Calm
Some reflections on leading Soldiers in times of calm and uncertainty
In early 2017, the war in Afghanistan was winding down.
The world seemed relatively calm.
The American economy was pretty strong less than a decade from the Great Recession, Russia wasn’t threatening Ukraine (after its successful invasion of Ukrainian territory a few years earlier), the saber-rattling with China wasn’t nearly at the level it is now, Iran was quiet, and besides the conflict in Syria, there were no major conflagrations in the world.
That was great for the world, but bad for a lowly company commander who was trying to keep an infantry company motivated. If Soldiers can clearly see the next fight on the horizon, then they feel like they are training with purpose. But with no enemy to fight, why train hard? It’s hard to see the purpose of your job if there doesn’t seem to be any realistic scenario in which you apply your skills. And if there is one thing we know about young men, it’s that not having a purpose is not good.
Soldiers with no purpose struggle to relate to each other through the rigorous training required to achieve a common goal. And when they struggle to relate to each other and turn inward, harmful behaviors start to surface. Drinking alone in their barracks. Driving their car too fast, alone, just for the thrills. For the married ones they take their frustrations out on their spouse and their kids, rather than work it through with their teammates. A soldier without a purpose is like a working dog that never gets exercised, he starts chewing on things and biting his own tail and barking at everything.
It’s easy to motivate an infantry company when your country has a clear and present enemy. In WWII it was the Krauts, in Korea it was the ChiComms, in Vietnam it was Charlie, during the Cold War it was Ivan, and at the beginning war on terror, it was insurgents. But in 2017, it wasn’t obvious if there would be a next fight or who we would be fighting.
As soon as I took command, I knew I needed to create a sense of urgency. I had read this in Leading Change by John Kotter, and it made sense. Sure, nothing was going on. But things can change in the world. And when they change, they change fast.
So, I decided to use 9/11 as an example of how the world can change in minutes. Everyone remembers 9/11, so I was sure that this would resonate with people. Who knows when the next 9/11 might happen, right?
I gathered the company together to give them my semi-prepared speech.
“Who here remembers 9-11?!”
About 25% of the hands went up…
…I had expected all the hands to go up. Who could forget 9-11?!!!
Then it immediately dawned on me. This company is mostly 19-21-year-olds, they’re too young to remember 9-11!
I pivoted on the spot.
“That’s right! Many of you are too young to remember that the entire world can change in one day!”
I gave myself a psychological high-five and finished my speech about the importance of training hard so that we would be ready for anything.
“War porn” was pouring out of Syria, which was very hot at the time. Videos of souped-up fighting vehicles doing battle in bombed out cities, rag-tag groups of soldiers roaming through rubble and firing their weapons at anything that might be an enemy. I found as much footage as I could and distributed it to the company’s NCOs to watch with the soldiers.
It wasn’t much, but it was all I had at the time to keep them motivated.
We planned hard training. I coordinated for helicopters to use in training as much as I could—young soldiers love riding in helicopters (and so did I).
Luckily, I had great NCOs. They were on board with what I was trying to do—keep the Soldiers actively engage without overworking them; making them feel cared for and appreciated while still maintaining strict discipline. I made frequent visits to the barracks on the weekends where I would hand out little airplane bottles of alcohol and chat with the Soldiers.
My wife was instrumental in putting together the type of Family Readiness Group (FRG) that she would want to be a part of, not the kind that was typical at the time—super clique-y and dominated by a few extroverted wives. This effort was so far from the traditional mold that it deserves its own essay.
All these efforts paid off. Our instances of misconduct were the lowest of any similar organization in the 4th Infantry Division. In fact, I never got a call on the weekend about a soldier who got himself in trouble—not one time. I only had one Soldier get a DUI, and it was over the summer block leave—and, honestly, it was kind of BS…he fell asleep drunk in his car in a parking lot (but at least he didn’t drive).
Today is very different from when I first came into the Army in 2011. Iraq and Afghanistan were still hot, and most of us infantry knew that we’d likely be deploying to one of those places to fight. There was a clear enemy in both places. We had learned a lot after a decade fighting the GWOT, and we knew what we were getting ready for.
As a platoon leader, my Soldiers and NCOs knew what was ahead. We would deploy to Afghanistan and fight the insurgents using GWOT specific tactics, techniques, and procedures. When the green pop-up targets presented themselves to be shot, we imagined the Taliban.
Now as a staff officer, tucked away in a cubicle away from the shooting ranges and training areas, I am not as close to the rank and file as I was a company commander. But even from a distance I can feel the challenges that young officers are facing as they lead their units through gunnery progressions, NTC rotations, and overseas training and deterrence missions. Some certainly excel at the difficult task they have been given, but many seem to be struggling.
Today there is more uncertainty in the world than there was in 2011 or 2017. Israel, Iran, Ukraine, and the Indo-Pacific all seem to have potential for US intervention, but it is hard to see the direct road to conflict. When the green pop-up targets present themselves now, it’s unclear if they are Russian, or Chinese, or Iranian, or a terrorist of some kind. There is a lot of potential for conflict, but what that conflict will be is uncertain.
Despite the uncertainty, or maybe because of it, the rhythm of Army life has not slowed down. Long training progressions that include weeks away in the field, month long rotations to combat training centers to fight wargames, and multi-month deployments across the globe for the strategic purpose of reassuring allies and deterring adversaries, all take a toll on units—especially when they are back-to-back-to-back.
Maybe I am misreading the situation, but leading Soldiers in today’s global uncertainty feels much harder than leading them in a time of relative calm, like 2017, and much harder than leading them when the US is actively involved in a conflict. But despite the difficulties inherent to uncertainty, the fundamentals don’t change. Yes, giving Soldiers hard and realistic training is critical, but so too is caring for them and making sure that they know that they are cared about.
Good leadership is as critical during these times as it is at any other, even if it is more challenging.
Thanks fir this article!
Great article on the role of a leader and on maintaining readiness and esprit de corps.
Re: "keep the Soldiers actively engage without overworking them." When I first joined the government as an employee(regular public service, not armed forces like you), leaders used this approach. If there was a week between big assignments, the leaders would assign us an internal project to keep us active, engaged, and focused.
This wouldn't be "fake work" or "bisywork"; rather, it would be a "nice to have" project that isn't essential to core business, but which nonetheless helps prepare the team.
For example, in a unit working on homeless in our country (Canada), during a slow week, the leaders might assign teams to report on what major IS, UK and Australian cities were doing to address homeless.
This kept us focused and learning and it kept us working as a team. The team could be asked to presetheir findings to senior management (our equivalent of officers), which is a good opportunity for the staff to develop confidence and a good chance for senior management to do talent spotting.
As well, since it was a non-essential "nice to have" project, it was a place that the leaders could take risks, like assigning a person their first team leader role. If the person couldn't handle the stress or struggled with issuing directions or dealing with interpersonal squabbles, this was a good way to see who was ready to rise, and who needed more time to grow.
Over the decades, there has been a move away from doing these non-essential projects during slow periods. I think that's a shame, since they serve a valuable purpose for keeping the team engaged, helping the team develop skills, and testing our people in new roles.