Group discipline may be defined as the spirit which pervades the members of a group—the controlling spirit which governs the impulses of the individuals and makes them try to do right and give their best in the common cause. It is as essential to the successful working of an organized machine of humans as is live steam to the working of a cold engine. Its existence in any group is recognized by a ready, cheerful obedience to instructions, by respect for those in authority, by keenness for the common success, and by a high sense of individual duty. It has been well called the "soul" of armies. This means that it is the responsive animating spirit which leads men to splendid deeds of heroism, gives them heart for cheerful endurance of untold hardships, makes them freely surrender individual wills to the will of the leader, and binds them into a loyal fellowship, aspiring, sacrificing, working together for a common cause.
Given a policy of unfailing justice, and no matter for what purpose men are brought together, this spirit of discipline may be made to pervade the whole group. It is the direct result of good leadership, and comes naturally from knowing how to handle men. It cannot exist under poor leadership. Its relative value for attaining results has been measured by Napoleon as seventy-five per cent of all the elements that go to make success in battle. In any undertaking demanding the continued application of the powers of man, its value must be rated very high. An organization that lacks discipline may not hope for efficiency. And as poor leadership thus denies efficiency to an organization, so may its efficiency be increased in direct proportion to the quality of leadership shown by those in control, especially by those in direct contact with the men.
The object of discipline is therefore seen to be an increase in the total of results. So do not let the mind get fixed on discipline as the end sought by leadership; it is but a means to the attainment of this real object—better results. As in the army many an officer failed of success because he centered his attention on being a disciplinarian and forgot that the object of all training and discipline was success in action, so in any activity, the leader must not let the importance of discipline in itself obscure his judgment when deciding any step toward attaining or maintaining it. It is not the end, but is to be used as a means toward attaining the real end—one hundred per cent results.
Morale is the final development of the highest type of discipline, and is thus the prize reward for good leadership. Based fundamentally on a belief in the cause for which we are working, it can never be inspired in an atmosphere of injustice or suspicion. Having morale means that no matter what obstacle or difficulty we face, we meet it absolutely confident of our ability to overcome it. Confidence—a justified confidence—is therefore the cornerstone of morale. Discipline and experience have made each man confident of his own fitness and ability, confident of the intelligent leadership of his chief, and confident of the ability and loyal co-operation of his fellow-mates in the team. To establish his men's confidence in these three things must therefore be a constant consideration in the mind of the leader. This consideration influences his every decision as to what to do and what to say, and how to do and say it. He uses the words and the method best adapted to work toward these results, well knowing that his men are influenced by his every act toward either confidence in or distrust of his leadership, their own ability, or the worth of their fellows. He thus builds up through honest, intelligent confidence that morale which is going to make his team ready to meet anything.
The manifestations of discipline and morale, and the various appeals to inspire them, differ in accordance with the work to be done by the members of the group and with the personalities of both the leader and his men. But all spring from an application of the same principles—and making this application to the specific case in hand becomes the interesting study and exercise of wit for the leader concerned. It is for him to arouse just the kind of spirit he needs for the special work and with the particular men he has. The spirit which holds the stoker faithful to his task in the bowels of the ship is different in form from that which animates the gun crew on the deck above—yet both spring from the same sources.
Leadership.—The development of man as an individual, his inherent qualities of manliness, high purpose, and a self-respecting individuality which still recognizes its responsibility as a citizen of the community—all these developed qualities make him potentially a splendid tool in the hands of a skillful master, and a dangerous one in the hands of a bungler. To handle these tools skillfully has therefore become a recognized art. It will be only when this art is generally known and practiced by our leaders that the nation may hope to benefit by anything like the full measure of its manpower.
This art of handling men is called leadership; and during the late war was made a study for practical application in all armies. On his excellence in the practice of this art depended every military leader's ability to deliver that superior manpower of his men which made his unit victorious. In the past this used to be the function of the few "born leaders" who seemed to know instinctively how to inspire others to give their uttermost. But these born leaders were too few to meet modern requirements, so we were forced to make their natural art a matter of analysis and instruction.
This art is based on the fact that there is in every man a tremendous latent force which may be aroused and used by a skillful leader who knows how to inspire the man's loyalty, pride, and ambition to do his utmost for the glory of his group and the honor of his cherished leader. The poor leader leaves all this enthusiastic service and devotion dormant in his men, and therefore commands only mediocrity. His men do just well enough to conform to cold requirements. The letter of the law is their sole guide, and they may even seek means to evade that. Such leadership paralyzes efficiency, and does actual harm to the character of the man who must operate under it. Denied the privilege of giving free play to his constructive instincts, he becomes prey to those which breed on discouragement and discontent, and the end of this man is far worse than the beginning.
Not so with good leadership. It wins its efficiency and material reward, not at the expense of manhood, but by appeal to the very instincts whose free play gives pleasure to the inner man and results in the upbuilding of his character and his faculties. The end thus finds him a better man and citizen for the kind of work he has done. It is this dual result which so highly commends the practice of this art. The most mercenary may well adopt it for the material gain it will bring; the altruist may adopt it for the inner joy of seeing the character and manliness of his men growing under his hands. And in the end even the leader who accepted it for material reasons will find self-satisfaction in that he must feel that the community is better for his living in it.
Leadership is an art, not an exact science. Its seat is in a man's soul rather than in his brain. To attempt to teach it we appeal broadly to a man's understanding and appreciation of what the laws of life require. It is a comprehensive subject which may be far from completely covered in one chapter. But fortunately one need not attain anything like perfection in order to be recognized as a good leader and to win a fine response from his men. So much is man a creature of the better instincts, so responsive is he to fair and decent treatment, that if his leader but be genuine in his practice of but a few of these principles of leadership, his men will deny his weaknesses and failures, and give him their loyalty and service without measure.