness of the unit. Those in attendance thought Marshall had ended his career on the spot. But Pershing respected his boldness to speak forcefully, and eventually brought him on board as one of his combat planners. Indeed, after the war, he would become Pershing’s aide-de-camp.
Later while working for General Douglas MacArthur, Marshall’s ideological views differed, and he would not be brought to heel. MacArthur dispatched the strong-headed Marshall to a distant post. There the latter continued to excel as a leader. In 1938, he would return to Washington to the War Plans Division as Deputy Chief of Staff. On one occasion, then-Brigadier General Marshall attended a White House conference to hear President Franklin D. Roosevelt propose a plan to expand the Army Air Corps by 15,000 aircraft per year in preparation for WWII. Marshall was again forthright. While others indicated their support, Marshall insisted that the plan lacked logistical support and training considerations. To the contrary, Marshall said what was needed was a large ground army. Roosevelt was unmoved, insisting that a large air force would be of greater deterrent to enemies, even while conceding that the Army did not yet have a single division at full operational strength. Again, those present thought that Marshall had spiked his career. But his willingness to be candid resulted in Roosevelt nominating Marshall to be the Army Chief of Staff.
The rest is history. Marshall would be the linchpin in preparing the US for war and leading the Army. While he wanted to serve as the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, Roosevelt wanted him in Washington, the center of decision-making. Marshall could have insisted, and Roosevelt would likely have relented. But Marshall subordinated his ambition for what was best for the country. He was, after all, fond of saying, “There’s no limit to the good you can do if you don’t care who gets the credit.” Indeed, he was not only respected, but respectful of others by being honest, forthright, and self-sacrificing.
After the war, as Secretary of State, he would develop the Marshall Plan that restored Europe and win the Nobel Peace Prize. He would again return to service as the Secretary of Defense during the Korean War.
I suppose that Marshall was one of the greatest Americans of all time. General John M. Schofield could have been describing him in 1879 when, as Superintendent of West Point, he spoke these words to the graduating class the year before Marshall was born.
“The discipline which makes the soldiers of a free country reliable in battle is not to be gained by harsh or tyrannical treatment. On the contrary, such treatment is far more likely to destroy than to make an army. It is possible to impart instruction and give commands in such a manner and such a tone of voice as to inspire in the soldier no feeling, but an intense desire to obey, while the opposite manner and tone of voice cannot fail to excite strong resentment and a desire to disobey. The one mode or other of dealing with subordinates springs from a corresponding spirit in the breast of the commander. He who feels the respect which is due to others cannot fail to inspire in them respect for himself. While he who feels, and hence manifests, disrespect towards others, especially his subordinates, cannot fail to inspire hatred against himself.”
We lack true leaders in America today and desperately need the caliber of people like Marshall with the wisdom of Schofield. Indeed, where are they?
0 Comments