Leadership with freedom to think

a way to create energetic employees.

In the army is there a concept called maneuver thinking, it is used when planning and commanding an operation. Two core elements in this are viewed as the key to success: concepts of pace and initiative. Norwegian forces leadership philosophy “mission-based leadership” is based on this giving both.

I, therefore, want to explain what “mission-based leadership” is, and how this will be capable to create the initiative. Not only why this is necessary for armed operations, but also how this can also be used in civilian workplaces.

Although the article may be colored as part of my military experience, much is directly transferable to any leadership situation. Leadership is in many ways always about developing those around you, and the goal is that they become better than yourself. Here, mission-based leadership can be exercised on many levels.

The background for mission-based leadership

This will probably seem very military but hang with me. The basic idea in maneuver thinking as it was presented in the previous section, is by using momentum in operations and attacks, one can both destroy the enemy and defend oneself. This can be compared with the fact that attacking a projectile launched into the flank will be impossible (Forsvarsstaben (FST), 2004, p. 21). If you relinquish shielding to significantly increase the strength of the attack and the possibility of rapid movement. Will you achieve the same in theory as you would have had if you had focused on framing and shielding.

The bonus will be that by moving more rapidly than the enemy, creating new dilemmas with the help of momentum. Will the enemy constantly have to use the OODA-loop (Rouse, 2021) to make a new assessment. It then comes down to who conducts the most appropriate assessment at a given time, not least to perform it the fastest. Mission-based leadership represents a key issue here to achieve this.

Mission-based leadership represents a philosophy of how military forces should be led where decentralization of decision-making authority is essential. This is to produce a relatively higher operational pace than the enemy. To achieve this, the information in the assignments needs to state clearly what is to be achieved, and why it is to be achieved. The primary goal here is to provide guidance for the mission solution, but it does not describe how it is to be achieved. However, this does not deprive the leader of the assignment of planning in detail.

Mission-based leadership in practice

A prime example of this would be that the commander has issued an order for a fire attack to be carried out in position X. Information is given about other own and possible enemies in the vicinity. The boss has planned the best possible arrival route is through a dense forest. He has therefore set out a security team around to ensure safe passage. The purpose of the assault is to ensure that the fighting spirit of the enemy decreases by inflicting heavy losses, without putting themselves at greater risk than necessary.

During the march to the fire attack, the team leader receives a message from the scout in front. The road they had intended to take is not possible to use, the enemy has established sentries there. The team leader then decides to follow a different route. It may take a little longer, but it makes certain they achieve their goal. Halfway through the new route, they discover another camp for the enemy. The size is twice as big as the one they were initially supposed to attack.

The camp is unknown to the headquarters, and a quick reconnaissance indicates that a fire attack here is possible. They have no connection in this part of the forest, so providing information to HQ about this is impossible. The team leader based on his mission intention decides that attacking here is better. This was not the initial mission, but the purpose behind inflicting heavy losses on the enemy, as well as lowering the will to fight will however apply.

It is not a get out of jail free card.

Mission-based leadership does not allow for order refusal. On the other hand, it ensures that better decisions that the boss has not necessarily thought of can be carried out. However, there is a catch, the purpose of the assignment still needs to be carried out. It all comes down to loyalty to the mission with the operation and the intention in mind. It is about a willingness to do more than what is expected of you. This is the very core of mission-based leadership. Willingness to and possibly breaking orders from the troop commander to ensure the most beneficial possible outcome of the initial order.

If the team leaders in this example had to go back until he received contact coverage. Then provide new information, wait for an answer. For then to initiate an attack or move on, it could have led to them being discovered or the enemy moving. The possibility of such an attack would thus no longer be present. Put differently, they had lost the little momentum they acquired. We can then conclude that detailed orders will limit our room for maneuver unless there is a culture of defying the order for the purpose of loyalty to the mission.

This is the recipe!

So, what does this have to do with workplace management? For mission-based leadership to be successful, there are some criteria on which it is based. A study of German and Prussian tradition led to six characteristics of assignment-based management (Jacobsen, 1996). There must be mutual trust. A squad leader must trust his team leader that he acts on the best intention for the mission and the community, this spread both ways.

