What Mastery Means for Military Leaders [TED Video]

Art historian and critic Sarah Lewis delivers a thought-provoking TED talk on “The Near Win,” a concept that espouses the immeasurable gain resulting from just-missing one’s ultimate goal. She highlights examples of artists, musicians, and Olympians in explaining that developing Mastery in a craft is all about “staying at our own leading edge.”

There is parallel connection to the military in that we, like an Olympian archer, must hone our craft through repetition after repetition. Sarah Lewis comments that:

Success is hitting the 10 Ring, but Mastery is knowing that it means nothing if you can’t do it again, and again, and again.

But success in battle requires not only individual Soldier Mastery, but also organizational Mastery. Do we work military organizations with enough repetitions to reach Mastery?

TED Video: “Lead Like the Great Conductors”

With humor and poignancy, this TED Video could be a leader development session by itself. Conductor and business consultant Itay Talgam shares the varying styles of great symphony conductors, revealing lessons on organizational behavior, emotional intelligence, leadership styles, and many others.

Watch this video with your team and keep the following questions in mind for discussion:

  • What do Talgam’s points have to do with the conduct of military mission command?
  • How do the conductors set boundaries and conditions for the orchestra?
  • What role does emotional intelligence have in leadership?
  • How do great leaders respond to change? What about setbacks or failure?
  • What inspiration should the leader provide for the team? Does it depend on the type and talent of the team?

Subscribe to The Military Leader

Complete Archive of Military Leader Posts

Back to Home Page

3 Traits That Will Get You Fired

When was the last time you saw a military peer get fired from a position? Doesn’t happen too often, right? In the civilian world, the last several years has been characterized by high unemployment and a difficult job market even for new college graduates. In contrast, the military is intentionally difficult to enter, but also hard to be removed from. Why is that?

Several reasons are important:

  • The military invests a lot of time/resources in developing specialized skills
  • The nature of service is honorable and we give the service member much credit for volunteering to serve
  • Service members are not easily replaceable
  • The military asks a lot of its service members, so it gives a lot of leeway for marginal behavior
  • Service members typically move every 2-5 years, so supervisors can “wait out” bad performance and pass it down the line

As a leader, you have mediocre performers on your team, the ones who fulfill their duty and not much more. They keep the organization running by learning just enough to progress in the military’s “up or out” system. They’re not destructive, they’re just there.

But how do you identify the bad apples, the ones who will have a corrosive, or even dangerous effect on your unit or another unit down the road? What subordinate traits are unacceptable and worth of dismissal?

12 Things Good Bosses Believe (Rule #8)

One of the best tests of my leadership — and my organization —
is “what happens after people make a mistake?”

Robert Sutton’s 12 Things Good Bosses Believe continues to provide insight for military leaders. Sutton explains that of his five books on business and leadership, #8 is the most important lesson:

Failure is inevitable, so the key to success is to be good at learning from it. The ability to capitalize on hard-won experience is a hallmark of the greatest organizations — the ones that are most adept at turning knowledge into action, that are best at developing and implementing creative ideas, that engage in evidence-based (rather than faith- or fear-based) management, and that are populated with the best bosses.

The military has a lineage of “no fail” leadership. There are clearly times when error, failure, or underperformance are unacceptable. (On this 70th anniversary, the D-Day landings at Normandy come to mind.)

D-Day Landings

There are also times (I’m sure you can recall from your own experience) when military leaders have exercised “no fail” leadership in situations that were slightly less decisive as D-Day. Unit meetings in garrison come to mind, where I’ve observed a commander routinely rip into the staff for minor (and often unavoidable) deviances from his perfect expectations. What is a person or team to do when they offer their best effort only to be cut down and reminded of their failings?

There are basically three responses to failure:

  1. Nobody notices. In the military, not identifying failure is worse than overreacting to it. Given the importance of our military mission, this typically does not happen in the areas of warfighting. However…don’t forget that “what doesn’t get checked often doesn’t get done.” It’s easy to assume that areas like counseling and property management are “good to go” and not identify a problem until critical system failure.
  2. The team gets crushed. In this case, the individual or team gives it their best but falls short, and the leader gives no allowance for not meeting the standard. Sometimes a leader has to intentionally do so to make a point, but leading without allowance for failure destroys creativity, morale, and learning.
  3. The leader uses failure to grow the team. Provided that failure wasn’t illegal, immoral, or unethical, the leader should use every opportunity to calmly walk the individual/team through a process to objectively capture the facts, identify successes as well as faults, and then extrapolate the appropriate lessons. This leader assumes that everyone is doing their best and wants to learn. And when the leader couples this process with positive feedback for the parts that went well, the result is immeasurably productive.

The effects of having a measured response and using failure to grow will be twofold:

  1. Productivity will increase. The team members will feel inspired to seek excellence, won’t be afraid of failure, and will be enabled to try new methods.
  2. Trickle down effect. Your subordinate leaders will follow the leader’s example and treat their teams in a similar way, which elevates the entire organization’s growth.

Questions for Leaders:

  • What determines how you react to failure? Your mood? The severity of the failure? The frequency of failures?
  • What is your threshold for what is an acceptable failure and what is not? Have you clarified your philosophy to your team?
  • Do you know how your subordinates react to their team’s failures?

Leave your comments below and be sure to share your thoughts with your team.

“12 Things Good Bosses Believe” was published on the Harvard Business Review online leadership blog May 28, 2010.

Subscribe to The Military Leader

Complete Archive of Military Leader Posts

Back to Home Page

Commander-Centric Leadership

“Why can’t we get anything done when the commander leaves!?!?”

Yesterday, we saw that leaders who empower subordinates and avoid micromanagement will likely see improved results and better work environments. But, pushing power down the chain is not such a simple concept in the military.

Army Regulation 600-20 plainly states:
“Commanders are responsible for everything their command does or fails to do.” There’s no misinterpretation: if it goes wrong, it’s the commander’s fault.

Take yesterday’s news about 9 Air Force commanders fired because subordinates cheated on skills tests. They were fired because their command decisions set a climate where officers felt pressured and were able to cheat on the tests.

Our military revolves around its commanders. They are the only leaders who can make decisions about the mission, structure, actions, and well-being of the command. This clear charter of responsibility, while a necessary aspect of our duty, can stall subordinate staff members who do not want to cross the commander’s decision authority.

“Commanders delegate sufficient authority to Soldiers in the chain of command to accomplish their assigned duties, and commanders may hold these Soldiers responsible for their actions.” AR 600-20 tells commanders to find a balance between delegation and control, but also charges them to develop and teach the unit’s members. This development not only shows the staff how they can support the commander’s decision making, but also prepares the staff members for their eventual commands in the future.

Questions for Leaders

  • Have you specified what decision authority your subordinate leaders can exercise?
  • Do you give left/right limits and let your subordinates make their own decisions in that band? Or do you require everyone to do it ‘your way?’
  • Have you asked your team for feedback about the command climate and the environment for decision making?

http://themanagersdiary.com/diary-entry-231-does-absence-make-the-staff-grow-stronger/

Subscribe to The Military Leader

Complete Archive of Military Leader Posts

Back to Home Page