Mission Command: Governor Henry Harrison and the Battle of Tippecanoe

Six principles comprise the philosophy of mission command: (a) build cohesive teams through mutual trust; (b) create share understanding; (c) provide clear commander’s intent; (d) exercise disciplined initiative; (e) use mission orders; and (f) accept prudent risk. When combined together, these six principles assist the commander in balancing the aforementioned art of command and science of control. To understand how General Robert E. Lee’s performance at Gettysburg lacked the marks of a great mission commander necessitates a deeper understanding of the individual principles of mission command.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the uses and application of mission command within Operation Anaconda. Operation Anaconda took place in the Shahikot Valley of eastern Afghanistan in early March of 2002. The ground commander selected to lead the operation was Major General (MG) Hagenbeck of the 10th Mountain Division, and for the purpose of this operation, Coalition and Joint Task Force (CJTF) Mountain. Due to the limited number of troops under his command currently available in Afghanistan, MG Hagenbeck was given command in addition to one of his own organic battalions, the 3rd Brigade, 101st Air Assault Division, some Special Operations Force (SOF) units, and Coalition Forces. This paper will identify MG Hagenbeck’s, his staff’s, and higher command’s use of the mission command principles during this operation. The principles of mission command are accept prudent risk, use mission orders, exercise disciplined initiative, provide a clear commander’s intent, create shared understanding, and lastly, build cohesive teams through mutual trust (Mission Command, 2014).

Operational leaders see how the individual components of an organization fit together and use those individuals work to make a larger outcome. When they focus on a problem, they think of what works best within the process and systems to make an impact on the situation. These types of leaders play a big part in making sure that things get done in an effective and functioning manner. According to the Army Doctrine ADP 6-0, the Army over time has strayed away from operational leaders and adapted Mission Command, which gives leaders the ability at the lowest level the capability to exercise disciplined initiative in an act of carrying out the larger mission . Mission Command is made up of the following six steps: Understanding, Visualize,

Operational leaders down to the platoon and squad level have recently faced increasingly complex missions in uncertain operational environments. Accordingly, Army doctrine has shifted to officially recognize mission command, which enables leaders at the lowest level feasible to “exercise disciplined initiative” in the accomplishment of a larger mission. The operational process consists of six tenants: understand, visualize, describe, direct, lead, and assess. During the battle of Fallujah, LtGen Natonski understood the intent two levels up, visualizing courses of action for both allies and the enemy, and leading his organization into combat while directing his officers and soldiers to meet his intent. He visualized that Marines alone could not accomplish the mission. He understood that without the support of Iraqi police and a task force from the Army with

Army Doctrine Publication (ADP) 6-0 defines mission command as “the exercise of authority and direction by the commander using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations” (U.S Army, Training and Doctrine Command, Combined Arms Center, Center for the Army Profession and Ethic, 2015, p. 1). The six principles of mission command direct leaders to build cohesive teams through mutual trust, create shared understanding, provide a clear commander’s intent, exercise disciplined initiative, use mission orders, and accept prudent risk. These principles enable subordinates that

The Battle of Tippecanoe was one of the major steps towards the War of 1812. It took place on November 8, 1811, in a clearing near Prophet’s Town. It was also perhaps one of the most controversial battles in the War of 1812. Although a peace treaty had been made one day prior before the Battle of Tippecanoe, the Native Americans attacked, which caused the American soldiers to fight back, who were led by General William Henry Harrison. The Native Americans had been led by Tecumseh, a Shawnee Indian Chief. The Battle of Tippecanoe was a controversial battle which the Natives Americans started, and ultimately, lost.

Lalawethika was an important influencer in Tecumseh’s life . He first joined his two brothers Sauwauseekau, and Tecumseh in a battle against the whites, were Sauwauseekau died.  Lalawethika after diseases were spread from the whites fell sick and passed out. This  led the tribe to change his name to Tenskwatawa or “The Open Door” because he said he saw visions and that he was now a healer.Tenskwatawa then joined Tecumseh to a warn their tribesmen that the  whites' who had claimed to be friendly were lying. His visions however, lead to his demise at the battle of Tippecanoe where he told his warriors that they would be safe. The defeat for him made him lose all

In June, Grant led his expedition on the same route Montgomerie had taken. Sensing another ambush at a pass near the site of Montgomerie's battle, Grant dispatched Marion with 30 men to flush out the Cherokees. Using trees for cover, Marion's detachment cautiously advanced within range of the Cherokees, whereupon the Indians sounded their war cry and fired. By the time the pass was secured, only nine of Marion's men were left. Grant's column proceeded through the pass and engaged the Cherokees for several hours, until the Indians fled. Marion's capture of the pass allowed Grant to create a path of destruction in the Cherokee lands, burning 15 Indian towns and destroying their corn crops. Finally, Chief Attakullakulla, known by some as "Little Carpenter," surrendered.

