Odd. Only a few months ago Admiral Jim Stavridis, in the August 2008 issue of Proceedings, urged junior officers to Read, Think, Write, and Publish.
Found this fascinating article in the latest Proceedings, which warns of the dangers of writing:
In today's military, boldness is rewarded only in battle, and sometimes not even then. It's a fact of human nature that leaders tend to promote subordinates who most emulate them.
The argument has been made that controversy among military officers should not be played out in public. Unfortunately, controversy played out in private usually dies a very quiet death. To give an idea life, sometimes the only effective way is to make it public, even when doing so might imperil one's career.
And there's the rub. I believe the real threat to serious and open debate has been a single-minded focus on careerism among some officers. This is destructive. In the final analysis, if you wish to advance the cause, you must be willing to put the good of the service over the good of your career (advice I gave to a young officer in "An Open Letter to Lt. Butler" and advice I tried to follow myself).4
I received warnings from superior officers that it would be in my best interest to stop writing. Some of this criticism stemmed from the nature of the subject I had chosen to write about. Some of the blame belongs to editors who changed the meaning of the pieces by assigning them eye-catching but off-the-mark titles. The result was the same: intense pressure from a superior officer to stop writing.
Odd. Only a few months ago Admiral Jim Stavridis, in the August 2008 issue of Proceedings, urged junior officers to Read, Think, Write, and Publish.
I was NTC in the late '90s when there were several junior officers (mostly LTs) who were all published in Army Times and/or Armor Magazine within a few weeks of each other.
The topics weren't without controversy, either - Force XXI's butt-kicking by the OPFOR, "Breaking the Phalanx", etc.
I remember the command being very encouraging of those officers in their writing and pushing dialogue forward in the field. And these weren't 'command-sanctioned' pieces either. They were just some guys who had ideas they wanted to express.
Brant
Wargaming and Strategy Gaming at Armchair Dragoons
Military news and views at GrogNews
“their citizens (all of them counted as such) glorified their mythology of ‘rights’… and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can endure.” Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers 1959
Play more wargames!
My personal experience is that if you write supporting a well liked or fashionable agenda, then you will be rewarded. - all about timing and use of language.
If you frighten or injure the Sacred Herd, you will suffer.
My work is by no means original or insightful, but I can say what serving UK officers would get crucified for saying, or so many of them tell me.
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
and subscribing off and on to periodicals covering all four services, my observation has been that there always are a few flag officers who actually encourage writing and don't object to some controversial stuff as long as it isn't overboard. A few of them will actually protect junior folks who write.
There are more of them who discourage such writing for several reasons, largely that it may reflect on them or the institutions they see themselves as guarding -- and the majority are sort of neutral and take no position unless, as Wilf says:The good news is that it seems to me there is, as a result of more and better communication and openness, a slight trend to less restriction and persecution on writers."...if you write supporting a well liked or fashionable agenda, then you will be rewarded. - all about timing and use of language.
If you frighten or injure the Sacred Herd, you will suffer.
Hmmm, Tom always made me drive when he took notes for his books.
I was however permitted to type his reports. That's quasi "encouraging your subordinates to write non-controversial stuff"... aye
If you want to blend in, take the bus
As long as they sang my praise
I always found this depended on where and whom one served. In history circles, writing was of course encouraged, indeed it was your duty.
I found the parallel to be with reading: those who read are more inclined to write. Those who refuse to read not only don't write, they don't want others to read or write.
Tom
I'd like to write but am honestly concerned about the ramifications.
I've seen outstanding officers write critically and had their careers destroyed. I don't want to be one "of them."
All goes back to organizational culture.
"Speak English! said the Eaglet. "I don't know the meaning of half those long words, and what's more, I don't believe you do either!"
The Eaglet from Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland
Tom,
Not that I'm terribly surprised... but that was incredibly insightful and tracks directly with my own experience...
You can take that a step or two further though...
Those who think critically, encourage their subordinates to do the same and are not "threatened" by informed and timely dissent... Those who don't....
I, too, think the trend is beginning to turn. However, this swing is as much a result of necessity then a philosophical cultural swing (even includes writing that makes ground beef of the sacred cow).
Proof will be in the coming decades when the dust has relatively settled in IZ and AFG. Unfortunately I remain unconvinced... If only we can remain decisively engaged in combat operations for another 15 years, maybe we can flush the 'old' culture...
Hope springs eternal (tongue only partially stuck in cheek)
Live well and row
Hacksaw
Say hello to my 2 x 4
I was warned by a few well-meaning individuals that continued writing could be harmful to my career if I'm not careful.
I will say that I have had nothing but positive results from my writings so far ... but then again I haven't written anything truly controversial or undermined my chain of command's position. I think the key is to separate provocative thesis from rants at the world. Well argued dissent is seldom ill-received, semi-personalized attacks on the system don't resonate well. There's a difference. It's kind of like why Hackworth started strong with "About Face" and entered a downward spiral of rants, or Ralph Peters' Paramaters pieces from the 90s are interesting and his NY Post columns grating.
