© 2005 Donald E. Vandergriff 1 Agenda Part 1 of 3 A holistic view What We say we know We know what to write Why How

© 2005 Donald E. Vandergriff1

AgendaPart 1 of 3

A holistic viewWhat

We say we knowWe know what to write

Why How


What?Guidance begins at the Executive level

Our military culture must reward new thinking, innovation, and experimentation.

President George W. Bush, CitadelSpeech, 23 SEPT 1999


What?Guidance from the top of the Army

To win this war and to be prepared for any other task our Nation may assign us; we must have a campaign quality Army with a joint and expeditionary mindset. A fundamental underpinning of this mindset is a culture of innovation. "Adapt or Die" contains important ideas that clearly describe some significant challenges to innovation in our institutional culture, as well as the behaviors we seek to overcome them. Equally important, the authors question the status quo. We must be prepared to question everything. As this article states, "Development of a culture of innovation will not be advanced by panels, studies, or this paper. Cultural change begins with behavior and the leaders who shape it." We have the talent to establish the mindset and culture that will sustain the Army as ready and relevant, now and into the future.

GENERAL Peter J. Schoomaker,Chief of Staff, Army


What?Everywhere you look-cries for change

“Cognitive Reform Is Hard

A process of cognitive and cultural transformation cannot be accomplished in uncoordinated bits and pieces as it is today. If done right, it might well demand change as sweeping and revolutionary as the Goldwater-Nichols Act. The end state of this effort should be nothing less than a revolution in learning throughout the Department of Defense. This much is clear from past efforts, however: reform of this magnitude is essential, long overdue, and undoable without the commitment of the entire military intellectual community.”

“Culture-Centric Warfare”Major General Robert Scales, Jr.

U.S. Army (Retired)Proceedings, September 2004


What?Do we really know?

We know what we think we want We write and brief great sounding buzz words We put it out there almost as it should happen

without having to change anything else Seems we hope it changes, but we can also

keep the “good ole days” COHORT in the 1980s of major change but

isolated from other institutions Is this occurring now?


What?“Do we really know?”

How many times have you seen or heard these words or statements? The Army must, “Change the culture” “Create adaptive leaders” “Adjust how we train leaders” “Create an environment that promotes innovation” “Change the personnel system” “Have the best leader development system in the world” “Have a world class leadership program”

But, after coming back to reality you think “Do these people really know what it means to implement

these ideas?” “It’s all talk and I have seen this before; only the names have

changed …”


What?The Army has defined the Culture

First the National Command authority, Joint Staff and the Army =Strategy defines end state = Expeditionary Army influenced by society & resources

We start with the strategic problem = the culture

We know what we want, or do we think we know?

Cold War Army

Culture

LeadershipI define as the onemost impacted by

culture

Expeditionary Army

What type of Culture is

needed too?

What type of Leader is needed?

GenerationsOf WarOne of many institutions

that must evolve


What?Expeditionary Army = new culture

Cold War Army

Individual replacements

Doctrine of attrition-massive firepower

Top-down hierarchy & information- centralization

Analytical planning defines result

Heavy and complex tail

Complex, short-shelf life equipment

High training-tempo to offset high personnel-tempo

Joint is “special duty”

Expeditionary Army

Stabilization—unit manningManeuver Warfare doctrine “Trust-tactics” Networking-decentralizationResults drivenInnovation enables constant

modification to doctrine, tactics and force designs

Task organizes lower levelTraining & education determined

by cyclic unit managementJoint is accepted as norm


What? Cultures are different?- “Adapt or Die”

Today’s Culture

Stress “process”

Forecasting

Risk aversion

Bureaucratic

Top-down

Rank equals success

Change is criticism

=>adherence to process ensures success

Future Army Culture

Stress “innovation”

Experimentation

Prudent risk-taking

Agility

Feedback loops

Contribution valued

Change is evolutionary

=>as long as objectives are achieved


What?Army defines what?

Future leaders will have a higher level of doctrine-based skills, knowledge, attitudes, and experience …In fact, the complex nature of future operations may require leaders of greater experience and rank commanding at lower levels than ever before.

TRADOC Pamphlet 525-5: Force XXI Operations

(October 2001)

The extraordinarily high quality of the Army’s human dimension …must rise to an even higher level in the increasingly complex operating environment of the 21st century…particularly…at the level of the combat battalion.

TRADOC Pamphlet 525-3-19Objective Force Maneuver Unit of Action Concept

(October 2003)


Why BOLC*Provide officers with a rigorous framework for leadership

Produce adaptable leaders who embody the Warrior Ethos

Establish a common standard and shared experience built on overcoming adversity and developing respect / confidence with their combined arms peers to produce:

• competent warrior leaders• grounded in combat Soldier tasks • capable of leading Soldiers in today’s COE

*TRADOC’s basic officer leaders course

What?TRADOC defines what?


