The following is an excerpt from Mike Figliuolo’s book “One Piece of Paper: The Simple Approach to Powerful, Personal Leadership.” Figliuolo is a regular SmartBlogs contributor.
Leaders have to make choices. Many times those choices are painful. The decisions a leader makes can affect dozens to thousands of people. Sometimes the results of a leader’s actions are spectacular. Other times the results are spectacular disasters. Nonetheless, leaders must make decisions and act.
Having a maxim (which is a personal rule of conduct or behavior) focused on forcing action is powerful. It will move you from analysis to activity. It will help you be decisive. It should reduce your fear and uncertainty and serve as a clear reminder of how to act during uncertain times.
My decision-making maxim came from the lips of one of the greatest military leaders in history: “In case of doubt, attack!” — General George S. Patton III
Besides the fact that I like the quote, the maxim elicits strong emotions for me. When I was in the Army, I was a tank platoon leader. I studied Gen. Patton a great deal during both my time at West Point and during my initial armor training. I internalized the notion that the worst action you can take on the battlefield is to take no action at all.
During one of my field training exercises as a platoon leader, I had to employ this maxim. Our war game scenario required us to charge across a long, open battlefield to find and destroy the opposing force. My tank was the lead tank of the lead platoon of the lead company of the lead battalion in the brigade combat team. We were the tip of the spear of a 400-vehicle unit.
As we sped across the battlefield, we approached a set of hills. There were several passes through those hills to choose from. During our planning before the battle, my commander and I decided I would lead us through a specific pass because it provided the safest and fastest route. As we raced toward the hills however, I was unable to tell which of the passes was the one we had chosen during our planning session.
I was faced with a difficult set of choices. I could have stopped, pulled out my map, and figured out which pass was correct. This would have stopped all units behind me, leaving 400 vehicles and their crews sitting in the open subject to enemy fire, but it would give me the time I needed to identify the right pass. My other choice was I could keep rolling at 40 miles per hour and take my best guess as to which pass was the correct one. That option would keep the brigade moving. It also meant I might lead us into the wrong pass, which could be a dead end.
In my moment of doubt I summoned the words of Gen. Patton and chose to attack. “Driver, go left! Take the left pass!” We attacked. We died — quickly. I should have gone right instead. Fortunately the units behind us saw the unfolding carnage of my unit being destroyed, and they decided to head toward the correct pass. They flooded through it and crushed the opposing forces on the other side.
I made a bad decision by going left. The choice of direction, however, was not the important decision. The true decision was whether to stop, analyze the map, and then choose a pass or to take my best guess as to which pass was the correct one and continue the attack.
While my company was dying in the left pass, it felt like I had made the wrong decision on that call as well. Upon reflection though I think my maxim served me well. Had I stopped to analyze the passes I could have gotten everyone behind me killed because they would have been sitting in the open, vulnerable to direct and indirect fire. By choosing to follow the maxim and attack, my unit died but the rest of the brigade survived and won the battle.
My decision created an outcome others could then analyze. They knew where the enemy was and which pass they had chosen to defend. I provided my colleagues with important additional data through my actions, and they were able to make better decisions based on new information.
I am not saying my choice of the wrong pass was responsible for us winning the battle. Heck, if I had chosen the right pass perhaps all of us would have survived. The bottom line is I made the best call I could based on my understanding of the situation.
Leaders make decisions. Those decisions are not always the correct ones but they are better than not making a decision at all. Had I abdicated my responsibility to make a decision, I would have risked the lives of the entire brigade. Better to choose wrong and have a few of us die than to not choose at all and invite certain death for everyone.
Gen. Patton’s guidance does not only apply in a tank. His advice makes for effective business decision-making too.
Let’s turn our attention to you. How do you spur yourself onward to action? What is your approach to decision-making? Are you aggressive? Do you make “gut” decisions or do you prefer to gather as much information as possible before making a call? Do you procrastinate? Are there certain types of decisions you find easier to make than others? Are there any types of decisions you hate making? You need to evaluate how you currently make decisions before articulating a maxim designed to focus your decision-making efforts.
Twitter
Facebook
Linkedin
RSS
That's the trouble with so many military leaders — they think in terms of acceptable casualties. Let's say it was your business, and not a war exercise…Let's say your "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" decision (rather than taking a moment to reflect, which had its own inherent dangers) cost you 10% of your staff (or your revenue, or whatever), plus the loss of your top leader(s). Still a good decision?
Here's the funny thing about business: generally speaking, no one has to die. Taking a moment to actually THINK (instead of always attacking) just might be a good maxim.
Military intelligence. Not an oxymoron. Just a plain old regular moron.
But how many times in business are both choices marginally acceptable, but there is only a 10% difference between the two. Both move the company ahead. However, one is 10% better than the other – the only question is which. However, the decision not to do anything is 100% sure to get us nowhere, and everyday we delay, the outcome of BOTH chances decreases by 1% so after 10 days the choice is moot! This happens all the time.
The other advantage to moving ahead is that we get to learn from the choice. Even if we pick the wrong one – we learn for the next time. Not making any choice gives us no learning. And we lose again.
I think you are missing the point – which is not surprising given the tone of your response. There is paralysis by analysis and sometimes (a lot of times actually) a wrong decision is better than no decision at all.
