“No one is really listening, they are just pretending.” – Madhu

05.01.12

As mentioned recently, I’m reading Inventing Grand Strategy and Teaching Command, by Jon Tetsuro Sumida. Chapter 2 is complete, however Sumida included one sentence at the end of the Introduction that has been nagging me. Professor Sumida said, speaking of Alfred Thayer Mahan:

“It remains to be seen whether readers exist with the mind and will to accept his guidance on what necessarily is an arduous intellectual and moral voyage into the realm of war and politics.” (emphasis added)

The phrase “whether readers exist with the mind and will” jumped off the page. Over the last few days I’ve seen several articles of warning of the West’s decline, and while many shed light on symptoms that would indicate decline, most are tired old bromides masquerading as “new thought.” For instance, a few days ago, a friend on Twitter (an Army officer) shared a Tweet from The New Atlanticist of an article called, “Why We Need a Smart NATO.” He tweeted, “Call me a cynic, but haven’t we ALWAYS needed a smart NATO?” Good question. In my estimation, “smart NATO” is yet another venture into sloganeering. While it may call into question my judgement, my first thought on reading “smart NATO,” was a line from the cult movie Idiocracy (if you haven’t seen it, get it) and one scene where the time traveling protagonist is attempting to explain the importance of water to plants to people of the future who use a sports drink instead. Here is the clip:

“but it’s got electrolytes…“

We’re living in a world of unprecedented availability of information, yet our meta-culture seems indifferent to anything that takes more than a few minutes to consume. Among too many military colleagues I know, it is not uncommon to hear the phrase, “I’ve not read Clausewitz through….nobody does…” And I respond, “But if not you, then who will?” If the practitioners of a profession as serious as the profession of arms don’t read and think deeply, who will? And what will become of the timeless principles learned and recorded at the cost of blood and treasure and how those principles translate into how we fight? I have an abiding fear our military, not out of malice but neglect, is cutting the intellectual cord with the past by making it culturally acceptable to be intellectually indifferent and incurious, to sloganeer instead of think, allowing slogans and PowerPoint as woefully inadequate substitutes. There is no app for intellectual development.

We can’t afford to allow the profession of arms to be anything but intellectually robust and challenging. Zen wrote an excellent summation of the recent posts on disruptive thinkers (which may for some have the ring of sloganeering). However these posts are evidence a lot of the young guys “get it” and want more. Good news, but recognition of the problem is not enough; action is required. Action that may damage a career.

I’m a member of the US Naval Institute, and an on-going concern of the Institute is relevance to the young folks. Yep, relevance. Relevance with a mission statement like this:

“To provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write in order to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to national defense.”

Reading, thinking, speaking, and writing requires what Sumida referred to as “mind and will.” Leaders create this condition and desire by example, unambiguous expectations, and by listening, adapting, and sharing their knowledge with subordinates and encouraging them to push their intellect. Good leaders will create a space where deep thinking is expected, where curiosity isn’t the exception, but the rule. Many of our folks in uniform compete in the physical fitness arena and do the hard work necessary to be the best physically, but we need more intellectually rigorous competition in both formal schools and at the unit level. Leaders create this environment, for the best leaders want their people to think. Robert Leonhard in his excellent book, The Principles of War for the Information Age said it best:

“The greatest legacy that a leader can leave behind is a subordinate who is not afraid to think for himself.”

While we can’t pretend to be in good condition or physically fit, some may be tempted to pretend on the intellectual front. Which brings me back to Madhu’s quote: ”No one is really listening, they are just pretending.” Doc Madhu, a blog friend and frequent commenter at zenpundit, was commenting on an excellent essay by Mike Few at Carl Prine’s Line of Departure. The essay was titled Finding Niebuhr, and Mike reminds us of Niebuhr’s famous Serenity Prayer:

“Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things that I cannot change, the courage to change the things that I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”

Courage and wisdom are virtues enabled by a well-developed, well-rounded, curious intellect. “Pretending” in the profession of arms can have deadly consequences, and more often than not, the pretenders are trying to “be someone” instead of “doing something.” More often than not, this is a group effort, enabled by a crippled culture dominated by groupthink.

