 July 2019 saw a huge revision of U.S. Army doctrine. Like everything in the Army though, as much as things change they also stay the same. One of the biggest revisions is the reintroduction of Command and Control into Army lexicon. One of the main reasons this was done was because the concept of Mission Command never took hold across the joint community. The joint force maintained command and control and when joint operations took place that was the terminology used. The reintroduction of command and control into army doctrine synchronizes the Army with the rest of the military arm of national power, yet how the Army approaches command and control will be familiar to anyone who has been leading in the Army over the last decade. The Army has relegated mission command from being a warfighting function and redefined the essence of mission command. Mission command is now “the Army’s approach to command and control that empowers subordinate decision making and decentralized execution appropriate to the situation.” It is how the Army will conduct command and control of assigned and attached forces. Yet this new definition does not fix a problem the Army has struggled with since the inception of mission command, what does it really mean and how do we effectively execute the concept? The concept is easy enough as defined by doctrine, let subordinate commanders make decisions that are best for their formations and that fit within the higher commander’s intent. Commanders should let go of micromanaging their formations and let leaders lead. Yet this concept is where commanders are getting into the most trouble. Commander’s Intent remains a critical component and arguably the most important principle of mission command. Too many times, the staff plans and develops operations without the commander’s input. The commander does not take an active role in the planning process and therefore does not adequately provide the needed intent. Without the commander’s intent subordinates cannot use their judgment and initiative to make decisions that further their higher commander’s intent. The result is the cascading of an operation further from what the command may truly want executed. The execution of operations becomes like the game of telephone with messages being altered and modified the further down they travel. Ultimately what you end up with is an exercise or operation that is not what the commander envisioned but is the collaborative project of the staff guessing what the commander wants to achieve. Commanders may be doing this with the intention of exercising mission command, but with the intent of allowing their staff the freedom to plan in an unconstrained environment. But the intent of mission command is to allow subordinate commanders the freedom to act within set parameters and guidance, not the staff. The staff requires the active engagement of the commander to develop courses of action that fit the stated guidance and intent. They need active injection of the commander’s vision during the process so the end product is unified under one intent. This critical step then allows subordinate commands the freedom to make decisions in environments that prevent consultation with higher. Subordinate commanders would all have the same broad concept and understanding of where their left and right limits are and what decisions they can make that they believe will lead to the end-state the commander desires. This is achieved through the addition of a new critical principle of mission command that rivals in importance to commander’s intent. The addition of competence also changes how one views commanders and leaders as it is now a critical component and arguably the foundation of successful execution of command and control using the mission command approach. Competence starts with the leader being tactically and technically proficient but also requires that all the leaders and soldiers under that commander be competent. Competence directly feeds the other principles of mission command, such as mutual trust, and shared understanding. A leader builds competence in their teams through training which builds that trust and gives everyone a common upbringing to fall back on when forces are separated. A competent leader providing their intent is the backbone for the execution of mission command under the command and control construct. The new definition of mission command has not done much for helping a force that struggled with its understanding in the first place. However, identification and application of the key principles to the successful implementation of the mission command will help bridge that gap. Commanders must be involved in the planning and execution process and cannot ride-along while the staff attempts to guess at the vision and intent for the operation. Competent leaders will provide their intent and in doing so will enable their staff to plan training that builds competence, trust, and understanding throughout the formation. Subscribe to The Field Grade Leader! MAJ M. Reece Collins is an Active Guard Reserve Signal Officer in the United States Army Reserve. He currently serves as a Current Operations Officer in an Expeditionary Sustainment Command and completed his KD time in Armored Brigade Combat Teams and a Combat Aviation Brigade.