BTW – as a functioning organization I would take the military over most, and certainly over all other governmental agencies.
Amen Ed. Thanks for saying what I was going to say. Well put.
"everything rises and falls on leadership" – John Maxwell. this says a lot!
But how many times in business are both choices marginally acceptable, but there is only a 10% difference between the two. Both move the company ahead. However, one is 10% better than the other – the only question is which. However, the decision not to do anything is 100% sure to get us nowhere, and everyday we delay, the outcome of BOTH chances decreases by 1% so after 10 days the choice is moot! This happens all the time.
The other advantage to moving ahead is that we get to learn from the choice. Even if we pick the wrong one – we learn for the next time. Not making any choice gives us no learning. And we lose again.
General Patton is certainly a good role model, but in the leadership training we engaged in with my former organization we studied General Powell. Colin Powell has a rule that you need to get in the range of 40% to 70% of the information in hand and then act. Greater than 70% and you're risking the "analysis paralysis", less than 40% and you don't have enough information to make a reasonable decision. In the exercise the Platoon Leader had 50% of the info and acted, right in line with Powell's guidelines.
Things change fast in the business world, and waiting for more information can let a competitor get a jump on you, or let a customer choose another supplier. There is, of course, a fine line between rapid and hasty. That's where Powell's rule provides some additional value over a simple "action vs inaction" model.
As for the Military, I grew up on Submarines where not making a decision quickly could result in a reactor core meltdown. Being able to make correct decisions quickly requires highly trained people. Invest in training your people so they can make the best decisions possible, and then provide the decision support systems they need, policies, procedures, guidelines, etc.
Michael – holy cow! How many years has it been? Drop me an email at info@thoughtleadersllc.com – I would love to reconnect with you (assuming this is the MAJ Meehan I knew at Fort Knox…).
One of my favorite sayings, which I have heard attributed to the Army — A good plan today beats a perfect plan tomorrow.
Bingo.
The point here is to adapt to the situation during a decision making process. In the military, no action = dead. In business, no action = no profit…good as dead. BTW Mike F, I doubt that it is the MAJ Meehan that you knew. He mentioned submarines = navy >< major…V/R CAPT D Sutton, USN-ret.
Spot on CAPT Sutton.
And re: MAJ Meehan – the one I knew was actually in the navy before he got his wits about him and came over to the dark side of the army so I'm putting odds on that it's him. Thanks again for reading.
I have to say, totally disagree with both the analogy and the conclusions. First, great leaders know where they are going BEFORE they get to the crossroads. Maxwell calls it the law of Navigation, you can call it simply thinking ahead. While not everything can be anticipated, MOST business decisions and a great many in life can be anticipated; so this whole "crossroads" analogy seems a little contrived. In fact, even those decisions which come from the "gut" of the leader, at a crossroads, don't emerge from wholly nowhere – and certainly not from a maxim. They come from reflection upon past experience and reflections.
Additionally, nobody's going to get killed in taking a moment to evaluate the "road map" in business; and rarely in life, too. But PLENTY of companies implode, hurting all of their employees' jobs and customers, as well as many personal lives implode, when someone takes a "quick" decision without thinking ahead.
So, I think this is really bad thinking, using an unrealistic crisis as metaphor, and encourages people to follow their gut rather than think – ahead and during the moment. It's dangerous advice, in my experience.
Matthew http://www.matthewferrara.com
While I respect your notions Matthew, I've got to completely disagree. First – not contrived. Ever been to the National Training Center during a pre-dawn attack with a brigade behind you? No? Then stop making assumptions. If yes, did you have a GPS? Because our GPS' were made out of paper when I served. Yes – we knew where we were going. It's a little thing called the fog of war (or at least mock war).
I think you're completely missing the point. I'm not advocating complete snap decisions. What I'm advocating is when you reach a point where you've done all the reasonable amount of analysis you can, make a freaking decision rather than subject your team to analysis paralysis. We're not talking about a "moment" of indecision here in the business world – I'm talking about the weeks or months it sometimes takes to make a call when gathering more data will tell you no more than you already know.
Mike:
Is your argument: If you've never been in a military training exercise, you can't understand the point? Really?
I just don't see your analogy; and I don't think making a "freaking decision" is the best way to lead a company. I've led my firm for 22 years. I know you can overanalyze and put off a decision; but your analogy wasn't that you sat at the crossroads for weeks or months thinking it through – you came upon the crossroads and quickly went with your gut. So it didn't seem to work for me. That's all.
Good luck with your blog.
No Matthew. Again – you misunderstand the point (both the original one and the reply). I concede the point because frankly it seems you have a fundamentally different perspective and aren't bridging to another way of thinking about it. The point isn't about gut calls. The point is about not being paralyzed and making a decision versus excessive analysis.
Mike, you hit the nail on the head.
Unless you've been in this type of situation, you really can't understand. Those of us who have been in situations like this, have a unique ability to understand and make the tough decisions.
I always think the following when I have to make a tough decision: "nobody is shooting at us, right". It helps me to put things in perspective. It's okay to make the wrong decision, as long as you know how to actually make a decision. Too many people in this world are afraid to actually make a decision.
Not even being in that situation, I can still perfectly understand it. Similiarly I often say to my team "no one is going to die" and "don't polish the cannonball" when they need to make a decision without ALL the information that typically leads to overanalysis anyway.