Army Career Essay
Introduction
Navy Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technicians (NEOD), the organization that I am currently a part of, are a small group (1500 personnel) trained in the art of bomb disposal. As a scalable and agile force, we specialize in a plethora of complex and dangerous tasks ranging from IED to chemical and biological weapon remediation. Post 9/11 global terrorist activities placed tremendous “operational stress” upon the NEOD community with relentless training and deployments (Jones, Hammond & Platoni, 2013, p.8). Successfully responding to, and assuming tactical command of thousands of dangerous events every year merely increased the demand signal from outside organizations. Success breeds success. However, as a Navy EOD Officer in Charge …show more content…
of a Joint Task Force (American and Afghanistan), I was able to see a conflict arise from a lack of understanding, personal struggles and a communication absence of two separate interdependent parties. The lead American Program Manager (commonly referred to as a Company Commander) was extremely abrasive, did not trust his subordinates and demonstrated very little care for his employees. He was also disconnected, and implemented no sort of feedback loop, so he lacked vital information to increase employee satisfaction and streamline the organizational processes. The conflict would continue to grow as power was unevenly distributed, personalities clashed, and management styles were not cohesive. As second in charge, I had the opportunity the step into a mediator role and lead a few struggling sectors, aligned with Sinek’s (2014) observation in Leaders eat Last: “not until those without information relinquish some control can an organization run better, smoother and faster and reach its maximum potential” (p.144).
In October of 2015 the U.S.-Afghan conflict entered its fifteenth year, the longest-running war in U.S. history, but with little progress to show for it in terms of both security and development. An enemy force that numbered roughly 45,000 in 2001 is now estimated to exceed 60,000 despite having incurred 20,000-35,000 casualties (Dawi, 2014). A World Affairs Journal article reports that more than 100 billion USD in aid, “has not brought the United States or Afghanistan a single sustainable institution or program” (Brinkley, 2014). Yet while many agree that the conflict has not gone well for the U.S.-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), there is little consensus as to why. This conflict is worthy of analysis because it arose as part, and due to America’s longest running war that has incurred thousands of American lives. As part of the conflict analysis in this paper I will analyze the situation utilizing the SPITCEROW tool, and then render my findings as a mediator while projecting a better way forward for future endeavors. By analyzing this situation I hope to spur interest for future policy implications and research on cultural sensitivity, military organizational communication and deployment lengths.
Description of the Conflict Situation
As insurgencies now aim to launch small scale attacks (terrorist and suicide bombings), and no longer look to fight as part of an army on a large-scale battlefield (uniform vs.
uniform), a new type of partner nation relationship development has begun. American troops are less often “large and in charge” and more frequently conducting advise and assist missions supporting partner nation capacity building. Termed “The Forever War,” or the “Long War,” skills now required of troops are more dynamic and empathetic (Filkins, 2008, p.121). Emotional intelligence as well as language and cultural skills are necessary to build the continuity, competence, and habitual relationships so critical in combating insurgencies. Our military needs to be able to both dial up and dial down skills dependent upon the situation, such as disarming bombs or having casual conversations with partners during a deployment. Broad spectrum intercultural and interpersonal skills are critical facets of success in the Forever War, but remain under emphasized. As Sun Tzu noted, “If you know your enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained, you will also suffer defeat” (Sun, Sun & Sawyer, 2007, …show more content…
p.18).
The aforementioned skills of cultural sensitivity and structured partnerships lacked in the situation I chose to analyze, as ineffective management techniques were employed, verbal abuse resonated, and in turn, created a hostile work environment that significantly degraded our operational abilities. I worked for a Company Commander who let his personal views and bias’s, as well as personal life interfere with our professional dealings. He had deployed numerous times to Afghanistan (over 20 months combined) but did not believe in the overall mission, coming to a conclusion that in the end it would fail and made his assumptions publicly known. The Company Commander was also going through his third divorce, and openly stated on numerous occasions that “all women were evil.” The environment that he fostered led to distrust, verbal abuse, and increased stress in what was already a pressure packed deployment to Afghanistan.
