| Empowering
Individuals To Make Smart Decisions |
Safety. Liability.
Loss prevention. Managers typically point to these issues when asked
about business risks. But what about the risks involved with decision-making?
Every day, employees make hundreds of decisions which impact an organization's
success or failure.
Making intelligent business decisions is never easy-even with complete
information. But uncertainty can make the process even more risky.
Looking for a model of decision-making excellence? Look no further
than the U.S. Marines. They seem to have mastered the process. This
is exactly what David H. Freedman discovered when he spent a few days
aboard the USS Tarawa. The following pages summarize the main points
he made in the April '98 Inc. Magazine article, "Corps Values."
Conventional business processes and management practices can place
your organization at considerable risk. With the frantic pace of business
today, centralized decision-making will cripple your company. Executives
would do well to heed two of the Marines' most closely held beliefs:
|
War
is chaos, confusion, and the unexpected.
|
|
Because
of that difficult fact, the only way to succeed as an organization
is to push the ability and authority
for decision making down to the Marines who are on the spot.
|
Translation: to survive in today's chaotic business environment, executives
must train and empower everyone in their organizations-from senior
managers down to front-line employees-to make timely, sound business
decisions.
To decentralize
decision making and truly empower individuals, the Marines have developed
a simple hierarchical structure which adheres to the "rule of three."
Essentially, each Marine:
|
has
three people for whom he is responsible;
|
|
must
keep his or her attention focused on only three tasks or goals
at a time; and,
|
|
when
making decisions, must boil down an infinite number of possibilities
to three alternate courses of action.
|
This rule leads to a tall and narrow organizational structure, which
may conflict with the advice of today's management gurus who promote
flatter, "more nimble" companies. But when things start happening,
the Marines collapse layers as needed. In uncertain or rapidly-changing
situations, Marines at all levels are expected to make decisions without
consulting the chain of command. Even privates know they're empowered
to do whatever is necessary to complete a mission. Says Major General
John Admire, commander of an infantry division at Camp Pendleton,
"If your decision-making loop is more streamlined than your enemy's,
then you set the pace and course of the battle."
By adopting the rule of three, an organization can push out decision-making
authority while keeping everyone's job manageable. The rule narrows
each individual's focus and responsibility, thereby minimizing confusion
and promoting more sound decision-making.
| The
Right Stuff for Making Decisions |
When pushing down
authority in an organization, senior managers must place effective
decision makers at lower levels. To trust these individuals' judgement,
executives must have confidence in employees' decision-making skills.
The Marines make the hiring and training process a top priority. In
fact, a selection and training position is the most prestigious slot
a Marine officer of almost any rank can have. (Consider the relative
prestige of a typical human resource position).
To screen out those who don't have "the right stuff," new Marine candidates
are put through the unique hell know as the Officer Candidate School
(OCS). "School" really isn't the right word. The purpose of OCS is
not to teach its pupils; rather, it is to weed out those candidates
who do not possess the leadership qualities that make a good Marine.
In essence, OCS is a 10-week, 24/7 job interview.
Once a raw lieutenant completes OCS, he or she attends the Basic School.
This is quite different from other training institutions, such as
M.B.A. programs, because it promotes the breeding of "generic, high-speed,
chaos-proof leadership over imparting specific skills." The Marines
believe the ability to quickly grasp concepts, analyze problems, and
motivate people is much more important than specialized expertise.
Thus, the Marines place strong emphasis on cross-training. In a traditional
organization, a manager may assume front-line responsibilities a few
days a year. But in the Marines, regardless of an officer's area of
expertise, he or she will periodically be transferred to positions
completely outside that area. This way, the entire organization benefits
by developing a body of "plug-and-play" managers-individuals capable
of filling almost any role and responding to any crisis.
| Developing
Generic Leadership and Decision-Making Skills |
Rules, checklists,
and pre-defined processes don't work for teaching leadership. So,
the Basic School hones decision-making skills by exposing Marines
to as many scenarios as possible. This helps new officers learn to
recognize patterns and apply those patterns to new, but similar, situations.
Dealing with uncertainty helps the Marines further develop decision-making
skills. While in training, Marines must complete exercises with more
demanding problems than anything they are likely to see in a real
crisis. But until the exercises actually begin, the officers have
no idea about exact missions, timing, and obstacles they will face.
Once headquarters delivers specific mission orders, officers meet
to determine their plan of attack. Unlike most organizations, Marines
believe the fewer people involved in a task, the greater the likelihood
of its success. They keep meeting and task force members to the absolute
minimum-everybody beyond that minimum should be used on another job.
This intelligent deployment of resources streamlines decision-making
and makes the most efficient use of available officers.
Whatever the mission, Marines have little time to decide on, plan
for, and execute it. Together, they work to put their orders in the
most succinct, relevant terms possible. Using a checklist, they quickly
develop the mission by determining the following:
|
Potential
strengths and weaknesses (e.g., knowledge of an area or specific
risk factors).
|
|
Assumptions
(i.e., what they will and will not face).
|
|
Things
they must not do.
|
|
Aspects
of the mission which require clarification from headquarters.
|
| Dealing
With Incomplete Information |
Often, a number
of key questions remain unanswered when the mission begins-frankly,
the Marines don't have time to wait for the answers. Indecisiveness
is a fatal flaw. If officers wait for complete information, they may
give the enemy an opportunity to regroup and take the advantage. So,
if and when additional information arrives, the Marines adjust their
plans on the fly.
Making decisions in the face of incomplete information takes some
getting used to. But, the Marines believe the "70% solution" has a
distinct advantage over a perfect solution (if one exists), because
the 70% solution can be executed immediately. And, if swiftly executed,
even a less-than-perfect solution stands a chance.
After developing the mission, the next step in the decision-making
process is to determine an "end state"-a realistic, measurable goal
that reflects the team's capabilities and limitations. This end state
is a critical concept because Marines generally don't tell their subordinates
how to do things. Instead, leaders specify the current situation and
the desired end state, leaving the details of execution up to subordinates.
Here again, lower level officers are charged with making decisions,
freeing more senior officers to concentrate on other problems.
Once the end state is clear, the group's last duty is to propose three
alternative missions that might achieve their goal. While traditional
organizations might automatically work toward agreement on a single
mission, Marines practically demand disagreement. Enlisted officers
are expected to express concern about questionable orders or decisions.
The debate provides Marines with valuable information they can use
to select the best alternative.
The Marines' commitment
to decentralized management and decision-making did not happen overnight.
It evolved over the Marine Corps' 200+ year history, driven by the
need for risky, lightning-speed, focused assaults. Obviously, such
missions would never succeed within a bureaucratic organization. Decentralization
has also been fueled in recent years by the need to stave-off dramatic
downsizing efforts. To differentiate themselves from the Army, the
Marines must become faster and more efficient in responding to an
expanding range of scenarios.
To keep pace, the Marines are developing entirely new forms of decentralization.
They are currently conducting field experiments using handheld computers
to develop a coherent picture of enemy and ally positions. The goal
here is to get enough information back to base so squads can make
better decisions about where to call in fire.
The decision-making techniques employed by the U.S. Marines have obvious
value on the battlefield. When a corporal is faced with a life-or-death
decision, he or she must have the authority and skills to make a split-second
yet sound decision. But, many of the methods the Marines use can be
equally valuable in the business world to cope with the ever-increasing
pace of change. For as General Admire notes, "Whether you're pursuing
peace or profit, there's a lot of tough competition out there."
This article is
brought to you compliments of Central Michigan Staffing © 1998. All
rights reserved.
|
|