Boyd’s challenge continues to ring true:

“To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. That’s when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do. Which way will you go?”

This is cross-posted at Zenpundit.

Posted in Adaptability, DOD, General, Initiative, Insight, Integrity, Leadership, Mahan, Wisdom | 2 Comments »

Inventing Grand Strategy and Teaching Command – currently reading

04.23.12

Inventing Grand Strategy and Teaching Command, by Jon Tetsuro Sumida

This monograph piqued my interest several weeks ago, as I consider whether or not to re-read Alfred Thayer Mahan‘s classic The Influence of Sea Power on History, 1660-1783. I’m about twenty years removed from my original reading, and honestly wasn’t ready for it when I did read it, so much of what I remember remains a blur at best.

Professor Sumida leads with a Preface entitled, Musical Performance, Zen Enlightenment, and Naval Command. Sumida draws parallels between the performance of music and the artistry inherent in sound leadership during war. Boyd’s ideas with respect to harmony came to mind. Sumida also draws parallels between Mahan’s ideas and Zen and offers:

“Mahan’s writing about the art and science of command resembles Zen in three major respects — a pedagogy that attempts to teach that which cannot be directly described in words, the absence of doctrinal ends, and a recognition of the limitations of ratiocination as the basis of action under conditions of rapid and unpredictable change.”

After finishing the first chapter of Professor Sumida’s work, I was struck by how relevant Mahan’s ideas with respect to leadership development seem to be in harmony with ideas advanced of late regarding the need for disruptive thinkers (this links to Mark’s excellent summary). Sumida portrays Mahan as man convinced of the need for naval executive education that goes beyond the scientific and mechanical, and focused rather on the “deep knowledge” and “truths” found only in history (I agree). He writes:

Mahan “was convinced that constant and rapid mechanical innovation had upset planning and education to the detriment of command confidence and authority. He feared the consequences of a navy led by indecisive men, bred by bureaucratic routine—or worse, subservience to corrupt civilian officialdom—to follow rules or act politically.”

At only 116 pages, Sumida’s monograph would normally be a quick read, but I plan to savor every word—and probably read more Mahan.

More to come.

Cross posted at zenpundit.com.

Posted in Adaptability, Creativity, Curiosity, General, Leadership, Mahan, Science, US Navy | No Comments »

Candid Communications & Tweaking Curiosity, Tools to Consider

04.06.12

THINKPAK, by Michael Michalko

As mentioned in a previous post, innovation and curiosity are on the minds of leaders across the spectrum. However, the connection between rhetoric and desire to action is often a challenge. There are many books on the market that claim to be a silver bullet for institutional creativity, though most fall short in practice. As Jonah Lehrer points out in his recent book, IMAGINE (reviewed here recently), group brainstorming isn’t all it is cracked up to be. Lehrer, quoting Keith Sawyer at Washington University, says, “Decades of research have consistently shown that brainstorming groups think of far fewer ideas than the same number of people who work alone and later pool their ideas.” Lehrer believes what traditional brainstorming misses (and I agree) is the powerful component of “criticism and debate.” In my experience, groups are most effective when everyone was prepared before the meeting, and everyone was engaged, candid, and critical—brutally critical at times. Many recoil from conflict, but the power of candid groups is to fully vet an idea or concept without personalizing. As Lehrer advises, “We can only get it right when we talk about what we got wrong.”

Lehrer’s observations track precisely with an important paper written several years ago in the Air and Space Power Quarterly by US Air Force Brigadier General Duane Deal. His article, Beyond the Widget, was a review of mitigating circumstances surrounding the 2003 loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia. The importance of candid communications is addressed:

Communicate, Communicate, Communicate

Leaders Must Insist on Discussion. NASA’s heavy-handed management of meetings, using a rigid protocol, discouraged an open discussion of concerns, resulting in a failure to properly investigate those concerns. The senior executive service (SES) leaders at the meeting table did not seriously encourage inputs from the lower-ranking government service (GS) engineers on the room’s periphery; however, it was these GS engineers who saw the potential danger from a foam strike to the Columbia.

