This is how you hurt Soldiers

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 10:50:38 -0500

This series focuses on the transition from Company Grade To Field Grade Officer.

If you want to hurt Soldiers – Plan Poorly

Late information crushes Soldiers, Leaders, and organizations. As a Major you are responsible for the dissemination of timely and accurate information. Why is this so hard? How do we fix this common problem? Use these simple time lines and the attached Plan to Plan and you will no longer hurt our most precious asset- Soldiers. Many preach 1/3 : 2/3 but that is really for short notice planning efforts. At ProDev2Go we suggest using the 9:6:4:13 rule within a Division. Division must publish it’s orders nine (9) months prior to execution, Brigade six, Battalion four, and the Company at 13 Weeks. This allows each level to properly resource training and follow the eight step training model. Make no mistake this is difficult and if every level isn’t on board the Company and our troopers suffer greatly. Some are hesitant to publish without complete information along these timeliness. The unit below you would rather have what you know now than wait for perfect information late. Stick to this timeline and FRAGO the plan as additional clarity is gained. To assist you in this effort use the Plan to Plan found Below. Take a Draconian approach to adhere to these planning windows and you will not only become more effective, but will take care of our Soldiers.

Remember to follow ProDev2Go on Wordpress and receive these posts directly in your email.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 11 at 2016 10:56 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 10:56:52 -0500

COL Private RallyPoint Member Thank you, Sir. You are absolutely correct. Failure to release information is a morale buster and leads to frustration with leadership.

Response by SSG Benny Stewart made Jan 11 at 2016 11:18 AM

SSG Benny Stewart — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 11:18:50 -0500

As A NCO the 1/3 to 2/3 plan works but not as good as Early awareness.. as the OP ORDER/mission statment is given to the sqd. leaders have at least 1 team leader with you and the other doing pre combat/mission checks simple things amo, water, right and workable equipment and in Garson too and have that team leader with you go back and give some timelines for prep and this was 1 way I had an early awareness, this worked well for me on a lot of my missions/operation and have them prepping the whole time allotted.....this way you would have the squad/platoon on the same page. But this factor does not work all ways this is where our adapt and overcome whet into action cause nothing is perfect.... AND THANKYOU FOR YOUR TIME SIR

AIRBORNE
RET.SSG B.STEWART

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 11 at 2016 11:24 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 11:24:58 -0500

Where I believe the process goes wrong is the inculcated notion that plans must be "perfect" and complete at the time of issue. Any grunt will tell you how long a plan survives contact.
My solution is both simple and doctrinal - ISSUE A WARNING ORDER as soon as the mission statement and Commander's Intent is drafted. What this does is allow subordinate organizations to do parallel planning on the big items - initiating necessary movement, suspending or reducing distracting activities that conflict, and knowledge of timelines for key benchmarks in execution.
The commander and/or staff can surely issue changes or (gasp) a second WARNO once some facts are known and the commander determines a COA as the MDMP process develops the facts and assumptions.

It isn't hard, but the Army in many organizations stinks at this.
I was a part of the process from beginning to end a few years ago for an NTC rotation. In this, there were certain givens that were known quantities, and the big unknowns were generally logistical and signal support in nature. The BCT got hung up hard in those issues, even though the rail load/ unload and concept of signal support was barely a blip anywhere two echelons below and not much really for their maneuver squadrons save the one that was the most outlying.
What happened was they got really hung up in "solving" these even though they only affected where two retrans sites were and timetables at RSOI back in the RUBA. The WARNO went to the squadrons on a Friday, and while the squadrons were absorbing that, the Brigade went straight into developing the OPORD on Monday, knowingly changing pieces of execution, but not issuing WARNO 2 or an update to WARNO 1 until the OPORD went out over a month later. The result: all sorts of time wasted at the battalion level unnecessarily. The staff was so wrapped up in trying to please their boss that they lost track of the end users.
And it was wholly preventable.

Response by CW4 Brian Haas made Jan 11 at 2016 1:10 PM

CW4 Brian Haas — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:10:11 -0500

Col Coffman, I must say...anymore of this outside the box thinking of making times and not screwing those below you...just might hurt your chance at promotion!! Haha, I obviously jest. This was something we even tried to get pushed more into the doctrine side while I was at DOTD for the aviation proponent. But the issue becomes perfectionists along the chain that refuse to send partial info. I talked to so many in the field that were experiencing that bottleneck at one or two spots.

Personally, I think the push needs to be from top down. Division ensure Bde meets their timeline. Bde ensure Bn, etc, etc...

But that's just my two cents. Give me a grid, freq, and name...I'm good.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 14 at 2016 5:57 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Jan 2016 05:57:14 -0500

Sir: You've presumably been in the Army for about 22-30 years. Have you ever actually witnessed a unit follow the 9:6:4:13 rule? While use of this timeline would be great in an ideal world, in my short time in the Army, I can't recall a time when a division-level unit with which I served had much clue about what it would be doing 9 months out, and this compounded the inability of brigade/battalion to publish guidance of any sort more than a handful of weeks or months in advance. Units may have thought they knew what they'd be doing 9 or 6 months or 4 months out, but what they actually ended up doing when 9/6/4 months passed rarely if ever ended up being what they planned for (meaning the orders for what they ended up doing came quick, fast, and in a hurry immediately prior to execution). Companies publishing orders 13 weeks out? Does this actually happen anywhere in the Army? So, while the 9:6:4:13 rule briefs well, it doesn't seem to pass a "reality-check."