Background The aim of this article is to connect Good Soldiering and mission command with the daily purpose, habits, thinking and actions of our people as they operate in teams as partners, followers and leaders. This article examines how mission command - as a system of thinking, cooperation, collaboration and action - is available for all of us to enhance and enable the Australian Army’s Good Soldiering cultural optimisation program. Having defined Good Soldiering and mission command, this article then employs the seven principles of mission command – competence, mutual trust. shared understanding, commander’s intent, mission orders, disciplined initiative, and risk acceptance – to connect both concepts. This article concludes that, through daily-habits, practice, rehearsals, diligence and vigilance, Good Soldiering and mission command are a powerful combination, enabling our people and teams to achieve their personal, professional and cultural potential. Good Soldiering and Accelerated Warfare Good Soldiering is Army’s cultural optimisation program focussed on assuring trust in our people as military professionals while ensuring Army is both ready now and future ready in order to master Accelerated Warfare. Good Soldiering promotes an enduring culture of optimal performance: as individuals, as teams and as an Army.[2] Accelerated Warfare requires our people to be ready now and future ready in an era characterised by volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity.[3] As a central idea in Army’s thinking, Accelerated Warfare describes both our operating environment and how we respond to challenges and opportunities from:
In an Accelerated Warfare environment, strength of character from our people, our teams and our organisation - embodied in Good Soldiering - is a key element of the moral component of fighting power.[6] Strength of character sustains our trust in each other and safeguards our legitimacy with the Australian people, allies and partners. Strength of character combines ethical and moral decision-making with vigilance against unacceptable behaviour. It is central to ensuring that our Army remains trusted as a national institution while promoting cohesion in our teams and with our partners. This in turn, enhances our capability as an Army in Motion which constantly and consistently adapts, changes and learns so our people and teams can reach their personal, professional and cultural potential.[7] Mission Command Mission command requires tactically and technically competent people and teams operating in an environment of mutual trust and shared understanding. Mission command builds effective teams and nurtures command climates in which leaders encourage people to take risks and exercise disciplined initiative to seize opportunities and counter threats within their commander’s intent. Through mission orders, commanders focus their people and teams on the purpose of an operation rather than on the details of how to perform assigned tasks. This allows people and teams the greatest possible freedom of action in the context of a particular situation. Finally, when delegating authority, commanders set the necessary conditions for success by allocating resources based on assigned tasks and accepted risk.[8] Connecting Good Soldiering and Mission Command Having defined Good Soldiering and mission command, this article now employs the seven principles of mission command – competence, mutual trust. shared understanding, commander’s intent, mission orders, disciplined initiative and risk acceptance – to connect both concepts through our purpose, our habits, our thinking and our daily actions. Together, Good Soldiering and mission command are a powerful combination for our people, and our teams, to achieve their personal, professional and cultural potential. The seven principles of mission command assist all of us with framing our approach to Good Soldiering. For success, both mission command and Good Soldiering require our constant collective efforts to ensure we are ready now and future ready to master Accelerated Warfare. Seven principles of Mission Command and Good Soldiering 1. Competence Tactically and technically competent people and teams are the foundation of effective mission command. Competence performing assigned tasks, to an agreed standard, is achieved via repetitive, realistic, and challenging training, combined with life-long learning through employment, education and professional development. Competence gained through common experiences develops teamwork, trust, and shared understanding that people and teams need in order to realise mission command and unity of effort.[9] Good Soldiering emphasises competence through our commitment to our profession. This commitment requires us to instil confidence in our people and teams through our professional mastery and shared excellence. Good Soldiering also values competence demonstrated through our unwavering strength of character – individually and collectively – at home, in the community, in the barracks, in the field and on operations. The good character of our people and our teams is demonstrated by our adherence to the four Army values of courage, initiative, respect and teamwork.[10] 2. Mutual Trust Mutual trust is the result of shared confidence between our people and our teams based on reliability and competence in performing their assigned tasks. There are no shortcuts to gaining people’s trust. Over time – hours, days, weeks, months and years – trust is built, by all of us, on values, caring for people, consistent leadership, commitment, two-way communication, personal example and common shared experiences. People are more willing to exercise initiative when they believe their commander and team trusts them by accepting and supporting the consequences of their decisions.[11] Good Soldiering is focussed on enabling and nurturing trust in our Army as a military profession, ensuring we are ready now and future ready to master Accelerated Warfare. Good Soldiering articulates that, as Australia’s Army, we live Army’s values. We are anchored by trust and our connection to community and country. Preservation of that trust, through exemplary conduct, is essential.[12] 3. Shared Understanding Shared understanding of an operating environment, task, purpose and approaches to solving problems forms the basis of unity of effort enabling peoples’ disciplined initiative. Effective decentralised task execution is not possible without first achieving a shared understanding.[13] Shared understanding is enabled by two interdependent variables: collective knowledge and connected actions.