Leaders not only must ask for inputs, but also must place a heavy emphasis on communication and encourage both consent and dissent. In fact, certain successful leaders of risky operations admit that they are uncomfortable if there are no dissenting opinions when important and far-reaching decisions are considered.

Encourage Minority Opinions. The minutes and audiotapes of NASA’s Mission Management Team reflect little discussion other than that emanating from the head of the conference-room table. Expressions of concern that the foam impact might affect the integrity of the orbiter were quickly refocused to a discussion of how much additional maintenance might now be needed to prepare Columbia for its next flight.

Successful and highly reliable organizations promote and encourage the airing of minority opinions, such as those of the NASA engineers seeking to express their concerns with the foam strike. Leaders must acknowledge and exercise their own responsibility to conduct a thorough and critical examination, and remain cautious so as not to create an environment where they are perceived as ignoring inputs or no longer willing to hear about problems. [emphasis added]

The point of sharing the report is the importance of establishing a culture where honesty (even passionate brutal honesty) isn’t an exception, but the norm. Yours might not be a high risk enterprise like a shuttle program, but every organization can learn the importance of timeless principles — principles that form the foundation of a To Be or To Do culture — and why To Be or To Do cultures are more likely to be innovative and creative.

But returning to innovation and brainstorming: many mistakenly discount their innate creativity and relegate innovation to the thinkers of their organization, but as Lehrer point out, and from what I have learned personally, and have seen in others: you can learn to be more curious and creative.

One tool is the THINKPAK referenced above. Mr. Michalko adapted THINKPAK from his book, THINKERTOYS, and I’ve come to rely on the pack of cards as a jumping-off place when I’m trying to expand my perspective on just about any topic. Michalko points out, “Everything new is really just an addition to or modification of something that already exists.” His pack of cards have often taken me to places or to ideas/conclusions I couldn’t have possibly anticipated. The cards are arranged around a mnemonic called SCAMPER:

S – Substitute Something

C – Combine with something else

A – Adapt something to it

M – Modify or Magnify it

P – Put it to some other use

E – Eliminate Something

R – Reverse or Rearrange it

Each area has multiple cards with different questions that will force your thinking in unexpected directions. Running a topic or an idea through the card deck is an exercise where you can literally surround a topic. As a result you will analyze and synthesize, and better understand your ideas or concepts without having to stare at a blank sheet of paper or computer screen.

If you’re leader, encourage your people to engage and think creatively, contributing, and communicating…as individuals, by demonstrating your curiosity. By demonstrating your curiosity, you will do more to promote curiosity and creativity in your culture than any poster or mission statement. Talk is cheap. People tend to believe what they see. One reason Steve Jobs was so successful was his abiding curiosity — on display for not just his employees, but the world to see. He encouraged folks to “think different.” Seems everyone wants to be Steve Jobs without paying the intellectual price, and the risk of failure incumbent to many creative ideas…To Be or To Do, which way will you go?

Posted in Creativity, Curiosity, General, Innovation, Recommended Reading | 13 Comments »

Frederick the Great, Baron Von Steuben, and the Value of Practice, Practice, Practice

04.02.12

Frederick the Great

During a recent trip to London, I took along John McAuley Palmer’s Washington – Lincoln – Wilson Three War Statesmen. Previously at zenpundit.com, I reviewed Palmer’s excellent and informative America in Arms, so I’ve been looking forward to this follow-up. While I’m not finished with Washington (on about page 90), this one is a much tougher read than the first, but I’m going to press on as I can make the time among competing work and books.

What I wanted to share with you was an excerpt from Palmer’s remarks on Baron Von Steuben’s Prussian military background.

