Management

Issues relating to good tactical leadership and planning can be found here.

Moderators: jimothy_183, Admin

Post Reply
User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2795
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Management

Post by Ryan » Sun Jun 03, 2012 6:23 am

"Both close-quarters-battle (CQB) and urban operations (UO) are related to urban warfare, but while UO refers mainly to the macromanagement factor (i.e. sending troops, using of heavy armoured fighting vehicles, battle management), CQB refers to the micromanagement factor—namely: how a small squad of infantry troops should fight in urban environments and/or inside buildings in order to achieve its goals with minimal casualties."

What do people think to macro and micro-management? Is there any procedures or tips you can give for each?
How can we make management, communication and leadership quicker and more efficient?
What kind of combat, span of control or leadership multiplyers can you employ?

A Hall Boss be micromanagement of a specific team, that is one example, and a combat and leadership multiplyer.
Communication example such as, "Man down, Room 1A" and that is it, move on. Command can note it and have a response.


Management Issues:
- Speed
- Realiability of information, because an operation is that fast a "CONTACT" may be a man-down a split second later
- Flow of information, as above and more!
- Micromanagement, it really comes down to previous experience and lessons learnt because micromanagement in a dynamic situation is nighe impossible
- Macromanagement, working out the biggest threat to the assaulters and getting in a relatively safe position of which to engage
- More I can't think of just now!!!
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
jimothy_183
Military
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Management

Post by jimothy_183 » Sun Jun 03, 2012 4:33 pm

Ryan wrote: What do people think to macro and micro-management? Is there any procedures or tips you can give for each?
Micro managaement = bad bad BAD BAD BAD BAD...just don't do it ok? In short it is usually a sign of poor leadership and low levels of trust between the leader and those being led.
Ryan wrote: How can we make management, communication and leadership quicker and more efficient?
Decentralise command which means as a leader you should employ subordinate leaders and delegate control to them.

I have more on this, just gotta find the time to go get it.

Read this
Ryan wrote: What kind of combat, span of control or leadership multiplyers can you employ?
During WWII it was found that in combat conditions the span of control for a leader was a maximum of 7 men. This can be substansiated in Howe's book and also in here

The USMC likes to employ the "Rule of three" which means that a unit leader can only have 3 direct subordinates under his command. Source
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
jimothy_183
Military
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Management

Post by jimothy_183 » Wed Jun 06, 2012 1:21 pm

Ryan wrote: How can we make management, communication and leadership quicker and more efficient?
I forgot to mention the concepts of the Commander's intent and also Commander's guidance.

http://www.armchairgeneral.com/tactics- ... intent.htm

http://www.armchairgeneral.com/tactics- ... idance.htm
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2795
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Management

Post by Ryan » Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:41 pm

Cool! Haven't heard of Commander's guidance before...
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2795
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Management

Post by Ryan » Sun Jun 24, 2012 2:53 am

I like the way the maximum of men under span of control has decreased... :P Those damn new generations.

So delegation is the way to go, what about the quality of those delegates, if not up to standard? How do you RE-TAKE control?
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
jimothy_183
Military
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Management

Post by jimothy_183 » Sun Jun 24, 2012 4:17 am

Ryan wrote: So delegation is the way to go, what about the quality of those delegates, if not up to standard? How do you RE-TAKE control?
@ 0:20



:lol:
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2795
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Management

Post by Ryan » Mon Jun 25, 2012 12:36 am

:lol: Nearly as bad as Private Pyle... Some like to use numbers and say "One, taking over command" and so on. Sometimes it causes a bit of riff-raff, and changing command would be like changing a fighter half way through a fight, they're getting the update sitrep and commands off the coach but it's now possibly going to be conducted differently or the team may adjust to the commander i.e. a lenient or untrustworthy commander you may lose quality. Other times the opposite and create motivation (which can be used, in a sneaky fashion, especially just pre-operation).

So if you have a section clearing a building (obviously fairly large?) then where would the TL and 2IC go? I suppose one goes towards the rear, apart of the trailers?
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
jimothy_183
Military
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Management

Post by jimothy_183 » Mon Jun 25, 2012 2:46 am

It depends on the situation inside the building. You have some options, you can merge the whole element into one or you can have one team provide overwatch and/or security while the other clears rooms or you can reconfigure the teams so that the 2IC is clearing rooms with 2 riflemen and 2 grenadiers while the Secco provides security with the LSW or you can have the 2IC and Secco swap. There are other ways to do this too that I haven't even thought of.

As for the actual positions of the leaders a leader has to be there to order the clearing team to do things while inside the room etc so he will have to enter with them. Ideally the leader would not be in the point position but if you are using fuild formations then you won't get to choose.
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2795
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Management

Post by Ryan » Tue Jun 26, 2012 7:59 pm

Would it be better for the TL to be somewhere around the middle so orders are given directly or is it more important the team is trained on being fluid and free-flowing? Like a scout in a field operation. And communication tips certainly help like passing down information (from front to back) and shouting out important information as a group.
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
jimothy_183
Military
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Management

Post by jimothy_183 » Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:38 am

We have had this discussion before both here and here. Both options are valid with different sets of pros and cons but in short if the team is better trained etc, use fluid.
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2795
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Management

Post by Ryan » Sat Dec 08, 2012 2:29 am

What does initiative have to do, pros and cons, in terms of personnel management? I mean someone may be using their initiative or at least what they perceive to be such in a wrong way. I think that's why the definition of initiative is a positive one, the right choice as opposed to wrong - other wise it's a human error not using human initiative.
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
jimothy_183
Military
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Management

Post by jimothy_183 » Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:23 am

Ryan wrote:What does initiative have to do, pros and cons, in terms of personnel management? I mean someone may be using their initiative or at least what they perceive to be such in a wrong way. I think that's why the definition of initiative is a positive one, the right choice as opposed to wrong - other wise it's a human error not using human initiative.
Initiative is a show of someone being proactive and independant. The con is that there is a risk that someone could be making a big mistake while taking the initiative without the actually being explicitly ordered to do something..

Initiative has been mentioned here.
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2795
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Management

Post by Ryan » Sun Dec 09, 2012 9:05 pm

True. I think it's an important subject, especially under bad leadership or when you have a team full of A-types. I think it needs another topic though.

Erm, to add to this. Micromanagement is not always bad. Micro-leading such as saying what is enterable, what is not, where you infiltrate in a narrow approach and so on will save lives and prevent compromises. Which door is the best door to get through? That's what the leader thinks. He then directs his troops there.

One of the biggest challenges for leading is the speed of which decisions need to be made and therefore TOO much micromanagement becomes a problem, slows people down and some micromanaging orders are just stupid i.e. "Hey you, get there" - when it's of no real advantage. To stop this you try to give yourself LESS stuff to manage, i.e. the plan is that structured that you are not making as many quick decisions or you are not drowning in your own decisions and choices you have to make.
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
jimothy_183
Military
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Management

Post by jimothy_183 » Mon Dec 10, 2012 7:40 am

Fair point. I'm just speaking from personal experience as I have observed several people who excersise micromanagement 100% of the time. That is what is bad, being unable to know when to micro and when to macro manage. There is a time and place for everything.
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

Post Reply

Return to “Leadership, General Discussions”