Recently I heard someone, "Defense people have a very structured environment. You follow SOPs, Policies and have an ordered way to do things. But it is different in the corporate. Corporate is all about unforeseen things". That triggered me to write this short article to burst this myth about military leadership. Rather than complex jargon, I tried to use a simple VUCA framework to explain things. (Quick reality check: the term VUCA is originated by the US military post Cold War)
V - Volatility. In other words speed of change. In the corporate one may define it as changing customer preferences, changes in technology, business contexts, and so on. In my field appointments, I have seen operational planning or mission changes almost every day. I was always forced to have an extreme agile mindset to match that speed. I not only used to plan for material and operational changes but also cater for agile manpower decisions.
U - Uncertainty. What will happen in the future? But the most important issue is, how will you respond to those uncertainties? In the corporate, we have BAU/BCP procedures. Again concepts copied from the Armed Forces. Uncertainty was a given for me in maintaining a generation old fighter jet. Material failure, manpower constraints, complex defects, mission requirements, etc were some of the reasons for uncertainty. How did I mitigate? With the help of agile planning, quick decision making, having some buffers, etc. Whether corporate or others, there will always be certain residual uncertainty in any business situation. Military prepared me exactly to understand that and made me realize the true meaning of 'leap of faith' which is needed for any good business strategist.
C - Complexity i.e. number of variables. More the number of variables more is the complexity. Corporate, especially global MNCs / conglomerates do have complex operations or business situations. The more business verticals you own, the more complex decision making it becomes. Similarly, military decisions have a number of variables to consider. For example, even for the simplest of defect rectification, I used to consider the manpower, skills, tools, spares needed, the time required, tests required, documentation, Pilot's satisfaction, weather availability, ATC clearance, and so on. All of this in parallel with ongoing operations with 10 other jets, next period operational planning, and maintenance planning with a tab on the reverse supply chain of spares/last-mile delivery for timely availability. Leave additional things such as multiple reports making/presentations, the welfare of men, leave planning, audits/QA, additional duties, various event management, drills, etc. (By the way, in the corporate, you have separate teams to handle each such problem).
A - Ambiguity is nothing but a problem in establishing cause & effect relationships. Maintaining an old jet was nothing but ambiguous challenges in 'never seen before' defects. Even as a leader, clearing ambiguity around decisions was my primary objective so that I could give clear instructions to my team for their deliverables. If you think of strategic/tactical decisions under ambiguous situations, military people daily live it!
Long story short, all of this unstructuredness is very much there in military life. It is not to prove that armed forces management is more challenging or difficult but to draw the reader's attention to the fact that it is very much equitable, if not more. Most of the modern management lessons have been taken from armed forces. The word 'Strategy' has been taken from the Greek word 'Strategos' meaning 'an art of the general'.
Now you know that the 'structured military' always worked under VUCA! In fact, it is the constant pressure of VUCA that pushed it to be always organized.
