In this article we interview LTC Ian Palmer, an extremely successful leader and professional team builder. LTC Palmer discusses leadership at the Field Grade level and tools he has employed over the years to manage time, tasks, and priorities. 

LTC Palmer commissioned as an Armor Officer from Notre Dame in 1997. Assignments include Fort Hood, Wuerzburg, Schweinfurt, Fort Polk, The Pentagon, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, and Fort Benning. LTC Palmer has served in various positions as a Field Grade Leader including Squadron S3 and XO, Brigade Combat Team XO, Stryker Squadron Commander, and as Squadron Commander for the 1st Security Force Assistance Brigade.

LTC Palmer (right) addressing the formation

“There is at least one thing worse than fighting with allies – And that is to fight without them”  

-Winston S. Churchill

Sitting down in a conference room surrounded by blank whiteboards and charged with developing a plan can be a daunting task for a group of Army planners. The task becomes increasingly difficult in a joint environment, as planners wrestle with joint and service doctrines, service-specific jargon and acronyms, and conflicting service interests. These challenges multiply in a bilateral or multinational environment. Yet this is a situation that we will face more frequently as the trend of coalition operations continues, and working with international partners becomes our new normal. Unfortunately, while doctrine addresses the planning process broadly, there are no doctrinal references that address the actual nuts and bolts of combined planning, laying out the hurdles to multinational planning at the operational planning team (OPT) level.

U.S. Army Soldiers assigned to 1st Battalion, 30th Infantry Regiment, 2nd Inf. Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Inf. Division and the Senegalese Army’s 1st Paratrooper Battalion rehearse mortar crew drills July 12, in Thies, Senegal as part of Africa Readiness Training 2016.

What is the worst trap an operations officer can fall into? From my perspective, it is falling in love with the plan. Anyone who has been an S3, planner, or action officer knows the emotion that I am describing here. It occurs in the moment when someone attempts to provide constructive comments, and you take the side of “the plan” instead of listening to their perspective. You instinctively shield “the plan” like a protective parent sheltering their child from the rain. After years of planning all kinds of things, I still find myself falling into this trap from time to time. Here are three thoughts to help with perspective in planning:

March 13, 2014 – Photo courtesy of Christopher Bodin

Do you get frustrated when someone throws roadblocks in the way of progress? I certainly do. I get really, really angry when someone on the staff derails progress, focusing on why a plan will fail instead of figuring out how to make it succeed. There is always someone who starts with no, focusing on every regulation, doctrinal imperative, and potential friction point to prevent action. But what’s the true source of this frustration? Is it truly about the organization, or does it become personal when someone challenges your work? Effective leaders realize that it isn’t about being right or wrong. Intelligent organizational leaders use diverse and divergent thinking to make projects stronger rather than letting their ego get in the way. Here are three quick thoughts on using divergent thinking to the team’s advantage – the change starts with you.

A Soldier in Basic Combat Training with Company A, 3rd Battalion, 13th Infantry Regiment, at Fort Jackson, S.C., exits the Skyscraper obstacle by falling several feet onto a mat at the confidence course, June 22.

Empathy: In the context of conflict, empathy is your ability to appreciate someone else’s perspective. Rather than writing someone off as an obstacle, have the patience to think through their concerns without bias. A good perspective is that analyzing these arguments only strengthens your initiative.

Humility: I am a flawed leader – I often take conflict or disagreement personally. In the context of professional disagreement, humility reminds me that my initiatives and approach are always flawed. Facets of my plan will always be flawed, and divergent perspectives can be credible.

Compromise: Once a leader has considered divergent perspectives and applied critical analysis to their approach, they can pursue stronger initiatives and plans. Good leaders compromise, understanding that being right is less important than collaborative inclusion.

Organizational leadership is not about being right. Organizational leadership is about maximizing the diversity of a team through collaborative inclusion.

Check out more thoughts on improving your organizational leadership here