Emphasis must be placed on education that develops enterprising and independent officers with good judgment, and not least the development of a common way of thinking.

Decentralization and intention leadership must be implemented. Assignments cannot be threaded from the top. A company commander who gives an order to the troop commander must not interfere in how the team commander of the troop commander performs his given assignment when the order is granted.

They can participate in the planning phase. On the other hand, when this has been done, the team leaders must be given the freedom to act and work, as he perceives the situation there then. The last two criteria are that you have a strong obligation, as well as a sense of responsibility for the assignment. You must emphasize quality in what you do.

What this means for you!

All this is directly transferable to a civil company. During my time in the civilian market, I have witnessed a variety of leadership styles. Everything from the determined leader in sales and service, to the tactical leader in project management. A general trait of these is there has often been one way to solve the problem and that is how it should be. The leader of the sales team believes that calling out is the best way to generate new sales. And the project leader believes his solution is the best to solve the problem.

These thought sets deprive the employee of planning and thinking independently. An excellent example of mission-based leadership within sales would be to say that today the goal represents a sum. How the employee reaches this sum they can select themselves, but remember you do not give away your responsibility as a leader. Instead of telling them what they can not, or need to do. Maybe you present options such as: call out to new customers, existing customers, receive service phones sell then on in or email. The choices are many, but as a leader, you must guide your employees where this is required.

The difference between leadership and management here is thin. But in the end, you are one who hauls the load along with the rest and leads. As mentioned earlier, mission-based leadership does not allow you to not plan for your employees. You should still decide and plan, but your employees know they have the opportunity to change if necessary.

If we look at someone who manages a project, the same theory applies here. You can either say this is how I demand it, or you can ask for thoughts and solutions around the task. At this time, you can also divide the task into smaller parts and spread it out, therefore providing your employees the opportunity to work independently. You should not let go of your work tasks here, but the focus will be on following up, guiding, and making decisions along the way. This is the opposite of managing everything yourself, as well as directing your employees in your direction. I repeat you should continue to plan and lead. But you provide an environment that allows new ways of thinking and that, not everything, goes according to a specific plan.

You should always establish a direction for where work should lead. But also, be aware that along the way there may present obstacles. The road that was intended to follow is maybe no longer possible. You cannot always be in the car at the front of the column. You are therefore dependent on that the employees can think independently.

Your responsibility!

As a leader, you have a responsibility to develop those around you to represent the best of themselves. And preferably better than yourself. This is not possible if you consistently have to explain how to do it.

You have to try and release them, trusting the staff is doing the best for you. Not only does it lead to a pleasanter working environment, the development of a sense of responsibility. But also provides you the opportunity to establish an enduring bond in the form of power and trust (Sweeney, Matthews, & Lester, 2011). You can read more about this topic here: Understanding Trust and Power

In summary

Assignment-based management can lead to tactics that you may not consider as possible during planning, being able to be developed along the way.

Decentralizing leadership becomes easier to deal with when you establish a clear goal and work towards it. You recognize what to achieve and have a plan for it. However, you know that if necessary, you can alter the plan.

The freedom of action given here is built on a relationship of mutual trust. It is, therefore, significant to train and educate leadership skills whenever possible.

And as always, it is, however, your responsibility as a leader to make a plan. But it is permitted to alter it, you might not always know best.

Remember to make sure you give this post 50 claps if you enjoyed it and want to see more.

Reference

Forsvarsstaben (FST). (2004). Forsvarets doktrine for landoperasjoner. Oslo: Kampen Grafisk A.S.

Jacobsen, J. O. (1996). Militærorganisasjonen : utfordringer og dilemmaer . Bergen: Institutt for administrasjon og organisasjonsvitenskap, Universitetet i Bergen.

Sweeney, P. J., Matthews, M. D., & Lester, P. B. (2011). Leadership In Dangerous Situations. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press.

Rouse, M. (2021, 01 25). OODA loop. Retrieved from: Tech Target: https://searchcio.techtarget.com/definition/OODA-loop