In order to determine the effectiveness to which the practices at the tactical and operational levels in contributing towards strategic aims in Afghanistan can be made, it is necessary to first define what the U.S. objectives for the region are. This way, it can be identified how large the sphere of influence that the Company Commander I worked for who created such a volatile work environment, had over the American and partnered Afghan forces. According to a Council on Foreign Relations report on U.S. strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, “The basic long-term U.S. aspirations for Pakistan and Afghanistan are uncontroversial and easy to list: stability, prosperity, and good governance” (Armitage, 2010). Responding to a growing Taliban insurgency following the collapse of their regime precipitate by U.S. and Northern Alliance forces in 2001, the combined U.S.-NATO International Security and Assistance Forces (ISAF) have employed a comprehensive counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan. On any given day, my Company Commander interacted with and was in charge of approximately 350 American troops, who were partnered with over 500 Afghanistan National Army soldiers, to conduct high-visibility and very dangerous missions. The Company Commander utilized a dominating and aggressive approach in dealing with a partner force Commander, who was in charge of all Afghanistan National Army soldiers that we interacted with. This would quickly foster distrust, as many of the soldiers were reluctant to do what he said, which was extremely dangerous during combat missions. On the contrary, the Afghanistan National Army Commander abided by a collaborative mindset, offering alternative solutions and rendering knowledge about his country, to better outfit our efforts. However, this information fell on deaf ears, as my Company Commander degraded and insulted our partners, as a toxic environment prevailed. This is a common situation in the workplace, but in a war zone where lives are at stake, it is extremely distasteful and every effort should be taken to resolve the situation. However, in a hierarchal organization this can be challenging, but possible if a systematic approach is taken and the right questions are asked, as highlighted in the next section.
Analysis of the conflict solution In examining the reasons why this conflict occurred we must first look at the structure of military lifestyle, or the first aspect of the SPITCEROW tool; the source (Mitchel, et al). Cultural insensitivity and behavioral incidents during partnered training, exercises, and deployments have been rampant lately. It is not only important how U.S. service members treat themselves and those within our organization, they need to improve how they interact culturally. The pace of military lifestyle makes it difficult to develop the continuity, competence, and habitual relationships desired by foreign partners and the objectives promulgated by Navy leadership. Personnel are constantly on the move and do not have time to research foreign culture or local etiquette of areas to which they will be deployed. For example, a team deploying to India will show up with no language or cultural exposure, making the transition a very rough one. Broken relationships and mistrust among our valued allies such as the Philippines, Thailand, and Columbia are highly destructive to the mission of our armed forces. U.S. personnel had a high-profile behavioral meltdown in each of these countries within the last five years leading to misfortune and a stoppage of military operations (Baldor, 2012). These struggles can give us some insight as to why my Company Commander, the primary party involved, fostered such a volatile work environment that affected those around him, including our partner force (the Afghans) who can also be considered primary party members. Perhaps he was not trained nearly enough, or quite simply spent way too much time overseas in a deployment status. Secondary parties or the second aspect of the SPITCEROW would be those replacing us on deployment because they would have to continue to patch broken relationships and remediate poor organizational communication. The interaction of my Company Commander illustrates exactly how disgruntled managers may become jaded, and mold their actions by past experiences and newfound bias’s, which is the third aspect of the SPITCEROW; the issue. In turn, a negative and distrustful environment was fostered with virtually no communication or any type of mentorship. As second in charge, I felt a huge burden lay on my shoulders to ease tensions and mend relationships. Largely affected and most importantly, was our cultural support teams who were mostly made up of women and had direct contact with the Afghan populous. Their aim was to liaison with women and village elders during our partnered missions, however, because a large majority of the force was women, my Company Commander refused to deal with or relay information to them. There was a limited amount of communication, and sometimes virtually none. In order to start attacking some of the issues, I