Thanks for the link, Andrew!

My only gripe with this is that I've seen far too many "leaders" try to cover up their own shortcomings by bemoaning the "lack of initiative" of their subordinates. They expect their subordinates to read their minds, to be in four places at once, to work nonstop for days on end, to magically acquire expertise in any subject you'd care to name at the drop of a hat, and to do it all for only slightly more money and respect that you'd give a 16-year-old working at McDonald's.

I was taught to "never give an order that can't (or won't) be obeyed", and to remember that the troops will, from time to time, eat, sleep, and relieve themselves, and ordering them not to is like farting into a whirlwind. I'm sure we've all seen officers at one time or another that lost track of some of those principles, and who were just generally clueless overall.

We should certainly expect great things from those we lead, and we should lead them in such a way that they do things they may not have realized they were capable of. We need to be worthy of those subordinates, though, and exercise great care to keep our standards of leadership equally as high as the standards we expect from those we lead.

Michael,

That's a good point. I don't believe the point of the story is to give subordinates lousy guidance and berate them if they fail, however. What I take from the story is the need for the spirit to take a mission and run with it when you must. Further, I always saw this story as speaking particularly to leaders.