COL Prescott’s understanding of operational variables (PMESII-PT) and mission variables (METT-TC) contributes to his mission command effectiveness. In Battles of the Revolutionary War (Wood), COL Prescott demonstrates his grasp of these variables by determining the British forces’ strength, the morale condition of his own men and the effective location from which his orders say defend. The 6000 British soldiers’ training and equipment outstrip the colonists in every aspect. To deny the British from seizing Dorchester Heights, COL Prescott’s understanding of the current situation gave way to his effective planning that was effective in his visualization of the defense mission.

According to Army ADP 6-0, mission command is the exercise of authority and direction by the commander, using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent, to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations (CAPE, 2012). Effective mission command can generally be analyzed according to the six principles outlined in ADRP 6-0. The six principles of mission command are to: build cohesive teams through mutual trust, create shared understanding, provide a clear commander’s intent, exercise disciplined initiative, use mission orders, and accept prudent risk (CAPE, 2012). This paper provides a brief overview of the

The Battle of Tippecanoe took place in 1811 between forces of the United States under the command of Indiana Territory Governor William Henry Harrison and forces from a pan-Indian movement under religious leader Tenskwatawa, known as the prophet. The battle ended in Harrison’s forces successfully repelling an attack by Tenskwatawa’s forces (Center for Military History, 2014). Harrison’s exercise of good mission command was critical to his forces’ victory, allowing him and his subordinate leaders to coordinate and organize their defense and counterattack to defeat the Indian assault.

The mission command system is expressed as the placement of individuals within a unit conducting operations with a specific set of procedures and principles in place to optimize the use of its equipment. What does it mean to recognize or comprehend the art of Command and the science of Control? There are six key principles of mission command in developing a cohesive team that support all aspects of a mission. The following essay will discuss these principles and examine examples of how the famous Operation Anaconda both endured victories and inadequacies.

He traveled throughout the Midwest urging tribes to form a political confederacy to prevent any further erosion of their lands. In November 1811, while Tecumseh was in the South attempting to recruit the Creeks into his confederacy, U.S. forces marched against Prophetstown. In the subsequent Battle of the Tippecanoe they defeated the Prophet, burned the settlement, and destroyed the Indians' food supplies. After returning from the South Tecumseh tried to rebuild his shattered confederacy. But when the War of 1812 broke out, he withdrew to Michigan where he assisted the British in the capture of Detroit and led pro-British Indians in small actions in southern Michigan and northern Ohio (Fort Meigs). When William Henry Harrison invaded Upper Canada, Tecumseh reluctantly accompanied the British retreat. He was killed by American forces at the Battle of the Thames on October 5, 1813. Although they never found the body of Tecumseh the Americans nor the british were sure of his death. Many believed that Colonel Richard M. Johnson had shot and killed Tecumseh with his pistol. Colonel Johnson was wounded and as he lied there an Indian came charging at him and all he could do was to fire at the Indian warrior and later soldiers went back to where he was wounded and drug off the battle field and found a mutilated Indian warrior. Even though Colonel Johnson never admitted he killed Tecumseh but took on the nick

After moving 42 miles in three days, Custer realized that “directly west, in his front, are the very Indians the columns [were] searching for.” He massed his forces and deployed scouts to confirm the enemy's position. Before dawn on June 25th, they found “6,000 to 7,000 natives . . . encamped about 15 miles away . . . in the expansive Little Bighorn Valley.” Post-battle analysis confirmed “at least 2,000 warriors” in a settlement that “cover[ed] nearly two miles.” During this reconnaissance, Custer believed the enemy had discovered his column, and hastily began his attack, “fearing the natives might escape.”

Tecumseh slowly transformed his brother's religious following into a political movement. In 1808 Tecumseh and the Prophet moved their village to the juncture of the Tippecanoe and Wabash rivers, where the new settlement, Prophetstown, continued to attract Indians. After the loss of much Indian land at the Treaty of Fort Wayne, Tecumseh gradually eclipsed his brother as the primary leader of the movement. He traveled throughout the Midwest urging tribes to form a political confederacy to prevent any further erosion of their lands. In November 1811, while Tecumseh was in the South attempting to recruit the Creeks into his confederacy, U.S. forces marched against Prophetstown. In the subsequent Battle of the Tippecanoe they defeated the Prophet, burned the settlement, and destroyed the Indians' food supplies. After returning from the South Tecumseh tried to rebuild his shattered confederacy. But when the War of 1812 broke out, he withdrew to Michigan where he assisted the British in the capture of Detroit and led pro-British Indians in small actions in southern Michigan and northern Ohio (Fort Meigs). When William Henry Harrison invaded Upper Canada, Tecumseh reluctantly accompanied the British retreat. He was killed by American forces at the Battle of the Thames on October 5, 1813. Although they never found the body of