needed to identify my Company Commander’s interdependence so that I could approach the outstanding issues that were hindering him from being an effective leader, and re-patch our communication in what should have been a comprehensive working network. I formulated what tactics I would use, the next aspect of the SPITCEROW technique, wasting no time because the conflict was enlarging due to employee dissatisfaction. Some members even asked to “be transferred to another unit,” because of the lack of communication, the enlarge aspect of the SPITCEROW was a key point of focus in the remediation process. In order to best understand what really occurred in this situation, we must reflect upon the layers of conflict. Initially taking a look at personality and style; hostilities and verbal aggression stemmed from situations that were occurring on the home front. My Company Commander was going through a messy divorce and custody battle, which was increasing stress and added to a surmounting workload. This transcended over into professional relationships, affecting mid-level managers (Officers in Charge, like myself), as well as our partner force managers, the Afghans who completed missions with us. As aforementioned, I knew that as second in charge, I could play a large role in providing relief and smoothing the situation, aligned with the SPITCEROW role aspect. I was able to identify what set my Company Commander onto the path of verbal assault and derailed our effectiveness as an organization. In analyzing personality conflicts of gender bias and relieving emotional triggers, I stepped up and took the role of official liaison officer to our cultural support team which was made up largely of women. I led all meetings and briefed operations to them, and conversely, I took orders from my Company Commander on future plans and policies. In doing this, I acted as a true mid-level manager, easing the workload of my Company Commander while letting my empathetic nature and leadership abilities take over as I liaised with our cultural support teams. In the end, I identified the true nature of my Company Commanders interdependence and what kept him from being an effective leader, while eliminating discriminatory and aggressive behavior. Additionally, I realized the need to enhance lines of communication for career development, and the benefit of those who would relieve my organization on deployment (those taking our positions when we left Afghanistan). We accomplished that by conducting weekly phone conversations and keeping the relieving organizations CC’d on every e-mail notification, as they became the real winners (the final aspect of the SPITCEROW). I addressed the behavioral concern of my Company Commander by asking well-pointed questions to seek and provide mutual feedback, as well as broadened our perspectives (Miller, 2014). This was received rather well, vice outright telling my Company Commander that he had an attitude problem, which would not have gone smoothly. I was pleased with the outcome, the next aspect of the SPITCEROW, as we were able to de-escalate the situation and implement controls. Many parts of this situation resonated with theories of leading shame expert Brene Brown. She observes that well-adjusted adults “learn how to trust ourselves and others, treat each other with respect, and know how to be kind and affectionate” (Brown and Fortgang, 2012, p. 31). Overall, a conflict can be de-escalated by utilizing emotional intelligence, reflective listening practice, and well-structured thought provoking questions.
Recommendations
If analyzing this situation as a mediator, I would first make observations and categorize this as an interpersonal conflict, due to the fact that the situation stemmed from my Company Commander interacting with individuals on a subordinate level basis (Miller, 2014). As a mediator, I would also analyze the interactions that we had as defensive in context, with an emotional investment due to the ongoing conflict resolution attempts (Miller, 2014). A psychoanalyst, whose job is to “help clients break down resistances and gain a deep level of self-understanding,” would diagnose this situation as having external forces that affect the client both emotionally and behaviorally (Miller, 2014, p. 107). Additionally, I would consider that the individual was suffering from the first dimension of the “Burnout theory,” termed “emotional exhaustion” due to his feelings of fatigue, used up, and that the overall mission was going to fail (Miller, 2014, p. 204). Burnout can have a variety of effects in the workplace and with individuals to include “physiological and attitudinal,” and as seen by the Company Commanders interactions, it is evident that this is a major issue and cause (Miller, 2014, p .205). No individual mind is fit to sustain over 20 months of deployment while going through a burdensome divorce and child custody battle. By diagnosing the situation as a mediator, I can now project efficient ways forward to rejuvenate personnel and the organization. In confronting leadership, gracious action must be taken because advocates assume career risk.
