Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 28 replies
  • Subscribers 14 subscribers
  • Views 2316 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

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

Andy Millar
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
  • 0

    Mission Command.  Letting the subordinate commander make decisions.  Delegating responsibility; however, not abdicating.  But some may not think this is the case!



    Comander’s Intent.  A subordinate commander would have the same broad concept and understanding of where their left and right arcs are and what decisions they can make that they believe will lead to the end-state: the commander's desires.



    After 37 years in the military I do not believe the military are excessively hierarchical it just appears that way, especially if you are dealing with those working for the DLO or Command.  Everybody is answerable to a boss!



    Whatever group (Administration, Logistics, Engineering or Support), in the military we train, train, train.  However, accidents still happen, pieces of equipment gets lost.  Exactly the same everywhere else.  Yes we learn to adapt and or improvise, we communicate and listen, but sometimes we get it wrong.  There are also those who infer they did not get the message or do not speak up when they know something will not is wrong.  But it is very rare that someone goes to work to have a bad day, nevertheless sometimes it does happen and we learn by these mistakes.



    Usually commanders rely on their NCOs to get the job done.  They are the ones with all the experience.  A good leader will listen to his NCO and then provide the direction, but it is still his team that gets the task completed.  There maybe occasions, out in the field, when a team is led by an NCO, they are perfectly capable of making the correct decision and looking after their troops, as long as he knows his commanders intent.



    I have investigated a many incidents, one such incident was a bunch of NCO were asked to complete a task.  With the best endeavours they attempted the job in hand until an incident occurred. Luckily no-one was injured.  This was a simple everyday task and procedures were well documented.  What I took away from this incident was that even though they were all NCOs, no one took the lead.  Additionally, the individual who gave out the task, did not delegate a lead.  They all wanted to get the job completed.  If someone had stepped back to see what was happening, it could have reduced the potential for the incident occurring.  The root cause of the incident was a maintenance failure, unbeknown to the team.  Not having a leader was a contributory factor.



    In the two case you describe, the incidents appear to be due to human error.



    How many times had it happened before?  We should not be looking to blame, we should be looking for the root cause and how to prevent the incident from happening again: just culture and psychological safety.


Reply
  • 0

    Mission Command.  Letting the subordinate commander make decisions.  Delegating responsibility; however, not abdicating.  But some may not think this is the case!



    Comander’s Intent.  A subordinate commander would have the same broad concept and understanding of where their left and right arcs are and what decisions they can make that they believe will lead to the end-state: the commander's desires.



    After 37 years in the military I do not believe the military are excessively hierarchical it just appears that way, especially if you are dealing with those working for the DLO or Command.  Everybody is answerable to a boss!



    Whatever group (Administration, Logistics, Engineering or Support), in the military we train, train, train.  However, accidents still happen, pieces of equipment gets lost.  Exactly the same everywhere else.  Yes we learn to adapt and or improvise, we communicate and listen, but sometimes we get it wrong.  There are also those who infer they did not get the message or do not speak up when they know something will not is wrong.  But it is very rare that someone goes to work to have a bad day, nevertheless sometimes it does happen and we learn by these mistakes.



    Usually commanders rely on their NCOs to get the job done.  They are the ones with all the experience.  A good leader will listen to his NCO and then provide the direction, but it is still his team that gets the task completed.  There maybe occasions, out in the field, when a team is led by an NCO, they are perfectly capable of making the correct decision and looking after their troops, as long as he knows his commanders intent.



    I have investigated a many incidents, one such incident was a bunch of NCO were asked to complete a task.  With the best endeavours they attempted the job in hand until an incident occurred. Luckily no-one was injured.  This was a simple everyday task and procedures were well documented.  What I took away from this incident was that even though they were all NCOs, no one took the lead.  Additionally, the individual who gave out the task, did not delegate a lead.  They all wanted to get the job completed.  If someone had stepped back to see what was happening, it could have reduced the potential for the incident occurring.  The root cause of the incident was a maintenance failure, unbeknown to the team.  Not having a leader was a contributory factor.



    In the two case you describe, the incidents appear to be due to human error.



    How many times had it happened before?  We should not be looking to blame, we should be looking for the root cause and how to prevent the incident from happening again: just culture and psychological safety.


Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines