Sam,
I would love your help on something like this. I am an undergrad and may not have "need" for a model quite yet but I think it would be highly instructive for me and I could always come back and dust the template or work in progress off should I find a ready application.... I don't know if I am ready,(you tell me, what am I getting into lol?) but I do have the time and I definitely have the interest so....
mmx1,
I twice overheard my First Sergeant asking my Platoon Sergeant, a Gunny, about the status of the mentorship process between him and us, the team leaders. That same Gunny was constantly pushing mentorship on us in relation to our teams. I wonder how much of their inspiration came from something like what you mention here... basically a program that never got off the ground.
For what it is worth I can not measure how successful I, or any of the other team leaders were in the mentorship of our teams, but I can say to A MAN that our Gunny was EXTREMELY effective in mentoring us. He knew a lot and he taught it all, I owe so much to him. He didn't have to answer the questions the way he did, he didn't have to be so descriptive or explanatory but he drew a connection between his experiences and our pressing need to learn from them. I owe a great deal to many but I owe everything to this man. Ideally if I could I would want to duplicate this experience throughout the entire Corps and the DoD if I can only because I KNOW how much it helped and still helps me today.
Marc,
That would be incredible! I would love to pursue this but have to admit that this is a new direction for me so the terminology and the basic processes may be foreign... but I learn quickly and I would work my ass off to put something viable together. I have been looking over the Marine sites and some of the Army Knowledge stuff and I am beginning to think that I may not need to invent a new wheel, but rather incorporate a new angle into systems that are already in place.
My two biggest questions are what should the OVERALL focus be and specifically what should the material include? Some suggestions I have:
A. An overall emphasis on the "No better friend, no worse enemy concept."
1. Half of the site or program is devoted to the "Friend" concept and would include a:
a. Focus on the United States of America and all things related- This includes enabling the service member to have a working knowledge of where he comes from, how we became who we are today and what makes our system different from say Marxism for instance.
b.Focus on Social Sciences- (Psych, Soc, Anthro etc...) These subjects are highly instructive on human behavior and go a long way in explaining similarities and differences and many of the "Whys?" we ask in a day.
c. Focus on Current Events and Cultural Awareness- Study three regions for X number of months, use no outright American sources and analyze their relative trends and tendencies and then tie it into the....
d.Focus on "History" - which provides a foundation for everything we see and do now.
The softer side of the program will attempt to fill in the blanks that home, high school, college, and general purpose life may not have provided.
[In essence, if this idea is starting to sound like a BA, it is not an accident, I foresee a program where a service member can earn a BA in military arts if they work hard enough... and I don't mean in their off time or when they are not deployed... I mean as part of their formal training process.]
2. The other half is geared towards the "Enemy" concept and would include:
a. Studies in historical battles - A module might include 20 pivotal battles (ranging progressively from smaller unit sized skirmishes to larger) and would entail having a 3-D "battle board" that is as accurate as possible, (similar to what are used for floor sized war games, or comparable to the "puff board" they have in CAS simulators... but not as large) and also physical, tangible "troops" that can be manipulated by the student. The lesson will take them through and step by step show moves and countermoves, what went right and what went wrong, what could be done differently, and would ask questions such as “What would you do differently? What would you do similarly? How would you deal with threat such and such given circumstance yada yada?" I know a number of guys who would give body parts to be able to actually witness Gettysburg (and *shudder* learn from it by osmosis whether they like it or not) but who would never pick up a ten page book on the subject. (I know the academies incorporate methods similar to this in some of their classes and would appreciate any insight or experiences from anyone connecting this to that.)
b. Increased focus in threat weapons and tactics- to include Dis. & Ass, live fire and implementation training (how they use it, with hands-on demonstrations in reconstructed enemy positions). eg: How an RPG-7 and an AT-4 are similar and how they are different and what that means in application to you on the battlefield. (Pubs are great but with the millions of AK's, RPK's, RPG's out there I don't see why every combat arms service member (AT LEAST) shouldn't be able to not only tell you everything inside and out about the enemies capabilities and liabilities but also show you… (See at this range, the groups are larger…so at X yards you are relatively safer from threat Y.) We can tell you 50 differences between the M16A1 and the M16A2 or the Glock 17 and the 19 (two very similar examples) but when it comes to the fundamental differences between an RPK and an AK (two completely different examples) "we" (hunters, NRA members, and all Marines over E-6 relax, I am not talking about you guys!) can only come up with a couple. This is unacceptable, we should know their weapons only slightly less than we know our own.
c. Studies on every single terrorist organization and rogue nation on the State Department or CIA’s hit list- I bet you if I had fifty guesses I could pick who our next attack or war would come from. This sounds like a no-brainer, and I am sure given fifty choices we all would be right but that is my point exactly, we KNOW where the main threats are, I mean over the last 20 some odd years we have been responding to the “Usual Suspects” and this is unlikely to change. Why do we wait until our usual enemy "#5" is pegging our fun meter to say "Let’s go kick some ass… and by the way start teaching the troops about #5 RIGHT AWAY!” This is bull####. Every E-5+ in the service should be able to tell you the difference between Hezbollah and Hamas and not have to receive a crash course two days out the next time we deploy into or just off the coast of Lebanon. We need to fix this and there is no excuse for the intel bubbas and the O's to be the only ones who know this stuff.
