Compare and Contrast the Army Problem Solving Model (Process) with the Rapid Decision Making and Synchronization Process (C100). As a leader and Sergeant Major, I must have the essential skills to identify and solve problems in order to accomplish the missions we face in our current and future operational environment. The army has provide us with two techniques in order to identify and solve problems; the army problem solving model which is a systematic approach to a decision making process, and the rapid-decision making and synchronization process which provide a rapid solution to a rapid changing environment. There are several similarities and differences between these two processes, as I compared the process I realized they both utilize the higher headquarter guidance, subordinates, personal observation, and decision-making guide in order to identify problems. These problems exist due to a difference between the current state of condition and the desire state of conditions. These processes support the commander's intent in order to generate a solution to a problem that will accomplish the mission whit in the require time. The army decision making process and the rapid decision-making and synchronization process are design to solve different types of problems; well defined problems in which all required information is available, medium defined problems in which some information is available, and ill defined problem also known as …show more content…
The National Military Strategy (NMS) is a document issued by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as a deliverable to the Secretary of Defense briefly outlining the strategic aims of the armed
Compare and Contrast the Army Problem Solving Model (Process) with the Rapid Decision Making and Synchronization Process.
Military leaders make decisions and solve problems every day. Some need a decision quickly while others can take time. The US Army has several decision-making methods to assist leaders. The Army Problem Solving Model (Process) (PSM) is a systematic approach to identifying the best possible solution to an issue or problem and a deliberate method of decision-making (FM 6-0, 2009). Leaders use it to solve a problem when time is not critical and they can put some thought into different solutions. The solution must be objective and based on facts in order for the decision to be relevant and practical. The Rapid Decision Making and Synchronization Process (RDM) is a decision-making and synchronization technique typically used during the execution phase of an operation (FM 5-0, 2010). Besides its use during execution, this style of decision making is quick and focuses on the ability to modify the plan, due to changing circumstances, and synchronize those changes with subordinate elements. Determining which method to apply requires an understanding of the similarities and differences of both techniques.
A most valuable opportunity exists for a leader to contribute in making a tremendous difference. New leadership at the top of the 4th Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT), a) gifted with wisdom to analyze an organization in identifying problems, b) capable of thinking creative in founding a vision for the future, and c) empowered with the reasoning ability to develop effective solutions to problems, will transform a declining unit to a new enhanced level of mission achievement and organizational effectiveness. 4th ABCT numerous problems are identified. A vision developed will guide the unit in the future. Most importantly, providing solutions to 4th ABCT problems occurs. Unit problems, vision, and solutions follow in order.
Effective planning is impossible without first understanding the problem. Commanders rely on personal observations, experiences, and input from others to develop understanding. They also prioritize information requests and incorporate additional information as those requests are answered. A complete understanding of the problem and environment builds the foundation for the operational process and ...
In examining the military history, one can easily find out that the main role of military leaders in the field is to decrease confusion and to guide units to achieve the desired end state. In accomplishing these tasks, Situational Understanding and Visualization have become necessary steps especially in today’s complex environment. This importance legitimates the question about their relationship between these two steps and the challenges facing leaders to achieve situational understanding and visualization. Commander’s visualization depends on Situational understanding. Leader’s success in these two phases remains conditioned by overcoming some challenges related to his bias, time and the efficiency of his staff.
The primary challenge for leaders in the Army is taking a group of individuals and molding them into a team. The framework that is employed to the greatest effect uses task-oriented instruction and is called battle focus training. After major objectives are defined, they are broken down into smaller sets. These smaller sets are known as collective tasks and are designed to be accomplished by small teams of soldiers. Each soldier is assigned one or more individual tasks that work together to accomplish the collective task. Training begins by teaching soldiers how to accomplish each of the individual tasks. At this point, emphasis is placed on the soldier as an individual. Although training is conducted in small groups, soldiers are evaluated independently of their peers. Once individual task mastery is achieved, leaders have soldiers begin to work together to accomplish collective tasks. This method of battle focus training incorporates aspects of both individualism and collectivism to accomplish the ultimate goal.
