in this month diplomatic issueSir Lawrence Friedman, one of Britain’s greatest strategic thinkers, criticized President Vladimir Putin’s misguided invasion of Ukraine under the title Why War Fails.
It could have been titled as accurately as “Why Businesses Fail”.
Kyiv, UKRAINE – AUGUST 21: Ukrainians arrive on Khreshchatyk Street to see the seized troops. … [+]
Friedman, emeritus professor of war studies at King’s College London, says senior military leaders aren’t all that different from leaders in any environment, including business. And like leaders in other environments, the way a leader behaves can have a significant impact on the success or failure of a company.
don’t lead like a dictator
“Dictators can certainly make bold decisions about warfare, but they are far more likely to be based on their own uninformed assumptions, and they can be challenged in a deliberate decision-making process. “Dictators tend to surround themselves with like-minded advisers and value loyalty over competence.”
The same is true for autocratic business leaders. And challenging your own assumptions and encouraging too much healthy debate, whether in the boardroom or on the battlefield, often leads to bad decisions.
Freedman said this puts field officers in a tough spot, the equivalent of middle management in the military.
Orders are sometimes inadequate because they are based on outdated and incomplete information and can be ignored by even the most diligent field officer. In other cases, perhaps there are better ways to achieve the same end, so their implementation may be possible but unwise. can look for alternatives to outright disobedience. They can procrastinate, follow orders half-heartedly, and interpret orders in ways that are more suited to the situation they face.
Western militaries have tried to address this inevitability by pushing decision-making down to the lowest possible level. This is variously called “mission command” or “Auftragstaktik.
Facilitate decentralized decision-making
“Western countries have increasingly sought to encourage subordinates to take the lead in dealing with the situation at hand. Commanders rely on those close to action to make important decisions. But we are ready to intervene if events go wrong. “Russian command philosophy is more hierarchical. In principle, Russian doctrine allows for local initiative, but the arranged chain of command does not encourage subordinates to risk disobeying orders. .”
Or even question them. He said Putin’s authoritarian approach to leadership was very dangerous for lower-level leaders to speak out, let alone think for themselves.
“In an authoritarian system like Russia’s, officials and officers should think twice before challenging their superiors,” Friedman says. “Life is easiest when you act according to the will of your leader without question.”
Sound familiar?
If you work or have worked for a large company, I’m sure you do. Most large companies work much the same way, even if they don’t intend to. This is a big problem not only for employees, but also for shareholders.
Again, the solution is to enable and facilitate decentralized decision-making.
“The value of delegated authority and local initiative will be one of the other key lessons from this war,” concludes Friedman, noting that it is only possible if certain conditions are met. He added, “There must be a relationship of mutual trust between those at the highest and lowest levels. Commanders at the highest level have the intelligence and ability to do the right thing in difficult situations.” However, subordinates must be confident that the commander-in-chief will provide them with the support they can.
Effective leadership is therefore a two-way street. Senior leaders must ensure that those facing coal have the cognitive capacity to make good decisions. These frontline leaders need to let the top of the house know what’s really going on so they can get the support they need to adapt to the situation on the ground.
It’s the same in corporations and war zones.
.