General Mark Hertling Emphasizes Respectful Disagreement as Core to Effective Leadership

Retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, a prominent military analyst and former commander of U.S. Army Europe, recently articulated a foundational principle of effective leadership: that respectful disagreement is not a sign of disrespect, but rather a deeper form of loyalty and commitment. His insights, shared in an article for The Bulwark, underscore the perils of surrounding oneself with unquestioning subordinates, often referred to as "yes-men."

"I’ve learned in my military career that disagreement, when voiced respectfully and appropriately, is not disrespect. In fact, it is a deeper form of respect," Hertling stated, emphasizing that such candor demonstrates a genuine concern for the mission, truth, and the well-being of personnel. He further cautioned that "at the end of the day, yes men are dangerous."

General Hertling, known for his candid commentary on military and leadership matters, argued that true disrespect manifests as silence in the face of crucial decisions. His perspective highlights that advisors and senior officers who speak candidly, even when their views diverge, are acting out of a profound devotion to the cause. This approach fosters a culture of critical thinking essential for navigating complex challenges.

The former commander's article, published in The Bulwark, a conservative news and opinion website, reflects a broader discussion on leadership dynamics, particularly in high-stakes environments like the military. Hertling's career, which includes extensive command experience and a tenure as a CNN military analyst, lends significant weight to his observations on the importance of diverse perspectives and intellectual honesty within leadership ranks.

Hertling's message implicitly critiques environments where dissent is stifled or punished, suggesting that such conditions can lead to strategic missteps and organizational vulnerability. The emphasis on respectful, appropriate voicing of disagreement serves as a blueprint for cultivating robust decision-making processes and ensuring that leaders receive unvarnished assessments necessary for success.