Individuals, and in this case mid-level managers must clearly articulate apprehensions, directly challenging superiors with the use of humility and positive communication skills. “Ethical communication forges collective understanding and the creation of meaning between individuals” (May, 2013, p.137). Prior to the negotiation of the second in charge, the situation was burdensome, and “negative emotions lead parties to escalate the conflict” (Lewicki, Saunders, Barry, 2011, p. 130). However, the fostering of communication and decision to approach the Company Commander created a constructive conflict and rekindled professional relationships. Additionally, the fact that the second officer in charge had an innovative solution (act as liaison with cultural support teams) exposed underlying organizational issues and determined what the true elements of the conflict were. On an individual basis, it showed maturity, empathetic understanding, and how an individual can contribute during a tumultuous time. By recognizing dysfunctional patterns of leadership and bringing them to the attention of leadership, the Company Commander understood the recommendations, and made a monumental shift from defensive to accommodating (Miller, 2014). The individuals took the correct course of action in this situation, as the encounter could have spiraled even more out of control. My final
recommendation as a mediator would be that being deployed to a war zone for over 20 months combined time, is simply too much, the U.S. Military should implement a “time away from home” tracker for individuals. This way, deployments can be accurately tracked, ensuring rest and recovery, and avoiding “depersonalization” which is necessary for organizational interpersonal communication (Miller, 2014, p.204).
Conclusion
Workplace conflicts are all too common, however, if taking place in an active war zone, the situation can cost lives. An appreciation of ground truth could have diverted resources from ineffective development projects towards establishing a level of territorial control adequate to facilitate collaboration and personnel struggles. As Emile Simpson succinctly explains in War from the Ground Up, “One can build medical clinics and schools, and conduct other developmental activity, but if organizations cannot properly implement them, they achieve little.” An emphasis also needs to be placed on the preservation of personnel, as this conflict could have been avoided by replacing the Company Commander with fresh personnel, to avoid “burnout.” By analyzing this feasible conflict, I now have a better understanding of the nature of conflict and the associated behaviors of individuals. Examining the levels of conflict enables mediators to effectively implement theoretical approaches that resolve the situations with humility. Evaluating the situation as a mediator provided me with the knowledge of the importance of incorporating effective communication, and possibly even more vital to future conflict resolution, an active feedback loop. Throughout this process, a major takeaway is that interventions, negotiations and mediations can all be effective in reaching conflict resolution.
Navy Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technicians (NEOD), the organization that I am currently a part of, are a small group (1500 personnel) trained in the art of bomb disposal. As a scalable and agile force, we specialize in a plethora of complex and dangerous tasks ranging from IED to chemical and biological weapon remediation. Post 9/11 global terrorist activities placed tremendous “operational stress” upon the NEOD community with relentless training and deployments (Jones, Hammond & Platoni, 2013, p.8). Successfully responding to, and assuming tactical command of thousands of dangerous events every year merely increased the demand signal from outside organizations. Success breeds success. However, as a Navy EOD Officer in Charge …show more content…
of a Joint Task Force (American and Afghanistan), I was able to see a conflict arise from a lack of understanding, personal struggles and a communication absence of two separate interdependent parties. The lead American Program Manager (commonly referred to as a Company Commander) was extremely abrasive, did not trust his subordinates and demonstrated very little care for his employees. He was also disconnected, and implemented no sort of feedback loop, so he lacked vital information to increase employee satisfaction and streamline the organizational processes. The conflict would continue to grow as power was unevenly distributed, personalities clashed, and management styles were not cohesive. As second in charge, I had the opportunity the step into a mediator role and lead a few struggling sectors, aligned with Sinek’s (2014) observation in Leaders eat Last: “not until those without information relinquish some control can an organization run better, smoother and faster and reach its maximum potential” (p.144).
In October of 2015 the U.S.-Afghan conflict entered its fifteenth year, the longest-running war in U.S. history, but with little progress to show for it in terms of both security and development. An enemy force that numbered roughly 45,000 in 2001 is now estimated to exceed 60,000 despite having incurred 20,000-35,000 casualties (Dawi, 2014). A World Affairs Journal article reports that more than 100 billion USD in aid, “has not brought the United States or Afghanistan a single sustainable institution or program” (Brinkley, 2014). Yet while many agree that the conflict has not gone well for the U.S.-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), there is little consensus as to why. This conflict is worthy of analysis because it arose as part, and due to America’s longest running war that has incurred thousands of American lives. As part of the conflict analysis in this paper I will analyze the situation utilizing the SPITCEROW tool, and then render my findings as a mediator while projecting a better way forward for future endeavors. By analyzing this situation I hope to spur interest for future policy implications and research on cultural sensitivity, military organizational communication and deployment lengths.
