💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 5415.gmi captured on 2022-06-11 at 21:42:18. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-12-03)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Chris Fussell
May 27, 2015
When Fredrick Winslow Taylor designed the world s first modern assembly line
and forever changed industry, persuasion was the last thing on his mind. Taylor
believed assembly line workers simply needed clear direction on how to execute
prescribed tasks. His belief, which manifested in both physical design and
organizational structures during the decades that followed, was that the human
factor should be removed from the production equation to the greatest extent
possible. Stopwatch and measuring tape in hand, Taylor designed and advocated
for systems that maximized efficiency and predictability through vertical
integration and top-down control. And with that, the 20th century s great quest
for bureaucratic efficiency began.
Taylor s approach, and the hierarchical models that it created, were the
dominant force of the 20th Century. His influence can be found in everything
from factory floors to Fortune 500 org-charts. But when the information age
arrived, it brought with it networks of globally distributed individuals
suddenly able to connect across boundaries, share information at light-speed,
rapidly attract new members, and create seemingly leaderless action at a pace
that put traditional bureaucracies to shame.
To succeed in this environment, today s leaders must focus on using persuasion
rather than direction to lead their own networks toward a common goal.
This is the critical lesson that the Special Operations community learned
during the early years following the attacks of Sept. 11, when the military s
most efficient and optimized hierarchy took on the task of dismantling Al Qaeda
a globally distributed network without any true form of top-down leadership
and quickly found itself outmaneuvered by an adversary that, when measured on
any traditional scale, was much less capable. In order to compete on this new
type of battlefield, the Special Operations community needed to adapt its
organizational structure transitioning to a hybrid model that retained the
strength and stability of a bureaucracy while allowing (and expecting) internal
and external networks to become the real drivers of action.
In the Special Operations community, those closest to the problem (in our case,
the operators in direct contact with Al Qaeda) were expected to form
relationships (both internal and external to our organization) with
individuals, units, or organizations that would be effective partners in
defeating the threat. These networks were not beholden to org-charts, and were
empowered by senior leadership to constantly adapt and move with great
autonomy. Empowering these networks allowed us to outmaneuver the terrorist
networks we were facing.
In the Special Operations community, there were three critical steps in
accomplishing this:
Understand your problem. We spent many months trying to convince ourselves that
Al Qaeda had some type of traditional top-down structure. This was false, and
our subsequent strategies were bound to fail. In seeing the threat as a series
of interconnected networks, the way we led and communicated shifted
accordingly.
Build the networks. Once you see the interconnectedness of your new
environment, you can begin to identify the internal and external networks that
are needed to overlay the problem some will be internal to your organization,
and some will be with external partners. In the Special Operations community,
we didn t approach this as a standard org-redesign (which are usually just
band-aids), but left the org-charts alone and built networks of relationships.
Because these ties generally can t be found on any org-chart, they are delicate
and require deliberate nurturing. And most critically, they must consistently
articulate the common purpose of the network, reminding all members why they ve
chosen to be a part of the effort.
Lead from the middle. Finally, break the top-down tradition by pulling
yourself, as a leader, into the middle of the network. Rather than being the
collector of all information and the choke point for all guidance, today s
leaders need to see themselves as conduits of information who act as the
central hub. It s not your job to control everything; instead, create an
environment where cross-boundary relationships can grow and those closest to
the problem are empowered to move with speed and precision.
Leaders in all environments must remember that people choose to join networks,
and can just as easily choose to withdraw. To influence such a network, and to
empower it to operate with speed and accuracy, leaders must create and nurture
relationships that span across the vertical divisions on the org-chart
breaking the silos that constrain thinking in so many bureaucracies. As the
network grows, leaders must articulate and over-communicate the network s
common purpose.
To sign on and stay in, network members must be persuaded constantly that
participation in the network contributes to a common purpose that they believe
in and advances their personal or organizational interests. Leaders in networks
must constantly work to create win-win scenarios for the members, some of whom
will likely have competing interests at various times. This requires leaders to
truly understand the varied interests (personal and organizational) of the
network s members. In a diverse network (often the most effective), this will
be a disparate set of interests and leaders in networks must protect these
equities without bias toward any one group.
Leaders that can persuade others to join their network by articulating a common
purpose and rallying others around it will quickly outmaneuver those that rely
on traditional top-down methodology. Today s best leaders are already adapting
to this new reality not checking their stopwatches.
Chris Fussell served in the Navy SEAL Teams from 1998-2012. He is a partner at
McChrystal Group, Senior Fellow for National Security at New America, and
co-author with General (retired) Stan McChrystal of the book Team of Teams: New
Rules of Engagement for a Complex World.