Summary:
This article describes the
various barriers that aid in the knowledge of effective red teaming within the joint
logistics community. Authors Christopher Paparone and George Topic address
issues that arise for this tool within senior management and leadership positions.
Paparone and Topic define red teaming as “the process of critically examining
and challenging the basic assumptions underpinning professional knowledge, planning,
programming, ideas, or initiatives.”
Used within the fields of
business and national security, red teaming provides organizations with the
ability to use unconventional methods in order to tackle simple or complex
problems. Within this article, Paparone and Topic ask “How often and how well
does the U.S. defense logistics enterprise red teaming and its major efforts?” Running
contrary to the concepts and designs of red teaming, the authors state that many
institutions within the logistics community tend to rely on unchallenged
thought processes and ideas.
Paparone and Topic stated that group
think is one major issue that red teaming attempts to mitigate as much as
possible due to its negative influence on group members as a whole. Controlling
and bypassing group think has at least three barriers that the authors discuss
throughout this article.
The first barrier that Paparone
and Topic address is hierarchy. While hierarchy does provide uniform and
efficient organization within the military for instance, it also can require
unquestioned compliance. This compliance can prevent a specific environment
from developing and encountering innovative ideas.
The second barrier presents the
idea that the team should be valued more than the ultimate decision made in any
given situation. According to Paparone and Topic, respecting team members and
their ideas signifies a willingness to be open to new ideas and criticism.
The third and final barrier
offered in this article displays a theme of self-censoring which in this case,
there is no desire to offer an alternative solution for fear that it will fail.
With this in mind, the individual not only fears failure, but also the blame
that comes with that from other teammates.
One solution that the authors
present in the academic realm to counter hierarchy, group think, and fear of
blame is the process of double-blind peer reviews. This process helps to
protect criticism from being concealed under any of these three previously discussed
barriers. The authors conclude this article by stating that one of the most
important lessons to teach future leaders is the “importance of candid and
critical assessments.”
Source:
Paparone, Christopher
R., Topic Jr., George L. (2015). Logistics and the (lost?) art of red teaming. Army
Sustainment, 47(2), 7-8.
Posts
Charles,
ReplyDeleteI can attest to the first hurdle of group think (hierarchy)being a real area of concern in the Army. As you stated in your write-up, it is often very difficult to influence one's bosses when they outrank you and have the ability to tell you off. This of course would be a direct reflection of their leadership styles and would ultimately harm that individual leader in the long run. I believe this is why the Army instituted something called "command climate surveys". These surveys are designed to allow subordinates to freely express their opinions of their leadership as a means for the leaders to make any adjustments deemed necessary. More often than not however, the subordinates use these surveys as an opportunity to complain about unrelated issues not dealing with unit leadership. So in theory I agree with the double blind peer reviews however they must be conducted in a certain way to get the desired results.
Eric, thank you for your comment. I did not know about "command climate surveys" and how subordinates use those for different purposes than they were intended. What I am drawing from your comment is the fact that there is still a problem even though the military tried to fix it with the introduction of these previously stated surveys.
ReplyDeleteChad, what are some of the shortcomings you found in this study?
ReplyDeleteHank, within this study I found the three barriers to be the shortcomings. Examining hierarchy, team value, and self-censoring in this study displayed multiple problems with red teaming.
ReplyDelete