Friedrich Wilhelm August Heinrich Ferdinand von Steuben

Von Steuben, in many respects was Washington’s ace at organizing, equipping, and training the army—a job for which Von Steuben was eminently qualified. His was the latest training in the methods of Frederick the Great and what was to become his vaunted Prussian General Staff.

For training, Frederick used what he called the “applicatory method.” This sounds a lot like Fred Leland’s cutting edge law enforcement training and Don Vandergriff’s work with the US Army. Here are a few quotes:

“He found that military success depends, not upon profound theoretical knowledge, but upon sound judgement and quick resolute decision under stress. Directing a successful attack is therefore not the same thing as writing an essay about it. It is a question of grasping a situation, making a practical decision, and issuing intelligible orders to the several parts of a military command. It is a question of not merely knowing but of doing. (emphasis, Palmer, pages 42-43)

“This led Frederick to form the habit of giving himself tactical problems in his daily walks and rides. Carlyle gives us the following interesting glimpse of the great king after he had become a distinguished and successful general:

For Friedrich is always looking out, were it even form the window of his carriage, and putting military problems to himself in all manner of scenery. What would a man do, in that kind of ground, if attacking, if attacked? With that hill, that brook, that bit of bog? And advises every officer to be continually doing the like. That is the value of picturesque or other scenery to Friedrich. (emphasis mine)

“From making this a method of self-culture to making it a means of instructing others is but a step…It is the continual test of judgement, of decision, and of facility in issuing effective orders.” (Palmer, page 43)

Frederick also used this training method as a “tactical measuring rod” to help determine the competency of his leadership.

Von Steuben proved Frederick’s methods with Washington’s army. But what struck me was the simple power of establishing and maintaining good habits that promote, practice, enable coping with dynamic environments, and the exploitation individual curiosity and action. Frederick institutionalized his “self-culture” into his meta-culture and so did Von Steuben in turn.

This type of practicing; the continual maintenance of good habits will help ensure a competitive posture in just about any field. Further, Frederick practiced ad hoc—wherever he was, he was thinking through the lens of his profession and asking relevant questions of himself and his subordinates—further lessons for today’s leaders, regardless the profession.

Looking, paying attention, and thinking is free—so even in declining budgets we should follow the example set by Frederick and Baron Von Steuben in his turn.

Cross-posted at zenpundit.com.

Tags: Practice
Posted in Adaptability, Curiosity, General, Initiative, Innovation, Leadership, Simplicity | 6 Comments »

Getting a New Perspective…with Literature

03.29.12

Earlier this week, Maura Kelly wrote an excellent piece for The Atlantic called The Slow Books Manifesto, “Read books. As often as you can. Mostly classics.” Ms Kelly writes:

In our leisure moments, whenever we have down time, we should turn to literature—to works that took some time to write and will take some time to read, but will also stay with us longer than anything else. They’ll help us unwind better than any electronic device—and they’ll pleasurably sharpen our minds and identities, too.

Ms. Kelly is right. Last year my friend Cameron Schaefer wrote an excellent piece on the importance of adding fiction to one’s reading repertoire (check out his list, and a list supplied by his readers). What struck me about Cam’s piece was how little fiction I’ve read in the last few years. Prior to 2005, it was not uncommon for me to read over thirty works of fiction per year (I rarely watch television.), and I spent several years following The Washington Post’s literary critic, Michael Dirda and his frequent good recommendations. Dirda took some time off, I stopped taking the Post, and my fiction habit waned. Three months into 2012, and I’ve read only one work of fiction: The Hindenburg Enigma, by my friend M. Dick Van Orden—he sent me a copy in exchange for a copy of BOYD I gave him.

Both Ms. Kelly and Cameron list the cognitive benefits of good fiction, and a book I recently reviewed backs up the value of being exposed to different perspectives. Literature is a good vehicle for new and different perspectives. Back in the 90′s the great literary critic, Yale professor Harold Bloom wrote The Western Canon. Bloom made a pretty convincing case for his canon, and his recommendations would be a good place to start.

