????

????幾十年來，部隊的將軍或軍官在退伍后，往往會進入公司的高管辦公室，雄心勃勃地開始自己的嶄新生涯，而他們的領導能力幾乎都會受到眾人的交口稱贊。

????聯邦快遞（FedEx）的弗雷德?史密斯、電子數據系統公司（EDS）的羅斯?佩羅特這些退伍老兵在二戰、越南戰爭和朝鮮戰爭后都為各自公司的發展立下了汗馬功勞。

????而在幾十年后的今天，隨著美國的最后一場戰爭落下帷幕，越來越多的士兵退伍，許多人產生了疑問：運轉良好、層級分明的軍隊領導體系在企業界的價值是否依然如故？

????隨著曝光的現役人員性騷擾和士兵自殺案件日益增長，美國核戰略指揮部的成員也傳出欺詐和酗酒丑聞，自上而下的軍隊管理風格受到了幾十年來最為密切的關注。

????盡管像通用汽車（General Motors）、威瑞森（Verizon）和強生（Johnson & Johnson）這樣的公司目前仍由退伍軍人掌權，然而比起二三十年前，如今跨入企業界的高階士兵數量有所減少。不過，沙場老兵們卻是急于儲備中層管理和領導者的公司眼中的香餑餑。

????從沙場到管理團隊的轉變引發了人們的疑問：傾向于壓制疑問和異議的軍事管理會讓公司付出代價，還是正好相反，會讓公司受益呢？

????后一種觀點得到了公眾的廣泛認可，軍隊的領導力評分始終高居其他領域之上。哈佛大學肯尼迪學院（Harvard Kennedy School）公共領導中心（Center for Public Leadership）發布的最新版年度《國家領導力指數》（National Leadership Index）指出，美國人只對軍事和醫療部門的領導力有著“平均水平之上的信心”。2012年的領導力指數顯示，軍隊連續第18年超越其他13個領域，獲得最高評分。排在軍隊和醫療類別之后的，分別是非盈利和慈善團體、地方政府和宗教機構。

????退伍的陸軍上校、圣迭戈大學（University of San Diego）公共領導專業的教授喬治?E?里德說：“軍隊一直保持著最高評分，也是唯一一個自信滿滿的領域。”

????不過，里德也提倡人們用公正的眼光看待軍隊的領導。十年前，他在美國陸軍戰爭學院（Army War College）講課時，有士兵警告稱：出口傷人、夸夸其談的“毒瘤領導”正在指揮系統中步步高升。根據對這些士兵的采訪，他撰寫了一篇報告，開創了一個全新領域。

????里德表示，隨著伊拉克和阿富汗戰爭打響，軍隊當時沒有做好準備來深入探討領導問題。他說：“我只是那飄散在風中的聲音。”但他認為在當今時期，軍隊可以更廣泛地審視自身的領導措施。

????里德說：“不僅僅是回顧一下成功的往昔。我們猶豫著是否要把軍隊領導失靈的情況記錄下來。這也是我們領導力的傳奇的一部分。”

????由馬薩諸塞州坎布里奇（Cambridge, Mass.）的獨立機構美國國家經濟調查局（National Bureau of Economic Research）主持研究的一份報告顯示，士兵出身的首席執行官傾向于作出較為保守的投資決定，也不太認可公司的欺詐行為。

????For decades, former generals or officers frequently found high-flying new careers in corporate executive suites, and their leadership was almost universally lauded.

????Ex-servicemen like Fred Smith at FedEx (FDX) and Ross Perot at EDS helped remake the corporate landscape in the years after World War II and the Vietnam and Korean wars.

????Now, decades later, as the country's latest wars wind down and more soldiers exit the military, many are questioning whether the hierarchical military leadership that traditionally worked so well is still as valuable in the corporate world.

????The top-down military leadership style is coming under scrutiny more intensely than in recent decades as reports surface of rising numbers of in-service sexual assaults and soldier suicides as well as cheating and drinking by members of the nation's nuclear command.

????While the number of high-ranking soldiers migrating to the executive suite has dwindled compared to two or three decades ago -- although companies like General Motors (GM), Verizon (VZ), and Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) are currently led by ex-servicemen -- veterans are being sought by companies anxious to stock their middle management ranks with tested leaders.

????The shift from the fighting fields to the executive ranks has triggered examination of whether military leadership, which tends to squelch questioning and dissent, winds up costing companies or, by contrast, benefiting them.

????The latter view is widely embraced by the public, which consistently rates military leadership atop other occupational fields. The most recent National Leadership Index, prepared annually by the Harvard Kennedy School's Center for Public Leadership, found Americans surveyed nationwide had "above-average confidence" only in the military and medical sectors. The 2012 index was the eighth year in a row in which the military won the top spot over 13 other fields. Nonprofits and charities, local government, and religious institutions followed behind the military and medical categories.

????"The military consistently receives top ratings and is the only segment where there is a great deal of confidence," says George E. Reed, a retired military colonel who is a professor of public leadership at the University of San Diego.

????But Reed also advocates a balanced look at military leadership. While teaching at the Army War College, he broke new ground a decade ago when he wrote a report based on interviews with soldiers warning of abusive, self-aggrandizing "toxic leaders" promoted up the chain of command.

????But with wars raging in Iraq and Afghanistan, the military was not prepared for an in-depth examination of leadership issues at the time, says Reed. "I was a voice in the wind," he notes. But he thinks that the military is entering a period where it can undertake a broader review of its leadership policies.

????"It isn't just looking at success stories," he cautions. "We have a hesitancy to chronicle experiences where military leadership doesn't work," says Reed. "It's part of our romance with leadership."

????Soldier-CEOs tend to make more conservative investment decisions and are less likely to sanction corporate fraud, according to a report prepared under the auspices of the National Bureau of Economic Research, an independent Cambridge, Mass.-based organization.