💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 5415.gmi captured on 2023-09-08 at 17:43:25. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2023-01-29)

➡️ Next capture (2024-05-10)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Why Special Ops Stopped Relying So Much on Top-Down Leadership

2015-05-29 08:31:51

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.