This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Are there lessons we could all learn from how the modern military copes with unexpected situations?

Hi,


A couple of serious issues I was involved with this weekend made me think of this. One was in the engineering world to do with the day job, I was reviewing a very serious incident report (fortunately no fatalities but very close) involving a mixture of everyone trying to do the best they could, but perhaps over reliant on structured checklists which had completely missed an entire piece of equipment in a fairly unique situation. The other was a medical issue in the family, once again all the individual hospital staff were doing their best, but there was a bit of the process that just didn't cope with a particular situation.


Which made me think of something that's long been at the back of my mind: I've never worked in a military environment, but my impression of the modern military from the contacts I have had is that there is still a very structured hierarchy, chain of command, and focus on process, but equally it appears that somehow there is also the ability for small units to have the skills and freedom to evaluate and make their own decisions when challenging circumstances arise - exactly the key skills that were missing in the two examples above. 


So really two questions I'd really like to know other people's views on (particularly those who have worked across both the military and civilian worlds): firstly are my impressions above correct? And if so (or even if a bit wrong but on the right lines) are there lessons we can learn from how this works that we can apply to the management of engineering activities in the wider world - particularly in safety critical issues where we need structure but also need the ability to rapidly and effectively cope with new problems when they come up?   


Thanks,


Andy
Parents
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    Hi Andy, I was thinking how best to describe 'Commander's Intent' then found this which is a reasonable explanation


    "Commander’s Intent means explaining why something must be done when assigning a task to someone. The more your agent understands the purpose behind what must be done, the better he/she will do it. By being clear about the purpose behind a plan, others can act toward that goal without the need of constant communication."

    https://personalmba.com/commanders-intent/ 


    It is also more than that, in terms of the wider context of achieving an outcome and setting follow on conditions that are required from the initial outcome/task.


    So for instance, saying to a team leader 'I need you and your team to achieve X in two months using these resources' might seem to allow initiative and (mission command), but depending on how the result is achieved might end in a positive or negative follow on context. For instance, if a team leader achieves the task in two months, or less, with the resources provided, or more efficiently, but in the process damages the company reputation, has the best in the team leave, undermines another team's contributing part, or backs the company into a corner which doesn't allow further advantage beyond stage 1, then that is limited use of Commander's Intent in a 'tactical' bubble.


    However, it would be better to provide the team leader with the bigger picture within which his task must succeed. So perhaps a better task would be "I need you and your team to build your team skills and cohesion in achieving X using these resources, as the first step of increasing customer satisfaction and retention, developing new business opportunities, increasing our reputation to attract new talent and being a lead as an ethical and responsible business'.


    Such a bigger picture contextual briefing provides the 'tactical' intent of achieving the immediate task, but explains this task in the context of the 'operational level' intent of growing the business, within the overall strategic context of being a vanguard ethical/responsible operating company (a B Corporation perhaps). It also provides the answer to the military campaign planning question of those delivering the Commander's Intent at all levels - what is my part in the plan/strategy in achieving the Commander's Intent?


Reply
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    Hi Andy, I was thinking how best to describe 'Commander's Intent' then found this which is a reasonable explanation


    "Commander’s Intent means explaining why something must be done when assigning a task to someone. The more your agent understands the purpose behind what must be done, the better he/she will do it. By being clear about the purpose behind a plan, others can act toward that goal without the need of constant communication."

    https://personalmba.com/commanders-intent/ 


    It is also more than that, in terms of the wider context of achieving an outcome and setting follow on conditions that are required from the initial outcome/task.


    So for instance, saying to a team leader 'I need you and your team to achieve X in two months using these resources' might seem to allow initiative and (mission command), but depending on how the result is achieved might end in a positive or negative follow on context. For instance, if a team leader achieves the task in two months, or less, with the resources provided, or more efficiently, but in the process damages the company reputation, has the best in the team leave, undermines another team's contributing part, or backs the company into a corner which doesn't allow further advantage beyond stage 1, then that is limited use of Commander's Intent in a 'tactical' bubble.


    However, it would be better to provide the team leader with the bigger picture within which his task must succeed. So perhaps a better task would be "I need you and your team to build your team skills and cohesion in achieving X using these resources, as the first step of increasing customer satisfaction and retention, developing new business opportunities, increasing our reputation to attract new talent and being a lead as an ethical and responsible business'.


    Such a bigger picture contextual briefing provides the 'tactical' intent of achieving the immediate task, but explains this task in the context of the 'operational level' intent of growing the business, within the overall strategic context of being a vanguard ethical/responsible operating company (a B Corporation perhaps). It also provides the answer to the military campaign planning question of those delivering the Commander's Intent at all levels - what is my part in the plan/strategy in achieving the Commander's Intent?


Children
No Data