The Battle of Little Bighorn is one of the most analyzed engagements in United States history. The events leading up to the conflict and the execution of the battle have allowed many people to gain valuable knowledge while gaining a concrete understanding of what unfolded on that fateful day. After the Civil War, tensions between Native American tribes and the U.S. military led to a number of bloody clashes as the United States ambitiously sought to expand westward. General Phillip Sheridan led the three-pronged campaign to break up concentrations of Sioux and Cheyenne Indians on reservations to enable expansion efforts into the Dakotas. Among General Sheridan's command was Lieutenant Colonel George Armstrong Custer. On June 25, 1876, the Seventh Calvary led by Custer fought and then was wiped out by Cheyenne and Sioux forces along the Little Bighorn River in southern Montana in one of the greatest massacres in state history. -United. Throughout the preparation and execution of the operation at Little Bighorn, mission command doctrine can be analyzed to better understand how and why the massacre occurred. According to ADRP 6-0 Mission Command, the U.S. Army defines mission command as "the exercise of authority and direction by the commander using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the scope of intent of the commander to employ agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations.” .” When applying mission command to the Battle of Little Bighorn, Custer (as commander) was responsible for accomplishing a number of tasks. Lt. Col. Custer demonstrated poor mission command by failing to understand, visualize, lead and lead throughout operations...... middle of paper...... despite warnings From his own scouts, Custer failed to understand the capabilities of both the Sioux and Cheyenne Indian tribes. Additionally, Custer failed to visualize the overall end state of the operation by greatly underestimating the Indian forces he faced. Custer continually demonstrated poor leadership during the operation by dividing his command into three groups and failing to recognize how variables such as terrain could prevent effective command and control during the engagement. Finally, a commander must lead throughout the operational process, and Custer clearly could not lead effectively by dividing his forces before confrontation. Many failures ultimately led to Custer's defeat, but investigating the battle provides insight into how the application of effective mission command can greatly affect the outcome of any battle..