For now, I plan to read Skylark, by the late Hungarian poet and prose writer, Dezso Kosztolanyi (1885-1936). I picked up Skylark a couple of years ago on the recommendation of a friend, and now is a good time to get back to regular exposures to literature.

What titles would you recommend?

Posted in Creativity, Curiosity, Fiction, General, Literature | 8 Comments »

IMAGINE How Creativity Works, by Jonah Lehrer — a review

03.27.12

IMAGINE How Creativity Works, by Jonah Lehrer

Mr. Lehrer’s excellent new book came to my attention via a long article in the Wall Street Journal on creativity. IMAGINE is written in the style popularized by Malcolm Gladwell (in books such as The Tipping Point, blink, and Outliers) where scientific research is synthesized and made accessible and interesting to the non-specialist.

IMAGINE is divided into two sections, Alone and Together, where Lehrer describes creativity at the level of the individual and the power of groups. Lehrer’s treatment of individual creativity weaves accounts from subjects ranging from Bob Dylan to the “invention” of the Barbie doll. My favorite chapter of the individual section is titled The Outsider. Lehrer illustrates the potential power and insight an outsider can bring to a problem. Using an example from pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly:

“…if Eli Lilly couldn’t predict which scientists would find the answer, then it needed to ask everyone the question. Instead of assigning its problems to particular experts inside the company, the corporation should make the problems public.”

Lehrer writes that as a result Eli Lilly set up a website InnoCentive to crowd source particularly vexing problems and the results became a successful business.

“The secret was outsider thinking: the problem solvers on InnoCentive were most effective when working at the margins of their fields. In other words, chemists didn’t solve chemistry problems, they solved molecular biology problems, just as molecular biologists solved chemistry problems. While these people were close enough to understand the challenges, they weren’t so close that their knowledge held them back and caused them to run into the same stumbling blocks…”

In my practice, I have long advised clients to put “new eyes” on tough problems, as solutions often come from the most unexpected source.

Lehrer’s description of group creativity was my favorite part of the book. He introduces the work of Brian Uzzi, a sociologist at Northwestern. Uzzi studied musicals “because he sees the art form as a model of group creativity.” Uzzi used a measure he called Q to measure “the density of the connections.” Turns out his Q number, or his measure of “social intimacy” is predictive of whether or not a musical company enjoys success. The Q number has something of a Goldilocks quality; too high a Q resulted in groupthink, and little or no innovation occurred. In low Q environments, people were so unfamiliar and disconnected, creativity was difficult. A just right Q was one with mixed relationships among the team. Lehrer quotes Uzzi:

“The best Broadway teams, by far, were those with a mix of relationships…These teams had old friends, but also newbies….They were comfortable with each other, but not too comfortable.”

Lehrer continues with a review of the Pixar culture and how this company continues to sustain a highly innovative output. Pixar uses architecture to keep people close and talking, and brutal honesty is practiced by all. The Lexus car company has the tagline “The relentless pursuit of perfection.” Pixar could say the same thing. Lehrer says the Pixar culture is “defined by the free flow of ideas” and the company’s accomplishments stand as a testament to their success.

Lehrer continues with a chapter on the benefits of urban living which is entertaining, but not as convincing. His chapter on what he calls the “Shakespeare Paradox” exemplifies the notion that “ideas have value.” Lehrer makes a compelling case that “culture largely determines creative output” with examples galore. He offers “meta-ideas” to ”create more geniuses”:

Take education seriously—his examples are uplifting and inspiring.
A willingness to take risks—which includes the possibility of failure.
Incentivizing innovation and creativity—Lehrer takes on US copyright law.

All in all, IMAGINE is an informative and inspiring book on how to be personally and culturally more innovative and creative. I’d recommend this book to parents, educators, leaders, and anyone with curiosity. Well done, Mr. Lehrer!