What I envision is not so much read this, write about that but more learn the theory from a series of case studies (from psychology, or American history, military history etc…) and then apply it in hand’s on exercises (How would you move your machine gun, weapons platoon, battalion etc? Ok show me…) that are reinforced with a “written” project that is submitted for "credit"- towards promotion for example. I like the dichotomy of friends and enemies and think that a system designed as such would be extremely flexible and therefore extremely palatable to both the civilian and martial sectors....
Last edited by Ender; 04-06-2007 at 10:33 PM.
This is a truth that has not escaped me! I am like a kid in a candy store on here and can not imagine any other situation on the planet that would put me in such close proximity with so many great civil and military minds. This concept actually ties in nicely with where I want to go next with this too:
ON SWC, I have noticed that there are a number of professors, teachers, academics, SNCO’s, officers, diplomats, and all other brands and flavors of government employment. The total sum of experience shared on this site would have to add up into the millennia and I am not ignorant of the fact that many of the concepts I am wrestling with now have been kicked over before by some of the very minds I speak of now. So in the attempt at trying to come up with a solid mentorship plan for the military (at least on paper) and also wanting to groom and be groomed into an effective future leader I ask these questions of everyone here.
-If you had to build tomorrow’s “super soldier,” how would you do it? Tomorrow’s "super spy?"
-If you had to rebuild your own education, or career path how would you do it?
-What subjects do you feel are critical for tomorrow’s military leader? What classes did you take or subjects did you study that are considered as "irreplaceable" for your development?
- What formative books, games, movies etc… were influential in shaping your ideas and thoughts from childhood, to early adulthood to now?
-If you had to pick 10 historical battles to share with your troops what would they be and why?
-If you wanted to develop solid well-rounded civil leaders what areas would you want them to have a mastery of?
I am very curious to hear some of the concepts that you all feel are crucial and look forward to being blown away. Aside from that and more practically, I feel that a lot of what you have to offer could help me distill some of the more erratic (but still substantive) thoughts I have racing around into a cogent argument for a “mentorship program" that is not half-baked.
Even if this entire thing is simply an exercise in thought and Headquarters Marines Corps never adopts the Ender Method I will still have learned a great deal by trying to iron it all out so any insight or contribution is strongly welcomed!!
Joel
Last edited by Ender; 04-07-2007 at 01:22 AM.
Hi Joel,
Well, since you want a dissertation.....
Anyway, I'm tied up until tomorrow morning, so will take a stab at some of your questions, etc., then. I'l also toss up a course site for you to play with then. 'till tomorrow,
Marc
Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
Senior Research Fellow,
The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
Carleton University
http://marctyrrell.com/
No rush Marc!
Last edited by Ender; 04-06-2007 at 10:40 PM.
http://www.mca-marines.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6
Joel,
Let me say up front that I commend you for your energy and more importantly for wanting to embrace the fact that our young Marines are a hell of a lot more capable than we often give them credit for. That said, I think your ambitions are too high for the time being. I say this because of the way that we currently approach developing our leaders (see link above). We use "strategic corporal" as if it were a fact, but in reality, as you've repeatedly stated in numerous posts at SWC, it's a lot of lip service with little training to back the concept. The specifics of your initiative would put some meat to the term "strategic corporal" and I encourage you to continue your efforts toward this end. Further, when at the 70-80% solution, write an article for the Marine Corps Gazette. Most every General Officer in our Corps reads the Gazette and will most definitely take on board what you have to say.
Unfortunately, at the present time we do have a mentor program, as mentioned by the TBS Lt. Problem is that it's not fully embraced across the Corps, at all levels of leadership. I ask if there's a difference between mentorship and leadership because, for me at least, a good leader is naturally a good mentor and will do many of the things that you describe such as identifying a Marine's strengths and weaknesses, goals, etc. and then develop a plan to take advantage of strengths and help weaknesses in such a way that helps the Marine accomplish his or her goal(s). Further, a good leader should also take a personal interest in developing a Marine's MIND through PME, such as ensuring that books on the CMC reading list for each rank are read and discussed, as well as additional assignments based on the current operating environment, etc. Additionally, leaders should frequently sit down with Marines, look them in the eyes, and explain expectations and have the moral courage to tell a Marine when these expectations aren't being met and when they are. Sadly, I've been in the Corps for 6 years now and have had only 1 senior sit me down, look me in the eye balls and do all this.
For this reason I think your mentoring program should start with the very basic elements of leadership initially: talk to a Marine one-on-one, spell out goals, help develop a plan to achieve them, and then SUPERVISE. If this is done, much of what you talk about will be accomplished. For example, in counseling/mentoring/leading/emplace new buzzword of the day my Marines, I almost always heard Marines respond to the question: "what are your goals in the Corps?" with "to be the most technically proficient Marine in the squad or section, to be a PT stud, to be a team player, to reach the next rank, to start working toward a college degree, and on occasion, to become an officer." These were the norm. Now all a good leader has to do is lead the Marine that responds in these ways to the promise land. I don't think you need a Marine from another battalion to help. Plus, with optempo the way it is today, I'm not sure how many Marines from other units are around to help.
Last thought... in your unit, through your own force of will and personal example, you can make a mentoring program the norm. I have no doubt in my mind that this is true. Now, finish school and get your ass to IOC so that a platoon of infantrymen can have the leader they deserve!
Last edited by Maximus; 04-07-2007 at 02:51 AM.
Bookmarks