Personal Initiative Differences between Combat Arms and Non-Combat Arms Field Grade Officers

Senior U.S. Army leaders have indicated shortcomings in personal initiative (PI) among Army officers, especially between combat arms and non-combat arms field grade officers. PI is a critical contributor to individual and organizational effectiveness and to the Army’s approach to command and control. However, the Army does not measure PI differences. This quantitative causal-comparative study involved an online, Self-Report Initiative Scale (SRIS) to measure PI. The target population was U.S. Army field grade officers attending resident Command and General Staff School between August 2020 and June 2021. The study used three research questions to address differences in PI scores between combat arms and non-combat arms U.S. Army officers; Army field grade officers and non-military, mid-level managers; and among four Army commission sources of Reserve Officer Training Corp (ROTC), U.S. Military Academy (USMA), Officer Candidate School (OCS), and direct commission. Results showed no difference in PI scores between combat and non-combat arms officers. However, Army officers had significant higher PI scores over non-military, mid-level managers. Additionally, ROTC commission officers had significantly higher PI scores over OCS and direct commission officers. This research indicates potential affirmative multi-echeloned social change opportunities. PI training is more cost effective than traditional training and offers potential savings for Army planners to better use for other defense programs. Objective performance criteria, such as PI, support increased diversity in Army organizations and improved individual functioning for Army leaders