Officers face a healthy debate regarding a War on the Rocks article that explores how to maximize leaders to think creatively and get out of the traditional boxes of a history focus. Too many officers feed their doctrine obsessions at the expense of challenges that outpace doctrine in a complex world. Doctrine is important, don’t get me wrong. In both the operational and institutional Army, the true challenge for leaders is the art of thinking and overcoming the dangers of intellectual laziness that feed bias.
Social media is just one facet of our contemporary world that further exacerbates allegations of feeding narrow thinking and bias. None of us is immune to the reality that with every click of a mouse we feed a flow of information that is intended to satisfy our demand. There is growing concern that social media is one facet that is feeding the macrocosm of American divide. And, the microcosm of the military can just as easily fall to the sway of bias (both perceived and real). It’s all too easy to blame social media for something that goes far deeper than a platform: the human mind.
Rethinking the way we think, why we think, and how we think can help mitigate these biases. The heart of the solution relies on the practice of philosophy. We need to be rethinking individually, socially, and culturally.
Rethinking Ourselves
Rethinking ourselves as individuals means examining our own bias. We all have biases. Applying the art of self-reflection can be a useful mediator. Leaders instill this most effectively in both the classroom and training environments. Socrates said, “the unexamined life is not worth living”. This requires honest examination of our biases. How do we view the world and why?
The philosopher William James Durant wrote it beautifully:
“It is a mistake to think that the past is dead. Nothing that has ever happened is quite without influence at this moment. The present is merely the past rolled up and concentrated in this second of time. You, too, are your past; often your face is your autobiography; you are what you are because of what you have been; because of your heredity stretching back into forgotten generations; because of every element of environment that has affected you, every man or woman that has met you, every book that you have read, every experience that you have had; all these are accumulated in your memory, your body, your character, your soul. So with a city, a country, and a race; it is its past, and cannot be understood without it.”
Our past shapes our perceptions, and those perceptions create bias. Not all biases are inherently bad, but any bias carried to excess can delude perspective. For example, many senior leaders have years of combat experience. This is valuable on many fronts. However, experience does not translate to infallibility. This is especially true in environments that may be quite different in nature and scope of experience. Does experience in counterinsurgency translate to understanding the scope of a conventional warfare environment? Consistently examining our assumptions allows us to think through the problem, and while this is necessary it is not sufficient.
Rethinking Socially
All people are different. Experience is one facet. Whether it be race, creed, gender, education, or other life experience – people are different. Great leaders and scholars see diversity as a learning multiplier and a bias mitigator. This is just as important to a formation as it is to an academic environment.
The greatest advantage of diverse teams and groups is that they can help to mitigate bias. Where we may see our thinking as unflawed, another person may be able to help us rethink that assumption or bias, in a new way that expands knowledge. Diversity is America’s richest fuel. We should use it constructively and maximize the utility it provides to understand complex problems.
With groups comes the possibility of groupthink.. This happens for many reasons. Applying sound principles of hearing out other views, which you may not agree with strengthens a culture that cares about truth and acting rightly. We may not be comfortable hearing differing views, but they are what we need. Constructive conflict leads to progress. This requires respectful candor, and the willingness to accept disagreement.
People want to click the easy button of tribalism because conflicting views make people uncomfortable. This happens in an Army unit as well as any group that can fall victim to operating as an intellectual siege barrier. Learning requires uncomfortable challenges to belief, which is respectfully aimed at truth, not character destruction (ad hominem attacks typically are not conducive to receptivity).
The clashing of viewpoints avoids the leader folly of utopian (or often dystopian) practices of avoiding issues that exist. Wargaming is one such example of this practice as it relates to staff planning. The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP) is rooted in acknowledging assumptions, and proper practice leads to a greater probability of realizing outcomes. Similarly, the Intelligence Community uses Structured Analytical Techniques (SATs), for the same purpose of checking assumptions and bias.
The best way to expand viewpoints is to open our circle to diverse people. This may be the circle of mentors we may have, peer group circles, or personal friends we entrust for council. Our learning is our responsibility, and our respective organizations learning is also our responsibility as leaders.
Rethinking Culturally
To succeed in this new environment, leaders and organizations need to inculcate a culture that prepares our soldiers to carry on the gold-standard of critical thinking. The military has a good reputation and high public trust for many reasons. We can potentially set the bar of being above the plague of division, and healers who can mitigate the growing reality of tribalistic divisions. We can, as then Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis said, “hold the line.” This requires a commitment to practicing the art of thinking for the sake of honest candor and truth.
Army leaders need to prioritize a “whole of thinking” educational approach that engages with individual, social, and cultural examination. When the thinking stops, the mission flops.
The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the US Army, Department of Defense, or the US Government.
Subscribe to The Company Leader!