Peace operations are about facilitating and ensuring non-violent self-determination, preventing further conflict and sustaining peace. The overall task is almost overwhelming in terms of its breadth, importance and meaning – and yet this is perhaps the greatest source of inspiration for a mission’s leader. At the same time, peace operations are just one part of a larger international effort in a host country’s transformation from conflict to peace. Mission leaders are therefore assisting in changing a country’s history, in close cooperation with its people and on behalf of the United Nations. This is a responsibility that requires highly developed leadership qualities.

Effective and inclusive leadership is a critical factor in the success of peace operations. Numerous studies and reports have concluded that the demonstration of effective leadership by appointed leaders is essential to a successful peace operation, and this has frequently been reiterated by UN Member States and UN leaders, as well as policymakers, researchers and stakeholders. Nevertheless, this insight has proved difficult to operationalize and hard to legislate for in practice. Peace operations are complex, and leadership is not easy.

Balancing the two has proved a challenge for the international community. Fortunately, there have been many successful and inspiring examples of mission leadership. In addition, patterns of best practice are identifiable beyond the manifold mission-specific circumstances.

With effective and inclusive leaders, UN missions can, over time, achieve most of their mandated objectives, engage the host state in sustainable state- and peacebuilding, optimize the use of scarce resources, motivate mission personnel and beneficiaries, and strength- en the credibility and reputation of the mission and of the UN. That said, it is important to recognize that mission leadership often comes with huge responsibilities, relatively little authority and limited supportive accountability. This is part of what makes it so fascinating.

1.1.1  A mission leadership focus

The word leadership is often used to refer either to a cadre of leaders (as in ‘the UN’s senior mission leadership’) or to an effective practice and inspiring quality we expect from good leaders (as in ‘she showed good leadership as a Head of Mission’). We must always be clear about what we are referring to when we talk about leadership. The considerations in this study focus on a mission’s senior leadership, as opposed to leadership in general.

The United Nations system leadership framework

The United Nations system leadership framework outlines eight defining characteristics of UN leadership:

•    It is norm-based – in that it is grounded in UN norms and standards, beginning with the UN Charter.

•    It is principled – defending its norms and standards and their application without discrimination, fear, or favour even – especially – in the face of pressure and push-back from powerful actors.

•    It is inclusive – embracing diversity as a strength, practicing cultural and gender sensitivity, and rejecting discrimination in all its forms.

•    It is accountable – both mutually within the UN system, and to beneficiaries and the greater public.

•    It is multidimensional, integrated and engaged across pillars and functions.

•    It is transformational – to achieve positive change.

•    It is collaborative – both within and beyond the UN system.

•    It is self-applied – that is, modelled in the behaviour of UN personnel, who are expected to act in accordance with UN principles and values.

Source: UN System Chief Executives Board for Coordination, ‘United Nations system leadership framework’, 31 January 2018.

In the sense of good practice, mission leadership needs to be exercised by the MLT at the country level, and by Heads of Offices and Sector Commanders at the subnational level. The aspects and contexts of good UN leadership embrace issues such as the multifaceted international character of peace operations and their political foundation; the hazardous environment; the ever-changing interests and agendas and their complexity and width; the high stakes; and the large number of dynamic and external factors.

While this study naturally includes much generic information on leadership, it strives to clarify, visualize and give advice on the kind of leadership that is specific to assignments in peace operations. In short, it aims to be as context-related, concrete and relevant as possible. Each chapter therefore includes a section entitled ‘Considerations’ that outlines key issues at stake and potentially competing principles. The observations in these sections are driven by the many polarities that exist in today’s complex peacekeeping environments.

The present study also aims to identify a leader’s perspective on the different issues discussed. This means that issues are introduced and elaborated on mainly from the point of view of leaders, and not as topics as such. What is a leader’s responsibility? What does a leader need to know and understand? What kind of action does a leader need to take? What can others expect from their leaders and what should mission leaders expect from them in return? Who is accountable for what, and to whom?

Contemporary UN peace operations are complex endeavours. This requires imaginative and dedicated leadership that is grounded in integrity and competence. UN Security Council mandates are now broader and are often more demanding as the functions of peacekeeping, peace enforcement and peacebuilding become increasingly intertwined and mutually supportive. Mission leadership is also about developing a strong relationship with national counterparts, coalescing the international community’s support and efforts on the ground and, most critically, facilitating change. These trends have placed greater demands on a mission’s leaders, requiring MLTs to be better prepared, resourced and accountable for their actions. In addition, missions and their leaders need to be more professionally directed and supported by the Security Council and the UN Secretariat. Shortcomings in these areas often fall heavily on the shoulders of the MLT. This is part of the job.

