MAGAZINE
SPRING 2020
PLAN OBSERVE ANALYSE
LESSON INDENTIFIED
PRIORITIZATION With regard to prioritization , the study identifies that LL is not the only concern of the Leadership who may often place more importance on other things . This drives LL practitioners , who likely require timely decisions , to often find ways to work around the LL process in order to address issues requiring immediate attention . This is especially true in the Implementation Phase ( the second phase of the LL process ) when focused resource commitment and prioritization of effort are required . In the case of competing priorities , the decision is sometimes taken but , in many cases , the action is deferred because of competing priorities .
DECISION MAKING With regard to decision-making , the study identifies that Leadership may struggle to make a decision because the sheer amount of available data and analysis results expand the available options to an unobtainable decision point . Also as a consequence of prioritization , Leadership engagement is sometimes perceived sporadic rather than as a continuous engagement element . Consequently , more time is often needed to inform Leadership about urgent issues that would require rapid decision making . Another factor at times impacting decision making is that Leadership does not fully trust the evidence provided by new technologies , leading them to base decisions more on their own experiences , feelings , and personal judgement . As a result , there is the potential that some decisions may not be informed sufficiently .
A POTENTIAL SOLUTION Although new technologies may help in addressing some of these challenges , and intensive research with passionate discussions about this topic will always provide new
ANALYSIS PHASE
instruments to enable Leadership in facing these challenges , there is something else that , in general terms , should be reconsidered . We believe command and control policies are not enough to compel a strong organizational LL mindset for information sharing and knowledge building , as this mindset is mainly based on a free individual will . The mindset cannot necessarily be changed simply by giving orders . We believe , therefore , there is a need to shift towards an inspire and support philosophy . In other words , a new approach should be considered in order to have the focus on peoples ’ needs rather than simply achieving LL as a task . The people within our Alliance are the engines that drive the decisions made by NATO Leaders . They should be inspired by a clear purpose of LL capability and identify the benefits of exploiting the outputs of LL , complete with a well-established feedback loop for both the LL community and relevant stakeholders . These people , of course , will require clear boundaries for their areas of responsibility but also discretion and freedom of action in their particular LL role . Utmost , people will need to be able to show and foster tolerance in regard to cultural diversity and language barriers in a multinational working environment . Overall , Leadership buy-in of the value of our organization will continue to be a critical factor for the NATO ’ s LL capability , a capability which will continue to face known and unknown challenges . However , the success in addressing these challenges very likely will depend on the ability to converge individual and organizational mindset towards effective learning and a solid knowledge transfer inside and outside the organization . LC
IMPLEMENTATION PHASE
DECIDE
IMPLEMENT VALIDATE
LESSON LEARNED
LEADERSHIP IS A CHOICE , NOT A
POSITION
( 3 ) In this context , leadership is a complex dynamic system rather than just an attribute or something only assigned to single individual leaders who give orders in a traditional leadership approach .
33
( 4 ) JALLC ; New Technologies in support of Lessons Learned ; JALLC / CG / 19 / 011 ; 31 January 2019 ; NATO Unclassified