Adaptive leadership is becoming widespread in the United States Army amongst junior officers in leadership positions that require quick thinking and innovation. Leonard Wong discusses how the versatile and unpredictable enemy and situations in Iraq produces adaptable junior officers. These officers are learning to make decisions under chaotic conditions and are becoming more mentally agile. The Army is changing. The Army is transforming its capabilities in the war in Iraq to be effective and successful. General Schoomaker states that we will not accomplish our goals as a nation in the 21st century unless our Army becomes much more agile but with the capacity for long term, sustained level of conflict. The Army is in the process of eliminating its old ways of war, it has to become somewhat of a decathlete. Trained for multiple events across a broad spectrum not just one event like a track athlete.
Leaders must think to survive in every form of physical and mental conflict. Army leaders are responsible to solve problems, from “the mundane to the magnificent’ , with an expectation of complete success in determining the best possible decision to a given problem. Utilizing cognitive training tools to expand a stagnate mind (Drs. Paul and Elder’s Eight Elements of Thought) and following proven models of success (Army Problem Solving Process) facilitate a positive outcome for Army officers when they are making difficult decisions. Drs. Paul and Elder developed eight elements of thought that assist Army officers and provide additional definitions to the thought categories in the seven steps of the Army Problem Solving Process.
Compare and Contrast the Army Problem Solving Model (Process) with the Rapid Decision making and Synchronization Process. (C100)
In the view of global security,(2011) The military decision making process abbreviated as MDMP is a planning model that establishes procedures for analyzing a mission, developing and comparing courses of action(COA) that are best suited to accomplish the higher commander’s intention and mission. The MDMP comprise of seven stages and each stage depends on the previous step to produce its own output. This means that a mistake in the early stage will affect all the other stages that follow. These steps include:
As an officer in the United States Army, it has been imperative for me to understand every facet of leadership and why it remains important to be an effective leader. During this course, I have learned some valuable lessons about myself as a leader and how I can improve on my leadership ability in the future. The journal entries along with the understanding of available leadership theories have been an integral part of my learning during this course. For all of the journals and assessments that I completed, I feel it has given me a good understanding of my current leadership status and my future potential as a leader. All of the specific assessments looked at several areas in regards to leadership; these assessments covered several separate focus areas and identified my overall strengths and weaknesses as a leader. Over the course of this paper I will briefly discuss each one of these assessments and journal entries as they pertained to me and my leadership.
The most effective commanders through their leadership build cohesive teams. Mutual trust, shared understanding, and accepting prudent risk serve as just a few principles for mission command. Mutual trust is the foundation of any successful professional relationship that a commander shares with his staff and subordinates. The shared understanding of an operational environment functions, as the basis for the commander to effectively accomplish the mission. While my advice for the commander on what prudent risks to take may create more opportunities rather than accepting defeat. Incorporating the principles of mission command by building cohesive teams through mutual trust, fostering an environment of shared understanding, and accepting prudent risk will make me an effective adviser to the commander, aid the staff during the operations process, and provide an example for Soldiers to emulate.
“An Army leader is any one who by virtue of assumed role or assigned responsibility inspires and influences peoples to accomplish organizational goals. She or He motivates people both inside and outside the chain of command to pursue actions, focus thinking, and shape decisions for the greater good of the organization.1” But for him to do that effectively and efficiently , he has to be prepared, shaped and refined. There are few institutions to prepare such leaders and CGSC is one of those institutions which are mandated, organized and equipped to prepare such leaders. In implementing its mandate, CGSC has programmed ILE common core C 100 to provide foundations for effective leadership development. The lessons covered in this block of instructions are important pillars of leadership development and impact on officers differently depending on the fields/specialties and the level of positions held. This paper therefore attempts to discuss the relevance of critical thinking and problem solving, group decision making, overcoming biases, planning and order production lessons on my future assignment as a logistics staff officer.
Taylor, J. and Ortega, D. The Application of Goldratt's Thinking Processes to problem Solving. Allied Academic international Conference. Las Vegas. 2003
Problem solving and decision-making are fundamental in all managerial activities. Although these defining characteristics of management can be used interchangeably, current literature makes a comprehensible delineation between the two. Problem solving can be defined as a mental process and is part of a larger process that begins with identifying the problem and ends by assessing the efficiency of the solution. Decision-making is also considered a mental process and identifies several alternative scenarios before making a final selection. For the purpose of this analysis, I will discuss the similarities and differences of problem solving and decision-making. I will also explain the steps of the decision-making process and discuss the different decision-making approaches.