• Capable of fast-paced action• Responsive to changes measured

in seconds• Extremely flexible• Mentally agile• Capable of independent operations• Technologically proficient• Warrior Ethos

Lieutenants of the Future Force will have to enter the Army already equipped with a sufficiently wide and deep base of

knowledge, intellectual skills, and mental capabilities.

What?Cadet Command defines what?


Attributes: Mental Agility Flexibility Adaptability Physical hardiness Emotional hardiness Followership Dominance

Skills: Decision Making Interpersonal Analytical Synthetic Computer Oral and Written

Communication Information Filtering Research

The bureaucratic understanding of leadership, a checklist: Actions: Team Building Decision Making Values: Selfless Service Respect

“…processes and structures that lend required order and routine to our lives can also hinder innovation. Examples include human resource policies that manage people as inputs rather than outputs, labyrinthine organizational structures that frustrate interdisciplinary networking, and reporting procedures that focus more on things then on ideas.”

BG David A. Fastabend and Mr. Robert H. Simpson “Adapt or Die”The Imperative for a Culture of Innovation in the United States Army

What? Cadet Command check-list response


What?Break the down the goal further

Leadership is one part, but the most important part

But this is what this entire study is about, how to create new leaders

Cold War Army

Culture

Leadership

Expeditionary Army

What type of Culture?

What type of Leader?


What?Second but important part-New Leaders

The most important aspect is how we lead (command) the Expeditionary Army=“adaptive leaders What does the lieutenant of the Expeditionary Army look like? How do we recruit them? How do we challenge them? How do we create them? How do we educate & train them? How do we evaluate them? How do we compensate them? How do we sustain them in the Army?

Big question remains?

What type of culturemust exist to act as a

catalyst toward Evolution?


What?What if it is all talk?

What happens when “Why” moves on, but not we don’t?

The CulturePresent-Strategic

Reform Officer Educationand Training=New ROTC

Goal: Expeditionary

Army

When these do not occurSimultaneously people inbetween become frustrated =ATLDP 2001

Limited changes may occur, some

improvements, butvision is

not achieved

Resistance to cultural change is incredible-many are based on

out-date-assumptions

VISION

An Incredible amount of energyis expended in planning and resources

to make this happen

Sen

ior

lead

ers,

pro

fess

ion

al jo

urn

als,

and

“ex

per

ts”:

“Ch

ang

e th

e cu

ltu

re”

Gu

idan

ce/d

irec

tive

s to

pla

n f

or

chan

ge

Proclamations made, superficial

policies made, butbeliefs, laws, regulations

not changed

Somethingless than planned

achieved, if anything

Maybe anArmy

not ready forthe next

real threat

“Why”


What?More details, more questions?

To provide decision makers and their staffs: A thorough analyses A different prospective on leadership and how to create it A tool to quantify and understand overused statements seen on

briefs: “change culture” “adaptive leaders” “education, vice training”

In order to: Understand that of all the good things the Army is doing,

Leadership development and creation is the least understoodLeadership development must evolveLeadership development is being restricted by out of date

assumptions Recommend holistic reform of how the Army prepares future

officers Because if we don’t start honestly addressing these issues

now, we (the Army and the country) will be in trouble in the future


What?Conclusion should lead to more questions?

Okay, we say what? but leads to other questions: Are willing to reexamine:

The concept of “officer”?The force structure that demands so many officers?Laws and policies that support a bloated top-heavy officer

corps?A culture that awards those that intelligently challenge the status

quo?

Are we willing not to “make mission” to achieve quality?Change Neo-Taylorism terms like “production,” “make mission,”

and “checklists” in the way we evaluate? Create the type of accessions system that will cater to, and

continually challenge the types of people that fit these terms?


WhatConclusion

The Army is good at defining “What”: Admits that our traditional view of war is out of date War and stability operations have merged, creating a need for:

A cadre of officers that must be able to deal with bothBegins the process toward creating the “strategic lieutenant”

Revisits how we define (and conflict with) the concept of selfless service for the Army and

the nation We have to overcome myths when revising our education and training for

cadets: ROTC (leadership development) cannot remain subordinate to the more traditional and

accepted on-campus academic disciplines. Instead, it must: Begin exposing them to complex problem solving, cognitive development earlier Reform every institution that deals with some aspect of creating officers

Documents

© 2005 Donald E. Vandergriff 1 Agenda Part 1 of 3 A holistic view What We say we know We know what to write Why How