Senior leaders in peace operations need to be proven and capable leaders from the outset. Exercising leadership in peace operations cannot be about on-the-job training. It is, however, to a large degree about on-the-job learning. Successful mission leaders are open-minded, curious and flexible, and facilitate an environment conducive to continuous and adaptive learning throughout the mission and the duration of its mandate.

1.1.2  The Mission Leadership Team

The MLT is made up of the senior leaders of the mission. Its makeup reflects a variety of competencies, professional backgrounds and working cultures, including politics, civil administration, the military, the police and civil society.

The MLT will inevitably reflect numerous concepts and cultures of leadership, and thus provides a resource for complementary experience and insight. Correctly approached and cultivated, this diversity will be an obvious strength for both the MLT and the mission as a whole. It is important to invest in developing and forging a professional, inclusive, committed, dynamic and enduring team. All peace operations generate continuous challenges, surprises and frictions for their leaders, and these need to be tackled and overcome as a team. For the MLT to work well together, its individual members must first demonstrate inter-cultural competence. Then, teambuilding should be prioritized, planned and creative. Small and recurring efforts count. The focus should not just be on formal and scheduled occasions, but also on building the team a little every day, and in every encounter within the MLT.

The exact composition of the MLT will vary depending on the specific type of mission and its requirements. Integrated and multidimensional missions are typically led by the Head of Mission (HoM) or Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General (SRSG). This core team consists of the Deputy SRSG (Political); the Deputy SRSG-Resident Coordinator/Humanitarian Coordinator (DSRSG-RC/HC); the Force Commander (FC), the Police Commissioner (PC); the Director or Chief of Mission Support; and the mission’s Chief of Staff. It is very often reinforced by other section heads such as Human Rights, Gender, Strategic Communications and Security.

In assembling this group, the HoM, in consultation with UN Headquarters (UNHQ), needs to find a balance between adequate representation and efficient decision making. In practice, most missions have a core group as well as a wider senior management group (see 2.1 Integrated Missions).

Whatever the chosen format, the MLT is responsible, at the operational level, for implementing the mission’s mandate through the coordinated planning and execution of the many tasks required to achieve the strategic end state – that is, the mission’s overarching vision. To achieve this vision, each MLT member must understand their individual role and responsibilities.

The individual leadership qualities of MLT members are crucially important but can only be optimized if personalities complement each other. As a prerequisite for collective decision making the MLT also needs to operate as an inclusive, coherent team in which the members are respectful of each other’s competencies, roles and assignments. This is particularly important when it comes to the overall civilian leadership of the military and police (that is, uniformed) components.

Civilian leaders provide the general and political direction and set mission-level strategic objectives. The uniformed components plan and execute their operational contributions in order to achieve those ends. At the same time, it is important for the uniformed components to be conscious of the dynamics of political priorities and considerations, and to understand that these are not always compatible with preferred operational practices and options. Uniformed leaders need to be sensitive and imaginative within their professional domains and identify ways for the military and police instruments to sustain the political process. In essence, they need to be officers with acute political and diplomatic antennae.

Developing the capacity to lead, then, is about developing the collective level and capacity to produce shared results, whereby everyone engaged must and does fill a leading role in some fashion. Given this, it may also be useful to clarify some aspects that are core to this study. The competing issues which need engagement by senior leaders are sometimes technical in nature, requiring ‘either/or’ technical solutions. More often they are ever-present tensions or polarities that require shared ‘both/and’ attention.

1.1.3  UN leadership guidance and know-how: mission leadership as a continuum

Unsurprisingly, the personnel involved in a mission and the UN Secretariat are the most immediate and important sources of knowledge for mission leaders. Open and attentive leaders will gain a lot by tapping into the accumulated experience, views and insights of those who have led and those who have been led. Mission personnel are likely to believe in much of what they have done and achieved. If that is taken as a point of departure, the MLT will likely accomplish two things: it will win the trust and respect of personnel; and it will have their support for the things it seeks to change or do differently. At the same time, maintaining the long-term trust and confidence of the host state is equally important.

The UN has a rich catalogue of written and official peace operations guidance. There are approximately 200 documents on the UN’s internal Policy and Practice Database, covering everything from conduct and discipline to overarching peacekeeping principles.^[1]

This guidance exists, of course, to provide support for the mission and its leaders, and to ensure effectiveness and the widest possible awareness of UN best practices. Missions typically also have on board a Policy and Best Practices Officer to lead knowledge management and sharing.

Guidance constitutes a formal, comprehensive and experience-based foundation for missions’ daily operations and routines. It falls into different categories and targets a range of leaders, specialists and functions throughout the mission structure. Some are mostly for a particular component. Others should be used by mission leaders more broadly. These provide a framework of standards that enable alignment, efficiency and accountability. The MLT needs to make sure that they are familiar to, understood and applied by all mission personnel. This requires a systematic approach to follow-up, control and reporting.