What I would like to see more of is soldiers and officers relating their experiences and lessons on paper - and their implications for doctrine. I am amazed at how much recognition I received simply because of a few articles stating what most people already know - but no one had taken the time to write down.
Agreed and as I am in the bidness of getting folks to write, I chide all leaders--regardless of rank--to keep personal notebooks, diaries, and key papers so that at some stage they can write their stories. Many don't listen but some do. If I can get 1 out of 50 to actually do that it is worth the effort.
best
Tom
I've seen no evidence in my career that writing has been looked on unfavorably. I’d say there are a few of things worth considering though:
If you are going to be critical, make sure your criticisms are backed up by some critical thinking
Consider what your motive is for writing, those who read it will usually pick up on it pretty quick.
Don’t be petty or reject criticism, the most value comes not from the content itself, but the knowledge that gets built around it.
Be true to what you believe in, writing something you don’t care about is pretty transparent.
One of the reasons I use my own name and have a picture of me in civilian clothes as my avatar is so if someone has an issue with what I write, they can find me easy enough and we can address it. It not a requirement, but it’s a nice reminder to me that I am accountable, both to myself and to others for what I write.
Finally, those who may appear to have been disabused due to their writing may in fact have other traits and qualities which manifested themselves in other ways. That is to say it is probably less about what they wrote, and more about who they are. Conversely, those who get rewarded are probably not done so on the basis of their writing alone, but upon those actions and characteristics which drove/inspired them to want to exchange ideas. I’ll admit that there may be some exceptions – a higher echelon CDR who punishes or rewards based on what someone wrote or said, but I think that is an exception. I believe writing about our profession, exchanging ideas and thinking about the issues that surround it are a mainstay to its health.
Best, Rob
Write. A good TTP is to show your draft around to trusted individuals prior to publication. Feedback on drafts made several poor to mediocre articles of mine acceptable. For example, Hacksaw's feedback on the Anbar article was critical, and when coupled with the MR editor (who was awesome), the piece ended great compared to the first draft.
Also shop it to one or two people who you trust for honest critical feedback on the ideas - and have them shoot holes in them.
As long as you argue well, it's hard for people to retaliate personally. The key is to separate your personal peeves from professional thought. It's been hard for me (Hacksaw knows), but ultimately makes the writing more effective.
Absolutely. Remember that as you write you will educate yourself as well as your readers. The rewards must come from within yourself, not from the readers. They should reinforce what you learned along the way, not vice versa. Otherwise you end up writing to satisfy an exterior audience who is both fickle and often jealous because you are writing and they are not.
Nothing prepared me more for the Rwandan tragedy than researching and writing history about earlier Congo crises.
Tom
My recently departed CoC only allowed informational and self-agrandizing articles.I always found this depended on where and whom one served.
The greater frustration was after having good discussions in private with others who could change training for the better, they would defer to the unimaginative boss.
For some reason in my career they pay me more if I write.
Sam Liles
Selil Blog
Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.
Lead by example.
One of my senior co-workers once told me that his goal was to write one major article for publication every year. He made general, so it must have been good advice.
I wasn't nearly so prolific (and didn't make general, either. Hmmm.)
A coupla caveats --
Don't write outside your league. Do it once and you'll be ignored. Do it more often and you'll get a rep.
Don't write on duty unless the article/book is directly related to your current duty position. Rob's case study is an example of the book relating directly to his duties. If co-workers or superiors think that you are using THEIR time to suit YOUR selfish purposes, life will not be good.
Don't go about it half vast. Gather all supporting data and double check your facts -- if something you write is inaccurate, what else is? Organize and re-organize your presentation --no stream of consciousness. Float it to a small circle of trusted friends. Proof your shirt -- no typos, no poor grammar, then is not than/to is not too is not two/they're is not their is not there. Small errors can become major detractions.
Don't blog in your article.
I'd mention I took advantage of a number of SWJ council members to provide me feedback - which not only told me what to change, but what to retain. Being able to have Marc and John on the project was a huge help. Bill was great at shaping the EXSUM. I also got a great deal of assistance in editing-there was no way I could get it all done myself in any reasonable amount of time. Bottom line was I'd never put together something that big, and having some friends to help kept me focused.Don't write on duty unless the article/book is directly related to your current duty position. Rob's case study is an example of the book relating directly to his duties.
It took allot of help to get it done and I did not realize it would when I started. All of that equals time. I'm glad it was something I could do at work (in my spare time), but something that big also follows you home. Tom mentioned the process also educates the writer, you better believe it!
Having said all that though, I'm grateful for the opportunity and the experience.
Best, Rob
Bookmarks