Both collective knowledge and connected actions are perishable, especially when people and teams are pressured in volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous environments. Therefore, when not in pressured environments, people and teams must consistently train, learn and educate to test and sustain our skills in sharing and nurturing our application of collective knowledge and connected actions. Good Soldiering, under the rubric of preparedness, brings people together to share information and integrate capabilities from community, joint, interagency, regional, coalition and multi-sector partners. We strengthen our relationships through shared vision and purpose. We understand, respect and embrace differences in our people and our teams. 4. Commander’s intent The commander’s intent is a clear and concise expression of the task, purpose, limitations, conditions and end-state of an operation. Commander’s intent, personally prepared and delivered, provides focus to our people and teams for achievement of the commander’s desired results without further orders, even when the operation does not unfold as planned. Commander’s intent, nested and reinforced at each level of command, provides the basis for unified actions throughout the force. A succinct and clear commander’s intent that people and teams can remember and understand, even without an order, is key to maintaining unity of effort.[15] Good Soldiering emphasises commander’s intent and unity of effort as essential foundations for Army’s cultural optimisation based on the Chief of Army’s five command themes of: preparedness, people, profession, potential and partnership. These five command themes enable our people to take action to continuously improve ourselves, our teams, our Army and our partners, not only on the battlefield but in all areas, all the time.[16] 5. Mission Orders An order is a communication—verbal, written, or signalled—that conveys instructions from commanders to their people and their teams. Orders provide guidance, assign tasks, allocate resources and delegate authority. Most orders contain five elements: situation; mission; execution; administration & logistics; and command and signals.[17] Mission orders emphasise achievable results, not how results are achieved. They are neither so detailed that they stifle initiative nor so general that they provide insufficient direction. Mission orders are succinct and unify efforts, enabling our people and teams to plan their own tasks through understanding the situation, commander’s mission, intent and essential tasks while assessing risk. Employing mission orders, commanders remain solely responsible and accountable for exercising delegated authority through people and teams. In turn, disciplined initiative and coordination allow our people and teams to plan, prepare, and execute their operations to accomplish their own mission.[18] Disciplined initiative, while executing mission orders, creates a culture of high performance. Good Soldiering encourages mission orders through teamwork, enabling our people to harness and employ available resources to achieve their mission. Based on the application of mission orders, the Chief of Army’s five command themes - preparedness, people, profession, potential and partnership - enable our Army to quickly form teams, whenever, wherever and with whomever is required to achieve our tasks.[19] 6. Disciplined Initiative Disciplined initiative is when people and teams work to follow their orders and adhere to the plan until they realise their orders and the plan are no longer suitable for the situation in which they find themselves. The situation may change through:
When the situation changes, our people and teams take action to adjust to the new situation and achieve their commander’s intent through employing disciplined initiative. Importantly, they report to their commander about the new situation at the first opportunity. Enabling disciplined initiative requires a command climate of mutual trust, shared understanding and learning. In training - before committing to combat - commanders practice and learn to accept risk and underwrite the good-faith mistakes of their people. In turn, people practice and rehearse employing commander’s intent to define the limits within which they may exercise initiative. People learn to trust that they have the authority and responsibility to act. Intent provides our people the confidence to apply their judgment in ambiguous situations because they know the mission’s purpose and desired end-state.[21] Army’s Good Soldiering and Our Contract with Australia all require us to ‘lead by example and strive to take the initiative’. As an Army in Motion, with the resources we have available, we are required to use our collective initiative to lead, design innovative training and nurture capabilities to create a culture of high performance. Our initiative is required to create the conditions needed for us to master and succeed in an Accelerated Warfare environment.[22] 7. Risk Acceptance Risk is the exposure of someone or something valued to danger, harm, or loss. Because risk is part of every operation, it cannot be avoided.[23] Commanders analyse risk in collaboration with people and teams to determine what level of risk is acceptable and whether to tolerate, treat or transfer risk, or terminate the mission. In developing courses of action, commanders consider risk to the force and risk to the mission against perceived benefits. They apply judgment regarding the importance of an objective, the time available, and any anticipated costs.[24] In applying judgement, commanders assess:
Reasonably estimating and intentionally accepting risk is not gambling. Gambling is making a decision in which the commander risks the force without a reasonable level of information about the outcome. [25] Mission command requires commanders, people and teams to manage accepted risk, exercise initiative and act decisively, even when the outcome is uncertain.[26] Good Soldiering requires Army’s leaders to understand and use risk to their advantage. It requires leaders to give their people productive and focused work. Importantly, Army’s leaders create environments where we trial new things, learn quickly from failure and share lessons with others. Good Soldiering sees success as workplace and workforce collective efforts inspired by collaboration and cooperation. [27] Conclusion Mission command - as a system of thinking, cooperation, collaboration and action - is available for all of us to enhance and enable the Australian Army’s Good Soldiering cultural optimisation program. This article connects Good Soldiering with the seven principles of mission command. It aims to ensure that both concepts inspire our daily purpose, habits, thinking and actions as we operate in teams as partners, followers and leaders. Through daily practice, rehearsals, diligence and vigilance, Good Soldiering and mission command are a powerful combination, enabling our people and teams to achieve their personal, professional and cultural potential. |
What are the four components described in the commanders intent?
Postagens relacionadas
direito autoral © 2024 estudarpara Inc.
