Leadership Language

Intent Isn't Enough

By Sgt. 1st Class Shaquille J. King

16th Hospital Center, 44th Medical Brigade, Fort Bragg, North Carolina

August 24, 2026

Download the PDF

Decentralized execution allows the Army to be agile, adaptive, and responsive in the complex environments of modern warfare and operations. It empowers leaders at every echelon to take ownership of outcomes, while staying aligned with the commander’s intent. (U.S. Army photo by Master Sgt. Justin P. Morelli)

After more than a decade in the Army, I developed a clear philosophy about how I lead.

I believe in decentralized execution, empowering my subordinate NCOs to take ownership and lead.

I believe in extreme ownership, taking full responsibility for the success or failure of everything in my section.

I believe in self-awareness, knowing what I know, and acknowledging what I do not.

These principles have guided me through every leadership role I've held. They're the product of experience, study, reflection, and a personal commitment to growth. I thought, I trust my team. I want them to lead. I welcome feedback. How could anyone see arrogance in that?

But a recent professional conversation with a peer helped me recognize a critical leadership truth: Intent isn't enough. Communication matters. It's my responsibility to express my beliefs clearly.

In the military, clarity is paramount. It's not enough to have good intentions; leaders must ensure their words and actions reflect the intent. Unfortunately, I realized that some of the words and phrases I used, often in casual conversation, were creating unintended impressions.

For example, when I told a member of the logistics assistance team, "Do what you want," I genuinely meant, "I trust your judgment. You own this decision." What they heard instead was, "He doesn't care."

Similarly, when I said, "I don't care what you do," I wanted to empower them to execute in their way, but the message they received was one of disengagement or indifference.

Instead of saying “Do what you want,” I will now say, “You’ve got the lead on this; I trust your judgment.” Rather than saying “I don’t care what you do,” I will say, “You know this best, execute as you see fit. I’m here if you need support.” (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Seth Aaron)

In another instance, when discussing my leadership philosophy with a peer, I said, "I'm not changing my leadership style." What I meant was that I'm committed to decentralized leadership but open to feedback on how I implement it. What they heard was that I am rigid and unwilling to listen.

During the discussion with that same peer I shared why I believe so strongly in decentralized execution and extreme ownership.

Decentralized execution is foundational to concepts like mission command which emphasizes disciplined initiative and adaptability by subordinates in dynamic and complex environments. It allows the Army to be agile, adaptive, and responsive in the complex environments of modern warfare and operations. It empowers leaders at every echelon to take ownership of outcomes, while staying aligned with the commander's intent.

I've exercised this philosophy in my own leadership style, and I'm willing to acknowledge that I need to get better at articulating my intent in a more clear, concise manner.

Later, this same person told me, "I feel like you took this conversation too personally; like you couldn't take constructive criticism."

That hit me hard because it wasn't true at all. In fact, I gained a great deal of respect for her during the conversation, and I genuinely welcome feedback that helps me grow as a leader.

It was clear my words and tone had not conveyed that openness. I unintentionally communicated defensiveness instead. That prompted a moment of deep reflection. It's my responsibility to communicate in a way that aligns with my beliefs.

My philosophy is unchanged, I remain committed to the leadership principles that serve both me and my teams well.

However, I am changing how I express those beliefs, particularly when communicating with peers, subordinates, and senior leadership.

For instance, instead of saying "Do what you want," I will now say, "You've got the lead on this; I trust your judgment." Rather than saying "I don't care what you do," I will say, "You know this best, execute as you see fit. I'm here if you need support." Instead of a hard statement like "I'm not changing my leadership style," I will now express, "Decentralized leadership is core to my philosophy, but I always welcome feedback on how I implement it."

Words matter. Tone matters. Perception matters. Leadership is about creating alignment: between what we believe, what we say, and how we make others feel. I’m committed to that alignment. I know I won’t get it perfect every day, but I’ll own the responsibility to get better. (U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Timothy D. Hughes)

I'm sharing this reflection because I believe many leaders, military and civilian, struggle with this same challenge. It's not enough to mean well. It's not enough to have good leadership principles. It's not enough to know your intent. Leaders must ensure their words, tone, and presence convey those principles clearly and consistently.

Words matter. Tone matters. Perception matters. Leadership is about creating alignment: between what we believe, what we say, and how we make others feel. I'm committed to that alignment. I know I won't get it perfect every day, but I'll own the responsibility to get better.

If you've experienced similar challenges, where your leadership intent didn't match how you were perceived, I would love to hear your story. What lessons have you learned about the language of leadership? How have you adjusted your communication to better reflect your beliefs? Feel free to share your reflections or advice. Leadership is a constant learning process, and we grow stronger when we learn together.

Bio

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the NCO Journal, the U.S. Army, or the U.S. Department of War.

Back to Top