In the American movie Jungle-2-Jungle, a prominent business leader goes to the jungle, and while there he sends a message to his employee to sell all of his coffee shares. However, his battery dies before he manages to confirm that he wants to sell the coffee.
His employee, unwilling to act without confirmation, doesn’t sell the shares, and much of the movie revolves around the two men attempting to sell the coffee shares that are quickly diminishing in value.
Recent advances in technology have shortened the already very short lines of communication maintained in American business. According to a study done by American University in Washington, D.C. “a typical manager receives hundreds of emails a day, and that consumes a substantial amount of work hours.”
In response to this trend, companies such as PriceWaterhouseCooper have created internal rules restricting email on holidays and non-business hours. A survey by the Society for Human Resources Management states that one in four companies have created similar rules.
In the U.S. business environment, managers expect to be kept informed of even small developments in projects under their supervision. In practice this means that managers are often cc’ed on routine emails relating to the „nuts and bolts“ of a project, even if the content of the email does not require input from the manager. This practice is done to ensure that the manager has situational awareness of his team members’ work.
Face-time is an informal term Americans use to describe direct communication between team member team lead. Some team members focus on their work and are less concerned with their level of personal interaction with management.
Others believe – and some evidence supports – that the more often they are seen by their management, the more favorable the perception is of their work.
Because Americans continue to link success with „hard work“, defining it in terms of hours spent in the office – starting early, ending late, coming in on the weekends, instead of work results and their impact on the bottom line – getting face-time remains common.
Buzzword: an important-sounding, usually technical word or phrase often of little meaning used chiefly to impress laymen; a voguish word or phrase.
Leadership. A buzzword. Not only management books, seminars and trainings profess their teaching of leadership skills. Universities, high schools and even some elementary schools have gotten into the act. Grouped under the heading of leadership is an array of topics, from communication to decision making to conflict resolution to business ethics. Leadership has become an umbrella-term for almost any skill considered to be critical to success.
But, we’re interested in the core meaning of leadership. In the specific, daily interaction between leader and led, between team lead and members. Even more specific, we want to understand how team lead and member together manage the line between strategy (the what) and tactics (the how).
To get a sense for the shared inner logic of that fundamental interaction in a given society, one needs to understand it in at least four areas essential to any functioning society: How a society defends itself (military); How a society organizes itself (government); How a society feeds itself (business); and how a society teaches and practices interactions analogous to each of those three areas (sports).
If a given society is stable, if it is flourishing, there will be a common leadership logic in each of those four areas. How could it be any other way? Can a well-functioning, stable, successful society have one leadership logic in the military sphere and another in the political or commercial sphere? Isn’t what a society teaches its young men and women in sports representative with how that society functions (or should function)?
We compare. The relationship between officer and soldier. Offizier und Soldat. Between president and cabinet. Kanzlerin und Kabinett. Between CEO and CFO, COO, CIO, etc. Vorstandsvorsitzender und Vorstandskollegen. Coach and player. Trainer und Spieler.
The All-Employee Meeting – also called All-Hands or Town Hall Meeting – is an effective and important forum American management uses to communicate directly with their entire organization. Its goal is not so much to go into the details of the organization‘s strategy, but instead to lay out its broad lines.
The AEM also allows for a question and answer period which gives both management and employees a forum to spontaneously address topics of particular concern. In addition, the AEM serves the purpose of motivating the team to work harder, faster, smarter.
Twenty years ago American football coaches would communicate the plays they wanted executed by sending it in with a player substitute. After that they tried using hand signals. For several years now they simply speak via communications technology directly with their key players.
Basketball coaches have no need for any communications technology. They stand directly on the side of the court within speaking distance from the action. Baseball managers continue to use hand signals.
The American military places extraordinarily high value on the development and usage of any and all technology which shorten, improves, quickens the communication between commanders and commanded. Combat helmets are outfitted with cameras and radio communication allowing for direct, one-to-one communication with each and every soldier.
It is said that the President of the United States can speak at any time, from any location, with any armed forces pilot in the sky. The 2012 raid on Osama bin Laden‘s compound was watched by the president and his national security team from the White House situation room.
President Abraham Lincoln was know for making unscheduled visits to Union officers and troops. Successful American leaders never lose touch with their people. Conversely, capable team members find ways to remain in constant communication with their team lead and other important members of management.
The Office is an American comedy television series adapted from a British series of the same name. The series depicts the everyday lives of office employees in a branch of a fictional paper company.
The office’s manager, Michael Scott, constantly interrupts his workers in an attempt to inspire them and win their approval. His efforts usually fail in a humorous way. Although this is a comedy, the manager’s frequent attempts to keep updated on his employees’ work and interact with them personally is similar to actual office environments.
