While I do not disagree that better training promotes trust, I submit that trust is rather hard to practice when those outside the chain of command, but who hold the purse strings, force military leaders to micromanage for a variety of reasons.
Case in point: at least one US 4-star general (CG, USAMC) (probably several others that included the CJCS and the VCJCS, the CENTCOM Cdr, and the CSA) getting daily reports by bumper number on the status of uparmoring Humvees in Iraq/Kuwait. Possible reason: some zealous reporters' stories on GI inventiveness in concocting ballistic protection for Humvee passengers, a vehicle never envisoned as an armored personnel carrier, and the knee jerk response by certain elected officials and their staffs to such stories.
The following from Bob's World latest post
is just the latest variation on a theme. I seem to recall Bn Cdrs micromanaging platoon-level fights in VN from their helicopters. With that kind of background informing the leadership development of the mentors of much of today's military senior leadership, is it any wonder that the best we might hope for from the current crop of seniors is something like a Reaganesque "trust but verify"?There is no putting the genie of high tech capabilities that have resulted in nannie cam leadership of late back in the bottle, but we need to make damn sure we are building a force that is ready to be just as effective when someone takes that genie away, bottle and all.
I can only speak to the American military, based on my experience. One hopes that other nations' militaries are not equally "blessed" with such trust and oversight.
Bookmarks