Description of the Conflict Situation
As insurgencies now aim to launch small scale attacks (terrorist and suicide bombings), and no longer look to fight as part of an army on a large-scale battlefield (uniform vs.
uniform), a new type of partner nation relationship development has begun. American troops are less often “large and in charge” and more frequently conducting advise and assist missions supporting partner nation capacity building. Termed “The Forever War,” or the “Long War,” skills now required of troops are more dynamic and empathetic (Filkins, 2008, p.121). Emotional intelligence as well as language and cultural skills are necessary to build the continuity, competence, and habitual relationships so critical in combating insurgencies. Our military needs to be able to both dial up and dial down skills dependent upon the situation, such as disarming bombs or having casual conversations with partners during a deployment. Broad spectrum intercultural and interpersonal skills are critical facets of success in the Forever War, but remain under emphasized. As Sun Tzu noted, “If you know your enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained, you will also suffer defeat” (Sun, Sun & Sawyer, 2007, …show more content…
p.18).
The aforementioned skills of cultural sensitivity and structured partnerships lacked in the situation I chose to analyze, as ineffective management techniques were employed, verbal abuse resonated, and in turn, created a hostile work environment that significantly degraded our operational abilities. I worked for a Company Commander who let his personal views and bias’s, as well as personal life interfere with our professional dealings. He had deployed numerous times to Afghanistan (over 20 months combined) but did not believe in the overall mission, coming to a conclusion that in the end it would fail and made his assumptions publicly known. The Company Commander was also going through his third divorce, and openly stated on numerous occasions that “all women were evil.” The environment that he fostered led to distrust, verbal abuse, and increased stress in what was already a pressure packed deployment to Afghanistan.
In order to determine the effectiveness to which the practices at the tactical and operational levels in contributing towards strategic aims in Afghanistan can be made, it is necessary to first define what the U.S. objectives for the region are. This way, it can be identified how large the sphere of influence that the Company Commander I worked for who created such a volatile work environment, had over the American and partnered Afghan forces. According to a Council on Foreign Relations report on U.S. strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, “The basic long-term U.S. aspirations for Pakistan and Afghanistan are uncontroversial and easy to list: stability, prosperity, and good governance” (Armitage, 2010). Responding to a growing Taliban insurgency following the collapse of their regime precipitate by U.S. and Northern Alliance forces in 2001, the combined U.S.-NATO International Security and Assistance Forces (ISAF) have employed a comprehensive counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan. On any given day, my Company Commander interacted with and was in charge of approximately 350 American troops, who were partnered with over 500 Afghanistan National Army soldiers, to conduct high-visibility and very dangerous missions. The Company Commander utilized a dominating and aggressive approach in dealing with a partner force Commander, who was in charge of all Afghanistan National Army soldiers that we interacted with. This would quickly foster distrust, as many of the soldiers were reluctant to do what he said, which was extremely dangerous during combat missions. On the contrary, the Afghanistan National Army Commander abided by a collaborative mindset, offering alternative solutions and rendering knowledge about his country, to better outfit our efforts. However, this information fell on deaf ears, as my Company Commander degraded and insulted our partners, as a toxic environment prevailed. This is a common situation in the workplace, but in a war zone where lives are at stake, it is extremely distasteful and every effort should be taken to resolve the situation. However, in a hierarchal organization this can be challenging, but possible if a systematic approach is taken and the right questions are asked, as highlighted in the next section.