The scene from the White House south lawn on August 9, 1974, is vivid in the nation’s memory. That morning, President Richard Nixon famously boarded Marine One for the final time, put on a wide grin and fired off a final double-V to the assembled crowd.
But one of the most interesting aspects of that day is what didn’t happen on the south lawn: Even though Nixon had more than two hours left in his tenure, the most critical tool of the modern presidency had already been taken away from him. He never noticed it, but the nuclear “football” didn’t travel with him as he boarded the helicopter, and later, Air Force One for his flight back to California.
Moreover, Defense Secretary James Schlesinger recalled years later that in the final days of the Nixon presidency he had issued an unprecedented set of orders: If the president gave any nuclear launch order, military commanders should check with either him or Secretary of State Henry Kissinger before executing them.
Schlesinger feared that the president, who seemed depressed and was drinking heavily, might order Armageddon. Nixon himself had stoked official fears during a meeting with congressmen during which he reportedly said,
“I can go in my office and pick up a telephone, and in 25 minutes, millions of people will be dead.” Senator Alan Cranston had phoned Schlesinger, warning about “the need for keeping a berserk president from plunging us into a holocaust.”
How a society fundamentally defines the everyday working relationship between leader and led – between two levels of hierarchy – is imbedded in how that society defends itself. In its military.
If that working relationship does not function well, if it fails, not only is the respective mission in jeopardy, the very lives of the soldiers are at risk. Defining and managing the line between strategy and tactics is in the military context a matter of life and death.
The American military tradition in practice involves a close working relationship between leader and led, between strategy and tactics.
The U.S. Army Field Manual 22-100 states: “Leadership is the process of influencing others to accomplish the mission by providing purpose, direction, and motivation. Purpose gives soldiers a reason why they should do difficult things under dangerous, stressful circumstances. Direction shows what must be done. Through motivation, leaders give soldiers the will to do everything they are capable of doing to accomplish a mission. Effective leaders use both direct and indirect influence to lead.”
Mission Command. The U.S. Army’s Training and Doctrine Command Pamphlet 525-3-0 states: “Mission command is the conduct of military operations through decentralized execution based on mission orders. Successful mission command demands that subordinate leaders at all echelons exercise disciplined initiative, acting aggressively and independently to accomplish the mission within the commander’s intent.”
Army Leadership Doctrine: U.S. Army Field Manual 6-22, Part 3 describes a direct leader as someone who “influences others person-to- person …. instructs, recognizes achievement, and encourages hard work.”
A direct leader carries out the goals of higher-level commanders on a day-to-day and minute-to-minute basis. Because higher-level leaders cannot dictate the specific actions that should be taken in every possible situation, direct leaders must act independently. However, their actions, and those of their subordinates, always support the commander’s intent:
“At the direct level, a platoon leader knows what a battalion commander wants done, not because the lieutenant was briefed personally, but because the lieutenant understands the commander’s intent two levels up. The intent creates a critical link between the organizational and direct leadership levels.”
Section 7-26 distinguishes between long-term, strategic intent – which is a written statement indicating the goals of the operation – and day-to-day intent, which is communicated more informally from the direct leader to his subordinates. “Leaders in command positions use commander’s intent to convey purpose. The commander’s intent is a clear, concise statement of what the force must do and the conditions the force must meet to succeed with respect to the enemy, terrain, and desired end state.”
It states further: “Besides purpose and motivation, (direct) leaders influence also consists of direction. Direction deals with how a goal, task, or mission is to be achieved. Subordinates do not need to receive guidance on the details of execution in all situations. The skilled leader will know when to provide detailed guidance and when to focus only on purpose, motivation, or inspiration.”
Omar M. Bradley, an American four-star general during the Second World War, summarized the relationship between soldier and non-commissioned officer in the following way: “In battle, the American soldier wants to know that the job is going to be done right, with no unnecessary casualties. The non-commissioned officer is supposed to be the best soldier in the platoon and he is supposed to know how to perform all the duties expected of him. The American soldier expects his sergeant to be able to teach him how to do his job. And he expects even more from his officers.”
In addition to teaching and directing their subordinates, direct leaders must constantly supervise the work of their soldiers. FM 6-22 points out that effective supervision requires leaders to get to know their subordinates very well. “Proper supervision is essential to ensuring mission accomplishment to standard. It is an integral part of caring for soldiers. The better they know their unit and subordinates, the more they can strike a balance for finding the details.”
Although constantly “looking over their shoulders” is not something that American direct leaders should do, they are expected to tell subordinates both what is to be accomplished (mission intent) and how it is to be accomplished (instructions). The detailed instructions direct leaders give to subordinates is [not are? The instructions; plural.] a key hallmark of American military leadership.