 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
RECOMMENDED READING: REVIEW: EVERY MAN A TIGER
One graphic, hard-hitting example of the dramatic improvement in results that can
be attained through the new model and view of the
organization comes from the military.
Every Man A Tiger, by Tom Clancy and Chuck Horner vividly describes the tops-down,
command-and-control, highly centralized
decision making in the conduct of the Vietnam War and clearly, crisply ties it to
a flow of misinformation, repressed feedback, terrible
decision-making and ultimately abysmal results.
The example is then sharply contrasted to Desert Storm where the military
leadership refused to yield centralized "control" of battle
field execution to Washington once the decision was made to proceed, nor did it
even try to formulate a plan beyond the first two and
one-half days of the conflict. Rather it relied upon a constant flow of
information (feedback) from the front lines creating and
constantly updating a "rolling two day" plan. Further, within established "rules
of engagement," substantial latitude was given to field
forces for on-the-spot decision making.
What made the old organizational model unfit for both Vietnam and Desert Storm was
the accelerated pace of battlefield change
driven by guerilla warfare in the first case and applied technology in the second.
The metaphor is clear in terms of the accelerated
change in the marketplace making the old model no longer suited for the
enterprise. Of course there were many important differences
between Vietnam and Desert Storm, but the linkage of performance to the differing
organizational models is key in the minds of
senior military leaders involved in both conflicts. The Desert Storm model is
closely aligned with various concepts at the heart of
complexity science.
Return
|
Overview | Concepts | Terms
|
