August 4, 2026
by Michael Corkum
Leadership comes in many forms—spiritual, physical, organizational, and even financial—but the common thread is that people follow. In the profession of arms, leadership is the “X-factor” that determines the outcome of a battle or an entire war. As a young Airborne Infantry Officer in the 82nd Airborne Division, I learned a mantra that was simple and visceral: “Lead from the front.” It meant being the first through the door, the fastest on the run, and the most proficient with a weapon. At this direct level of leadership, known in the U.S. Army as the company grade level, physical grit and tactical directness are the currency of influence.
This translates to all career paths, whether in the military or the civilian sector. Direct leaders need direct leadership. The U.S. Army defines leadership as “the activity of influencing people by providing purpose, direction, and motivation to accomplish the mission and improve the organization.” While the words seem simple enough, they are not a “cookie-cutter” solution. Having served for over 23 years, I’ve realized that as the scope of command increases, the character of that “influence” must fundamentally change.
I was fortunate to have senior leaders who mentored me through these transitions, yet I rarely paused to analyze the mechanics of leading leaders at different echelons. Now, as I prepare to step into a senior leadership role, I feel the weight of this responsibility. The next generation of leaders deserves more than just a “do what I do” approach; they deserve a leader who understands how to pivot from tactical oversight to strategic presence.
We must all understand the transitions through leadership milestones from the direct action of company grade officers to the nuanced, inquiry-based leadership required at senior levels. While my perspective is forged in the military, any organization where winning matters must also understand that leadership changes as responsibilities increase, and how we mentor those leaders must evolve as well.
The Direct Leader: Coaching the Tactical “Doer”
Direct leadership is the hallmark of any good company grade officer. These leaders are out front, “embracing the suck” and directing through the chaos to inspire and guide their formations. They provide matter-of-fact feedback and shoulder the heavy responsibility of carrying out the mission’s intent through to its end state. At this echelon, credibility isn’t just a by-product of rank; it is a result of presence. Whether it’s a lieutenant leading a platoon through a night movement, a captain synchronizing a company-sized breach, or a sales manager facilitating a killer deal, the expectation is that the leader is physically at the point of greatest friction.
Company grade officers lead by doing, showing, and striving to be the most proficient tactical expert in the unit; at this level, they are modeling competence for the formation to see. However, they do not do this alone. They must empower their non-commissioned officers (NCOs) as the true subject matter experts, trusting them to execute their intent and provide honest, unfiltered feedback. By balancing personal influence with empowered NCO leadership, company grade officers create an environment where the formation looks to them for immediate answers and decisive action. Overall, this echelon is defined by intense personal influence and informed decision-making.
Mentoring Junior Leaders
Senior mentors talking to their company grade protégés must provide clear, cause-and-effect mentorship to ensure that their tactical and technical base is firmly established. Once that baseline is met, mentors can develop them for the next tier of their career. These leaders are still learning, so mentorship should feel like a coach breaking down a missed play rather than a scolding from an angry fan. Mentors help them see both the small and big picture, balancing direct action execution with organizational concepts and thinking beyond their piece of the puzzle.
A caution: the very traits that make a captain successful—the ability to personally manage every tactical detail—can become a liability as they advance. The transition from “the doer” to “the orchestrator” begins as they are promoted to an organizational level.
My own transition into this organizational space was a trial by fire. When I left company command to become an intelligence staff officer, I knew how to lead, but I was completely blind to staff processes and the mechanics of the intelligence cycle. Unfortunately, the senior leaders in my assigned section either did not know how or did not care to mentor their junior officers. I even took it upon myself to ask one of our lieutenant colonels for mentorship, only to be met with a disappointing shrug.
I was told it was just a matter of “learning by doing” and that it would “either click or it won’t.” As I progressed through the ranks, I encountered many invested leaders who took the time to develop me, but early on in that critical phase, I was left to fend for myself. That systemic indifference stayed with me. Today, it serves as the primary driver for how I deliberately lead, teach, and mentor the people who work for and with me.
The Organizational Leader: Guiding the Process as the “Orchestrator”
In the U.S. Army, moving from a company grade officer to a field grade officer (a major) is the first transitional shift. Here, direct leadership is still valued, but it must be applied in a more refined way. The bulk of leadership at this level is leading through processes and systems rather than directly leading people. Here, leaders run battalions, operate on multi-star staffs, or facilitate teams of teams in the civilian world.