Postscript:

While Lehrer doesn’t mention the late Hungarian-British polymath, Michael Polanyi, Polanyi’s ideas with respect to tacit knowledge are well represented throughout the book.

Cross-posted at: zenpundit.com

Posted in Creativity, Curiosity, General, Innovation, Insight | 16 Comments »

“Our enemy is adaptable, we must be, too.” Adaptability & Simplicity, Random Thoughts

03.16.12

Earlier this week I had the privilege of speaking at the Navy Expeditionary Forces Conference (NAVEXFOR 2012) in Virginia Beach, VA. The theme for this year’s conference was “innovation in constrained environments.” In my talk, I focused on potential internal cultural constraints and deliberate actions to mitigate resulting threats. Not surprisingly, other speakers focused on our enemies and the constraints they place on our forces, and the fact those enemies impose constraints with innovative methods and weapons like roadside IEDs. Yesterday, through a friend on Twitter, I learned that insurgents in Iraq had used cell phone geotags to destroy AH-64′s; innovation, indeed.

One speaker made the comment in this post’s title: “Our enemy is adaptable, we must be, too.” He went on to characterized their adaptations as “simple.”

Using this description, through simple adaptation, our enemies disrupt our activities, destroy our equipment, and kill or maim our service members using cheap, simple, but deadly tools. The resulting affect isn’t limited to physical casualties; their innovations also disrupt our ability to control the initiative, and perhaps just as importantly our sensemaking abilities. The ability to alter an opponent’s sensemaking will inform and increase the complexity of an already complex environment, so adaptability is essential.

In most situations we counter these simple adaptations by employing complex and expensive solutions. This has been accurately called, “adaptation at acquisition speed.” Those expensive and complex solutions must make it through byzantine acquisition processes rife with political maneuvering, operating in a culture of “no,” which results in increased costs, schedule, and ultimately our frequent inability to be responsive to troops in field. Institutional inertia in the defense bureaucracy prevents significant change in the short-run, so these facts must be considered an on-going constraint.

In spite of these constraints, our troops are thinking and acting—they are adapting, using simple tools, like remote control vehicles. This “toy” was used to inspect vehicles and detect IEDs. Instead of an expensive long lead-time solution, they went to Radio Shack—and the vehicle lasted for several years—so they got another. According to the report, at least six lives were saved as a result. Not surprisingly, the folks closest to the problem produced an effective solution. No doubt there are other stories of ingenuity and adaptation, but this story exemplifies the possible. The underlying point is this soldier was thinking and acting—he was adapting in a way that allowed him and his colleagues to remain more safe.

Sun Tzu and the ultimate in adaptability

The speaker’s quote reminded me of this quote from Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, Chapter VI Weaknesses and Strengths (page 153 in the Samuel B. Griffith translation):

Now an army may be likened to water, for just as flowing water avoids the heights and hastens to the lowlands, so an army avoids strength and strikes weakness.

And as water shapes its flow in accordance with the ground, so an army manages its victory in accordance with the situation of the enemy.

And as water has no constant form, there are in war no constant condition.

Bear with me, as I like word pictures and synonyms and what follows is a bit like “plodding,” but I’ve found adjacencies in language illuminating (if I could draw this, I would). Water as a metaphor for adaptability presents any military force (or any other group) a daunting task. Considering the physical qualities of water several synonyms come to mind:

Water is transparent, so to be adaptable, we need to promote and practice clarity in internal communications and actions. Keeping ambiguity to a minimun is one method of promoting clarity, and practicing honesty is a good way to practice.

