When people talk about
leadership they love to talk about vision, and mission statements and
‘motivating the troops,’ and all the other pieces that can make being a leader
– at any level – both challenging and exciting. But there is another piece to
leadership, and it is as necessary a part of leadership as are the fundamentals
of vision, intellect, communication and the rest. That piece is the process of
learning from mistakes.
In the military,
particularly in certain high performance communities such as fighter aviation
and Special Forces, there is a process that is known colloquially as ‘the
debrief.’ In fact, there are a broad range of ‘debriefs,’ from the intense, 20
minute long, pointed tactical debriefs that take place immediately after every
flight or every special warfare ‘problem’ – whether operational (real) or exercise, all the way up
through theater-wide collection of ‘lessons learned’ that take weeks or months
to assemble and are analyzed by the various war colleges and such offices as
the ‘Center for Naval Analysis.’
All of these
various efforts have as their goal improving the performance of all those
involved and all those that will follow. Properly done, this process will
improve both the planning and execution of any effort, unit level training, and
the equipment used, and most importantly, will improve the decision-making
ability of those involved.
There are three
major cognitive categories of every de-brief or lesson learned:
- What worked
and Why?
- What didn’t
work and Why not?
- What worked
in spite of your actions?
There are more
possible ways to parse this, but when done properly, these three major
subdivisions will in fact encapsulate all the other possible categories.
This is nothing
more than an effort to learn from experience, so that all benefit from the
mistakes of others. To do it well requires several characteristics, including
the ability to accurately collect information on what has taken place, the
ability to accurately relate and analyze that information, and the ability to
coldly and clinically analyze and evaluate the results. This last item, the ability to
understand what happened and reach an accurate conclusion, is the most
important part of the entire process. Without it the process is meaningless.
And without it, it is impossible to become a top decision-maker.
Good
‘debriefers’ become such because they practice the art for years, continually
honing what can only be described as an art. To watch a top fighter pilot or
SEAL debrief an operation is to understand the full scope of a real
professional. It requires dedication to excellence, discipline and a critical
eye; and years of practice.
Of course, one
of the real problems with Lessons Learned is that if you keep at it long enough
you will eventually arrive at a problem in which the next step is ‘start over
with a completely different concept.’
This is perhaps
the hardest decision that any organization can face – though to give the ‘devil
his due,’ DOD has made this decision from time to time. Examples mainly can be
found in procurement decisions in which certain classes of weapon systems have
been terminated. For example, in the 1960s DOD and the Air Force ended the B-70
high altitude, supersonic bomber when it became clear that the technology trend
for future weapons made the survivability of such an aircraft unlikely.
Businesses have the advantage that they can attach profit and loss figures to
many concepts, making the decision to stop easier in some – but certainly not
all – cases.
But, in the
end, the key is that the experiences of the past need to be continually
analyzed and assessed and good leaders will evaluate those assessments and
decide when it is time to say ‘enough.’
It is worth
noting that this is what is not happening in the federal government; we have
several echelons of leadership that are seemingly incapable of recognizing that
they are incapable of controlling what is happening in the ever expanding and
increasingly complex departments and agencies. Large businesses have the
advantage of clearly understood returns on investment/profit and loss
statements to ‘keep them honest’ – hard data points that allow them to ‘fall
back’ onto more or less objective material; governments do not. Healthcare can
be measured either at the very personnel level – between you and your doctor,
or it can be measured in profit and loss statements among the various
businesses that make up the health care industry. But the efforts to control
large and sprawling operations such as government health care are showing an organization
that has already unraveled. But the leadership refuses to see that the only
reasonable step at this point is to reduce the size of the effort and their own
span of control.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home