In my previous blog, “Battalion Command : “The Heart of Leadership” I had written about the leadership lessons learned from the battalion commanders of the Indian Army. I had reasoned that many of these lessons are relevant for all walks of life, including the corporate sector.
The response from many of my corporate friends was quite positive, and they pointed out many areas of convergence between the military and corporate leadership. However, a few differed and insisted that the leadership environments in the military and the corporate world are entirely different and thus do not have many similarities. This prompted me to explore the leadership practices of the seemingly diverse systems to unveil their best practices, strengths, and weaknesses.
One significant difference that got highlighted was the “profit-oriented” approach of the corporate leaders. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with it because profit is a crucial aspect of our economic system and drives growth and development. It is good as long as it is generated ethically and not at the cost of people who are the key stakeholders of any enterprise.
This is, in many ways, similar to the goal-oriented or mission-oriented approach of a military leader. The difference, however, is that military operations involve high levels of risk, uncertainty, and ambiguity. A military leader therefore needs the willing and wholehearted support of his people. This makes it essential for him to remain people-centric.
Most successful military leaders—Alexander, Napoleon, Manekshaw, Patton, Omar Bradley, Slim, and many others, including lesser-known leaders in the Indian Army and armed forces across the world—have been known for their ability to build a strong rapport with their soldiers. JRD Tata, the doyen of Indian industry, was known to be a people-centric leader who invested time, energy and resources to create great teams who took their respective enterprises to great heights.
I, like many of my seniors and colleagues, followed several soldier-friendly practices that are common in the Indian Army. We spoke to our soldiers informally, dined with them, played games with them, and celebrated festivals together. These simple practices helped them feel valued, connected, and, most importantly, part of the team and stakeholders in its success.
The result was a strong sense of ownership and commitment. As a team, we consistently excelled in whatever we undertook—operations, training, or sports—and often achieved far more than what was initially expected of us.
The Environment
The primary distinction between the two leadership settings lies in the environment. A military leader operates in conditions fraught with physical risk, imminent danger to life, and consequences that can impact national security. In contrast, a corporate leader faces risks such as financial loss or shareholder dissatisfaction, but these do not generally entail physical danger to themselves or their team.
Moreover, the combat environment is characterized by extreme ambiguity and unpredictability, requiring decisions to be made with limited or unreliable information. On the other hand, a corporate leader, even in urgent situations, typically has access to a clearer picture supported by facts and data to take informed decisions.
Leadership Traits
Leadership is essentially the dynamic interaction between the leader, followers and the situation. Each leader may thus exhibit a different style or set of traits, as followers vary in their levels of motivation, skills, and commitment.
The leadership traits of exceptional leaders are strikingly similar, regardless of the field they belong to. According to the CEO Genome Project, the most successful CEOs exhibit four key traits: decision making, communication, adaptability and reliability. These traits are equally vital for military leaders. These traits enable leaders to articulate a compelling vision, inspire and motivate their teams, navigate unforeseen challenges with resilience, and consistently deliver on their commitments, even under immense pressure.
This study, however, further intrigued me, as it seemed to have missed out on many core leadership traits like self-awareness, integrity, loyalty, humility, vision, empathy, innovation and passion. On delving deeper, I realised that communication is not only about language; it is more about the idea being communicated. It is even more about listening to people, having empathy for them and establishing a deep connection with your team. A successful communicator has to be a people-centric person. As an analogy based on the findings of the CEO Genome Project, all successful corporate leaders have to be “people-centric” despite being “profit-orientated”.
So there is an important lesson for military and corporate leaders alike: people obey the “boss” because of his position, but they follow him because of his personal and interpersonal traits and skills. Authority can make people do what they are told, and money can make people perform, but neither can create the trust, loyalty and ownership that comes from true leadership. The people are still the ones making the difference in winning a battle, accomplishing a mission, or building a successful enterprise. The leader who understands this is more likely to win not only the hands and minds of his people but their hearts as well.
There is also a perception that it is difficult to uphold ethics and values in the corporate world. While this may sometimes be true of short-term, opportunistic businesses, it certainly does not hold true for large corporations that have to build trust and deliver consistently for longer periods of time. In fact, good corporate governance has become an important consideration for shareholders and institutional investors when evaluating a company’s long-term sustainability, management quality and investment potential.
Conclusion
The military and corporate worlds are undoubtedly different. Their objectives, environments and challenges are not the same. Yet, when we look closely at what makes a leader successful, the similarities are striking.
Whether the objective is to accomplish a military mission or achieve corporate goals, people remain at the centre of leadership. Decision-making, communication, adaptability, reliability, vision and innovation are the most critical leadership traits, but they become much more effective when combined with integrity, empathy, humility, loyalty and genuine concern for people.
5 comments
A very Lucid & knowledgeable Article by Gen ( Dr) Chandel on Leadership in the Forces viz the Corporaye World & certain Core Common Values therein .Needless to Say the Common subset is the People Centric Approach to Achieve the Desired Goal by Military & Corporate Leaders to Success.I have personally known the Author who has been utilising the aforementioned Principles to Great Success .
Very nicely brought out dear Gajinder as always. In this rapidly changing technological world, the new generation is looking at easy money through short cuts. In a short term, this may look successful, but,they miserably fail in the long run. Money is only a means to our end and money can never be your end. Believe in the processes,the money is a byproduct. In the present world, the leadership qualities are going through a sea change from the traditional army and corporate leadership. A leader has to be quite versatile with his subordinates from democratic, participatory , decisive and situational leadership qualities. Leading by personal examples, communication skills, decisiveness under pressure and team cohesion are common in both army and corporate fields. The major difference is the supreme sacrifice of life in the army which cannot be compensated in the corporate sector at any cost. It’s a wonderful ongoing debate, but flexibility and adaptability to any situations will be the WINNER. Best wishes
Good article Sir.. Thanks for sharing the same.
My views are as under:-
1) Difference in core goals make leadership style different.
2) Milatary leadership focused on mission success and survival of his troops but Corporate leadership focused more on profitable and marketing competition s.
3) Milatary leadership more or less set guiding rules and regulations and team work but Corporate leadership more less flexibility way of doing work among teams.
4) In milatary rankes gives Power and authority to person which act in national interest and here nation comes first but in corporate leadership act more less in the company interest only.
5) Lastly,we must learn from each other styles working.
Very well articulated reflecting deep understanding of sense prevailing inside and outside military Cantonment echo system . Terminal objectives of both the system are different ,one pay with human lives while other with monetary assessts.
Article by Gen Gajendra is powerfully articulated and deeply resonant with both research and lived experience across sectors. It rightly acknowledges the distinct contexts of military and corporate life while affirming a universal truth: at the heart of effective leadership…anywhere… are people, guided by character as much as competence
Why this perspective holds strong
• People-first leadership is non-negotiable. Whether in a battalion or a boardroom, leaders succeed by influencing, aligning, and caring for people to achieve shared objectives.
Corporate leaders increasingly seek these same qualities. Studies and practitioner accounts show that military-style strengths, ethical conduct, resilience, teamwork under stress translate well when blended with corporate values like innovation and emotional intelligence.
Core capabilities matter, but character amplifies them. Decision-making, communication, adaptability, reliability, vision, and innovation are essential , but they gain trust and durability when rooted in integrity, empathy, humility, loyalty, and genuine concern for others.
“The mission may change, but the formula doesn’t: clear vision + disciplined execution + genuine care for people = enduring success.”