Water is physically cohesive, while being ultimately pliable. Think about it; put water in a jar, it conforms to the jar, pour it out, it follows gravity, and water surrounds whatever is submerged in it. Water moves as one, just as a group adaptability needs to be a key characteristic of any successful team. But in a larger sense, when one considers what I call the “bordering language” of synonyms, one discovers a greater depth to the concept of coherence, words like intelligence, comprehensibility, understandability, intelligibility, decipherability, conncinity (my favorite), unity, and harmony—just to name a few. Concinnity is a harmonious arrangement of things; where a culture is arranged and led in such a way as to promote and sustain harmony. My friend Ed H. has the best working definition for harmony that I’ve found. Ed derived his description from the novelist Douglas Adams and French impressionist painter Georges Seurat:

You don’t get harmony when everybody sings the same note. Harmony is the marriage of the contrary and of the similar; marrying discordant elements, regardless of tone, of color, of line, of thought and of purpose…

Water as described by Sun Tzu is fluid. Fluidity can be a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, fluidity implies adaptability, flexibility, fluency, smoothness, and ease. On the other, fluidity implies instability, unstableness, fickleness, inconstancy, changeableness, shifting, and flux. For cultures in a competitive environment, having the first form of fluidity is desired, while inflicting the second on the competitor. In addition, fluidity’s synonym fluency implies an eloquent and skillful use of language—or mediums of exchange. Fluency is possible only through practice, lots of practice. So much practice the skill becomes tacit knowledge, thus simple (effortless?)…even intuition.

Simplicity

Articulation in language and action are elements of simplicity. Simplicity implies tacit. As simple as the force of gravity directing water down a hill, going around and engulfing obstacles, thus is the potential of a group that has made their purpose/mission tacit and have the freedom to act. In fact, the sum of the skill sets may be so simple as to defy explanation—and more often than not in these cases, others learn by close association; watching, failing, learning, and making tacit those capabilities needed to cope and adapt. Boyd said as much in the abstract of Conceptual Spiral:

To flourish and grow in a many-sided, uncertain and ever-changing world that surrounds us, suggests that we have to make intuitive within ourselves those many practices we need to meet the exigencies of that world.

“To make intuitive within ourselves those many practices we need” implies the development and nurturing of habits that will enable us to adapt.That which is habitual becomes simple (and as mentioned above, yet another route to tacit).

Close

To the troops using the remote control vehicle mentioned above, the solution was obvious, and seemingly simple. Importantly, they were in a unit where they could act on their idea—and they did so outside the bureaucracy at little cost, and saved six lives (maybe more).

Taking a riff from the conference title, our leaders should be checking to make sure the rules of engagement (ROE) and other rigid rule sets aren’t implicitly making their folks hopelessly incapable of adaptability. As we increase adaptability, the more adaptability becomes a habit—and when it is a habit, it becomes simple. Just a thought.

Postscript:

The best short book I’ve read on tacit knowledge is Michael Polanyi’s The Tacit Dimension, the best long book on the same topic is Personal Knowledge by the same author.

Postscript Update:

This post is cross-posted at Zenpundit.com, a site where I also blog (mostly book reviews).

Posted in Adaptability, DOD, General, Innovation, Simplicity | 3 Comments »

To Be or To Do, A Culture of Innovation, Recommended Reading for NAVEXFOR 2012, 13 March 2012

03.13.12

Many thanks to today’s kind and attentive audience at NAVEXFOR 2012. At the conclusion of each iteration of the To Be or To Do material, I always suggest further reading. These are the books I consistently recommend:

To Be or To Do Recommended Reading Installment 1

To Be or To Do Recommended Reading Installment 2

For a less expensive alternative to bookstores or Amazon, try www.abe.com

For a great “thinking” resource/dictionary check-out: www.visuwords.com

Here are a few books not yet on these lists:

Kelly: More Than My Share of It All, Clarence L. “Kelly” Johnson Examples of innovation before all the red-tape.

Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, Betty Edwards Using this book, anyone can learn to draw. Definitely a good exercise for creativity.

Grand Strategies, Literature, Statecraft, and World Order, Charles Hill The best book I read in 2010. An excellent synthesis of how literature has contributed to our system and strategies.

Trial of a Thousand Years, Charles Hill. Excellent, but brief history of the West and Islam. My review at Zenpundit.com here. (I write book reviews at Zenpundit when I have the chance.)

