Leadership for Intelligence Professionals   

General George Washington and His Staff

Washington's Expectations of His Staff

“It is absolutely necessary…for me to have persons that can think for me, as well as execute orders.”  Excerpt from letter of Washington to Joseph Reed ,a talented young Philadelphia lawyer who served as his secretary and became his closest confidant. 

       Quoted from 1776 by David McCullough.

Washington's Use of a Staff Officer

“Being Washington’s chief secretary was much more than a passive stenographic task….Washington …explained that his letters were drafted by aides, subject to his revision.  Hamilton’s advent was thus a godsend for Washington.  He was able to project himself into Washington’s mind and intuit what the general wanted to say, writing it up with instinctive tact and deft diplomatic skills.  It was an inspired act of ventriloquism: Washington gave a few general hints and, presto, out popped Hamilton’s letter in record time.  Most of Washington’s field orders are in Hamilton’s handwriting….

Pretty soon the twenty-one year old alter ego was drafting letters to Congress, state governors, and the most powerful generals in the Continental Army.  Before long, he had access to confidential information and was allowed to issue orders from Washington over his own signature….

As Hamilton evolved from private secretary to something akin to chief of staff, he rode with the general in combat, cantered off on diplomatic missions, dealt with bullheaded generals, sorted through intelligence, interrogated deserters, and negotiated prisoner exchanges.”

      Quoted from Andrew Hamilton by Ron Chernow.

Washington's Style of Staff Leadership

It was typical of Washington’s style of leadership to present a promising proposal as someone else’s idea, rather than his own.  It was his way of encouraging open discussion and constructive debate….Washington was…listening, responding, encouraging, persuading….Nobody doubted that Washington was in charge.  His officers deeply respected him, but their conversation was not constrained by deference.  The discussion was freewheeling, and its tone suggested that Washington wanted it that way….  From much hard-won experience in American politics and war he had learned to work closely with his subordinates.  Washington met frequently with them in councils of war and encouraged a free exchange of ideas.  He also listened more than he talked and drew freely from the best ideas that were put before him.  In early councils he actually took a vote.  Later he worked more skillfully by the construction of consensus.  In that way he created a community of open discourse and a spirit of mutual forbearance.  He encouraged his lieutenants to join freely in the common effort….They did so with growing respect for this extraordinary man….Washington was at the center of all these decisions, functioning more as a leader than as a commander; always listening, inspiring guiding: rarely demandanding, commanding or coercing. 

      Quoted from Washington's Crossing by David Hackett Fischer 

Indeed, that Participating Leadership style which Washington used with his staff was so well-known that he was frequently criticized for it. Henry Laurens the president of Congress and a Washington supporter “…wondered if the problem was Washington’s reluctance to make hard decisions.”  Others “…maintained that he was a puppet in the hands of General Nathaniel Greene.” one of his most competent subordinates.  Brigadier General Anthony Wayne hoped “…our good general will but follow his own good judgment without listening too much to some counsel.” And  “General de Kalb likewise deplored Washington’s tendency to make decisions on the advice of ‘Councils’.  De Kalb meant councils of war.”  Likewise, “Lafayette denounced councils of war because they produced nothing but timid opinions and unrealistic compromises."

But, Washington didn’t always follow the typically timid advice of his generals in the councils of war.  For example, at one council of war, “…Washington proposed a strike across the Delaware to attack the isolated German position at Trenton….[His second in command General Horatio] Gates demurred.  He told the commander in chief his army was too demoralized to attack anyone.  The only hope was to retreat….The commander in chief demurred in turn and renewed his determination to attack Trenton.”  The result, of course, was one of the most important victories of the war.