When asked by a peer and fellow field grade officer, Major Josh Powers, to discuss my thoughts that would best prepare the recent graduates of Command and Staff as they transition back to the operating forces, many themes and ideas came to mind. One idea stood alone…
By now, you’ve probably been inundated with advice on how to be an effective staff leader as an Iron Major serving in an S3 or XO role. You’re eager to establish efficient systems for operations and administration, develop a brilliant PSOP, lead the staff through MDMP, translate your commander’s intent into guidance and taskings, and oversee a command post. You’ve probably received some valuable warnings about the ways in which Majors fail. However, successful completion of every task and every mission as a Major means little if you leave a trail of burned-out, bitter, and cynical staff officers and NCOs in your wake. You are now visible to a far broader audience, especially company-grade officers and mid-career NCOs who may be nearing decision points about their future in the military. Unfortunately, the caricature of the grouchy, miserable Major stroking the commander’s ego and sleeping in the office has gained considerable traction in military culture. Gifted junior officers will often see this as a glimpse into their future and choose to pursue another line of work. Understanding and practicing the intangible elements of field grade leadership – beyond staff systems and MDMP – can elevate you from the clichéd stereotype of the grumpy, overworked, “yes–man” clawing for a top-block evaluation to a transformational leader that brings out the best in your unit and its people.
It was Romania, and four feet of snow had fallen the night before. Nearly all functions base-wide had been shut down for two days, but my Detachment still had a mission to do. With limited support, to include an impassable three-mile stretch to our office, my Detachment Sergeant and I were literally frozen in time. As we walked through a dug out tunnel of snow to our dining facility, we war-gamed what was important, what could wait, and what just didn’t matter anymore. We knew that we had to decide how and when to put our soldiers in harm’s way to complete the essential aspects of our mission. Even considering the Army’s prescribed Mission Essential Tasks (METs), our definition of essential had changed.
Most of us have experienced Homer in high school or perhaps college, so this story should not hold any surprises. Though I did not expect them, I found a few new things to share.
U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Shawn White, 20 Jan 2020
Over the course of my career, I have had some incredible experiences to discuss strategy with some of the world’s most brilliant minds. One particular moment that really stands out to me is when I had the opportunity to sit in an off the record meeting, in a small, intimate group with a former Secretary of Defense, who I had previously served under. Although I did not agree with all the decisions he had made, through the conversation I came to better understand how he came to those life and death decisions. It was illuminating to hear him discuss the difficult decisions of his career and then his reflection upon in retirement. Ultimately, did what he felt was right at the time for American security and few people have been in such an important role under that kind of microscope. Learning from people with this kind of experience is the best means to prepare for future difficult decisions. This opportunity did not come as part of a formal military program but through a Young Leader program at a think tank.
Humility has taken its place in the pantheon of critical military leadership qualities in recent years. The highest praise of a senior leader often is that they accomplish great goals through their units – with a sense of humility. Toxic work environments, operational failures, and personal indiscretions all appear to stem, in part, from an underlying lack of leader humility. The challenge for military leaders is that humility exists on a continuum, and too much humility can lead to passivity and indecision. Also, attempts to demonstrate humility through statements and acts can give off an aura of disingenuousness. Given the amorphous and contradictory nature of humility in military leadership, the concept may provide little functional utility for officers. The following narrative attempts to give a brief framework of the factors that allow officers to lead in the optimal zone of humility.
In more than 20 years of service there have been several opportunities to offer guidance, mentorship and opinions to other Soldiers on career moves and life decisions. Every situation is slightly different as most individuals have slightly different career, life or family goals. While it may make sense for that aspiring general to move their family five times in six years, it may not be the right move for someone who believes in the Chief of Staff of the Army’s guidance that taking care of our people is the key to success.
This year’s Command General Staff College will be graduating and PCSing (hopefully) in the midst of a pandemic that has fundamentally changed the daily lives of people across the world. As these newly minted Majors head back out across the force they are taking the institutional knowledge imparted upon them that will continue to move the Army forward. But it is important to take a look at how COVID-19 has possibly changed some of these lessons learned in the classroom.
This year’s graduation week initiative will be focused on conducting an “after-action review” of sorts to take a look at how we did in the ongoing response to COVID-19. We all saw leaders across the force do an exceptional job leading organizations through this and we have also seen the struggles to break our norms like haircuts and mass formations for accountability. So how have we done? How will the Army’s experience and DOD inform the future? What systems succeeded or failed? Did Mission Command work in this de-centralized environment or did it prove we talk the talk, but not walk the walk with MC? Should more staff work be done via telework? How else will COVID-19 shape the force moving forward?
Contact us at fglinitiatives@gmail.com if you are interested in writing a piece for Graduation Week or have additional questions.
Many – if not all – Field Grade Officers (FGOs) can recall the enormous leap from being a highly proficient tactician to an accomplished strategist at a Joint Command. Up until that point in their career, they had forged reputations based on applying their technical expertise in complex scenarios that left little time for second guessing and debate. The first day serving at the operational or strategic level can be particularly nerve-racking. After offering an extensive overview of the mission to a new Major in our Division at Joint Command, he asked how he could best prepare for his new position. The response was simple; read as much as possible. Professional developmental reading will always have a place in each officer’s growth, but every officer can benefit from purposeful reading that facilitates a depth of knowledge capable of assessing dynamic complexities across a wide spectrum of problems.
Town hall meetings across the Army in recent weeks have been filled with similar rhetoric from leaders: “we will be safe where possible, but we still have to train in order to maintain our readiness.” Stories from social media and the Army Times have detailed the specifics of this guidance. Large accountability formations, morning physical training in groups, physical fitness tests, Expert Infantryman Badge testing, barracks cleaning parties, units headed to the field to train, the stories of leaders flaunting CDC guidance are almost unending. All of this is being done in the name of readiness. Medical readiness is not simply about ensuring a unit is “green” on MEDPROS slides. Leaders who blindly strive to meet requirements, without understanding or complying with the intent behind them, are missing the point. Leaders seem to forget that health, perhaps more so than training, is an essential part of readiness. While disease is an invisible threat, history shows us that ignoring it or treating it as a tangential factor in decision-making is a costly mistake.