The Art of War, Sun Tzu, translated by Samuel B. Griffith I’m fond of this version

Tools for Thinking and Problem Solving, Moshe F. Rubenstein

The No Asshole Rule, Robert Sutton, PhD Excellent guide for civility in the workplace

The Principles of War for the Information Age, Robert Leonhard, LTC, USA, Ret. Perhaps one of the best modern books on this topic. The tech stuff is dated, but still valuable.

Military Strategy: A General Theory of Power Control, J.C Wylie, RADM, USN, Ret. Excellent and basic on strategy. See my review at Zenpundit.com here.

The Mind of War: John Boyd and American Security, Grant Hammond This biography of Boyd focuses more on Boyd’s Air Force career and his technical contributions. An excellent read.

Science, Strategy and War, Frans P.B. Osinga The definitive book on Boyd’s ideas. Osinga synthesizes Boyd’s many presentations into prose. Not an easy read, but rewarding.

The Human Face of War, Jim Storr See my review of this book at Zenpundit.com here.

Persian Fire, Tom Holland Excellent history of the Persia’s attempts to capture Greece. Heavily sourced from Thucydides and Herodotus.

The Landmark Thucydides & The Landmark Herodotus, both edited by Robert B.Strassler These are marvelous books for the non-specialist. Plenty of maps and diagrams. Get the hardbacks if you can (better made).

Posted in General, Leadership, Recommended Reading | 2 Comments »

John R. Boyd, Colonel, USAF, Ret. (25 Jan 1927 – 9 Mar 1997)

03.09.12

This is the fifteenth anniversary of the passing of John Boyd.

Boyd is the origin of “to be or to do” and I continue to be amazed how much a person I never met has influenced my life.

Posted in General | 1 Comment »

To Be or To Do, Recommended Reading, The Richard Feynman Edition Part 1

03.08.12

Works by and about Richard Feynman rank high on my estimation. These are a few favorites, and a couple I’ve either not read completely, or still working my way through.

Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman, James Gleick Written in 1992, this is an informative and enlightening journey through not just the life of the subject, but through the exciting world of physics from the early 20th century through the 1980′s. While the first 100 pages were a tough read, the remainder was a reward; Feynman’s brilliance and brutal honesty are on full display. Mr. Gleick does a nice job also of providing ample background on Feynman’s colleagues/competitors/mentors, etc. and provides pretty clear explanations of the concepts brought to life by Feynman & Co. As a biography, this work is first-rate and highly recommended.

Quantum Man: Richard Feynman’s Life in Science, Lawrence M. Krauss A very good biography–focused primarily on his scientific contributions. Added bonus; the author knew Feynman. Very good, and recommended.

FEYNMAN, Jim Ottavioni (author) & Leland Myrick (illustrator) This is an illustrated bio that I have, but have not read. I’ve skimmed it, and it looks very good.

No Ordinary Genius: The Illustrated Richard Feynman, Richard Feynman (author) & Christopher Sykes (editor) An insightful and informative biography of one of the 20th century’s great minds. This title gives more insight into what others thought about Feynman—and they pull no punches. No Ordinary Genius is an excellent, topical biography in the words of the participants. Well done and recommended.

Feynman’s science books:

The Feynman Lectures on Physics, boxed set: The New Millennium Edition, Richard P. Feynman, Robert B. Leighton, Matthew Sands. The set I purchased included the valuable Tips on Physics. It will probably take me the remainder of my life to work my way through these three volumes (if then), and it is a rare treat to take these volumes aside two or three times a year.

The Character of Physical Law (Messenger Lectures, 1964), Richard Feynman The lectures in this volume are written (like most of Feynman’s work) as though he were sitting by your side. This title is among my favorites.

Feynman was a remarkable person, and in many respects larger than life. We’re blessed that he left behind such a rich collection of works, appropriate for the scientist and non-scientist alike.

Tags: biographies, physics, science
Posted in General, Recommended Reading, Science | No Comments »

Archives

Blogroll