Organizational leaders are synchronizers and organizers. Their challenge lies in managing staff processes, ensuring proper resources are applied, and prioritizing requirements. Organizational leaders focus on planning and ensuring large organizations are moving in line with their commander’s intent and desired end state. They are no longer leading a formation of people; rather, they are synchronizing processes carried out by small teams. Majors lead by influence, moving to the point of friction in a process and providing clarity regarding the commander’s intent and vision. At this level, “leading from the front” means identifying where a system is failing and providing the intellectual or organizational energy to get it back on track.
Mentoring Mid-Grade Leaders
The transition to an organizational leader is often the steepest learning curve with the highest rate of failure. Mentorship for these leaders can make or break careers. When a leader is promoted into the next tier, the expectation often is that they are already polished and know exactly how to address all staff concerns with no issues.
This expectation could not be further from the truth, yet it remains the reality. Mentors need to address this through a combination of direct and influential leadership. If a major misses the mark, the mentor needs to show them where they failed to meet the standard, then lead them to discover why it was missed rather than just correcting it and moving on. The mentor must assist the mid-grade leader through their thought process to identify where the divergence occurred and then how to avoid making the same mistake again.
The mentor must lead the learner to self-discovery. Failure to develop this attribute in mid-grade leaders will cause friction in an organization where the staff leadership cannot identify where a process fails because they were not there to guide it. Furthermore, if they don’t learn the lesson here, they will be woefully unprepared at the senior level.
The Strategic Leader: Advising through Inquisitiveness
The final leadership transition is from organizational to strategic leader. Unlike the shift from direct to organizational, this is a slower build. Leaders at this level are likely to have 17 to 25 years of experience and have mastered both junior and mid-grade leadership requirements successfully.
Leaders at this level have established their methods and are hard-pressed to change them. This level of leader relies on experience and the ability to anticipate friction, but they also understand the larger needs of the organization and how priorities that are focused “down and in” must complement and be nested with the larger mission “up and out.” Here, rank is less effective than position and responsibility, and the strategic leader provides perspective, not detailed feedback. They translate the external landscape of the “up and out” into the organization’s daily operational role, demonstrating how the “down and in” directly supports the broader strategic mission while highlighting the distinct value of the organization.
Mentoring Senior Leaders
When mentors engage this select few, the conversation often revolves around the senior leader’s judgment. This is informed by three pillars: competence, presence, and inquisitiveness.
Competence: People follow competence; there is no doubt. While the strategic leader possesses competence, they no longer need to know every detail, nor do they need to pretend to. Mentoring senior leaders isn’t about directing individuals so much as it is about synthesizing how teams of teams fit into larger requirements.
Presence: Mentors must emphasize that leadership at the senior level is often about being present and available while maintaining a calm demeanor in the face of friction. Avoiding snap decisions or contested discussions in large settings reinforces the senior leader’s presence and reassures the team that they are taking it all in, processing the information, and providing clarity, intent, and an end state.
Inquisitiveness: At this level, people do not need to be told how to solve the problem, but they may need to work through an issue with questions—specifically how and why. Great mentors force subordinate leaders to adopt a mindset of thinking through the steps and providing options to an issue without being directed. When mentors ask leaders why they made a decision, they get a better picture of the thought process, helping them arrive at a more viable solution through their own logic.
Mentorship at this level evolves into peer-to-peer coaching. It requires vulnerability, a willingness to admit what we do not know, and the wisdom to trust the experts we have empowered.
Mentoring Leaders is a Cyclic Process
Leadership is not a skill learned once and then perfected; it is an ever-evolving mission of refinement with specific needs at each level. There is no school where the product is a “polished leader.” We are given the tools early in our careers, and we lead by example to place ourselves into the breach. But how we place ourselves—and where that breach is—changes over time.
We all must be aware that leadership changes from direct to organizational to strategic levels. As leaders and mentors, we must be able to recognize when and where these shifts take place so we can reinforce them in ourselves and in those we are privileged with the opportunity to shape for the future.
Click here to sign up for The Maximum Standard’s weekly email where you’ll get a leadership vignette delivered for free every Tuesday morning!
We’re always looking for authors. We coach first time authors (and anyone) through the writing process if you need a little help. It’s worth taking the first step to get published.
Mike Corkum is a Military Intelligence Officer and graduate of the US Army War College. He is a 23-year career Army Officer and has led Soldiers at every level from tactical to strategic, including combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan as an Infantry Officer, Combat Advisor, and Intelligence Officer. He is currently serving as the Deputy Commander for the 66th Military Intelligence Brigade (Theater) in Wiesbaden, Germany.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, the Department of War, or the U.S. Government.
The Maximum Standard 