Analysis of the conflict solution In examining the reasons why this conflict occurred we must first look at the structure of military lifestyle, or the first aspect of the SPITCEROW tool; the source (Mitchel, et al). Cultural insensitivity and behavioral incidents during partnered training, exercises, and deployments have been rampant lately. It is not only important how U.S. service members treat themselves and those within our organization, they need to improve how they interact culturally. The pace of military lifestyle makes it difficult to develop the continuity, competence, and habitual relationships desired by foreign partners and the objectives promulgated by Navy leadership. Personnel are constantly on the move and do not have time to research foreign culture or local etiquette of areas to which they will be deployed. For example, a team deploying to India will show up with no language or cultural exposure, making the transition a very rough one. Broken relationships and mistrust among our valued allies such as the Philippines, Thailand, and Columbia are highly destructive to the mission of our armed forces. U.S. personnel had a high-profile behavioral meltdown in each of these countries within the last five years leading to misfortune and a stoppage of military operations (Baldor, 2012). These struggles can give us some insight as to why my Company Commander, the primary party involved, fostered such a volatile work environment that affected those around him, including our partner force (the Afghans) who can also be considered primary party members. Perhaps he was not trained nearly enough, or quite simply spent way too much time overseas in a deployment status. Secondary parties or the second aspect of the SPITCEROW would be those replacing us on deployment because they would have to continue to patch broken relationships and remediate poor organizational communication. The interaction of my Company Commander illustrates exactly how disgruntled managers may become jaded, and mold their actions by past experiences and newfound bias’s, which is the third aspect of the SPITCEROW; the issue. In turn, a negative and distrustful environment was fostered with virtually no communication or any type of mentorship. As second in charge, I felt a huge burden lay on my shoulders to ease tensions and mend relationships. Largely affected and most importantly, was our cultural support teams who were mostly made up of women and had direct contact with the Afghan populous. Their aim was to liaison with women and village elders during our partnered missions, however, because a large majority of the force was women, my Company Commander refused to deal with or relay information to them. There was a limited amount of communication, and sometimes virtually none. In order to start attacking some of the issues, I needed to identify my Company Commander’s interdependence so that I could approach the outstanding issues that were hindering him from being an effective leader, and re-patch our communication in what should have been a comprehensive working network. I formulated what tactics I would use, the next aspect of the SPITCEROW technique, wasting no time because the conflict was enlarging due to employee dissatisfaction. Some members even asked to “be transferred to another unit,” because of the lack of communication, the enlarge aspect of the SPITCEROW was a key point of focus in the remediation process. In order to best understand what really occurred in this situation, we must reflect upon the layers of conflict. Initially taking a look at personality and style; hostilities and verbal aggression stemmed from situations that were occurring on the home front. My Company Commander was going through a messy divorce and custody battle, which was increasing stress and added to a surmounting workload. This transcended over into professional relationships, affecting mid-level managers (Officers in Charge, like myself), as well as our partner force managers, the Afghans who completed missions with us. As aforementioned, I knew that as second in charge, I could play a large role in providing relief and smoothing the situation, aligned with the SPITCEROW role aspect. I was able to identify what set my Company Commander onto the path of verbal assault and derailed our effectiveness as an organization. In analyzing personality conflicts of gender bias and relieving emotional triggers, I stepped up and took the role of official liaison officer to our cultural support team which was made up largely of women. I led all meetings and briefed operations to them, and conversely, I took orders from my Company Commander on future plans and policies. In doing this, I acted as a true mid-level manager, easing the workload of my Company Commander while letting my empathetic nature and leadership abilities take over as I liaised with our cultural support teams. In the end, I identified the true nature of my Company Commanders interdependence and what kept him from being an effective leader, while eliminating discriminatory and aggressive behavior. Additionally, I realized the need to enhance lines of communication for career development, and the benefit of those who would relieve my organization on deployment (those taking our positions when we left Afghanistan). We accomplished that by conducting weekly phone conversations and keeping the relieving organizations CC’d on every e-mail notification, as they became the real winners (the final aspect of the SPITCEROW). I addressed the behavioral concern of my Company Commander by asking well-pointed questions to seek and provide mutual feedback, as well as broadened our perspectives (Miller, 2014). This was received rather well, vice outright telling my Company Commander that he had an attitude problem, which would not have gone smoothly. I was pleased with the outcome, the next aspect of the SPITCEROW, as we were able to de-escalate the situation and implement controls. Many parts of this situation resonated with theories of leading shame expert Brene Brown. She observes that well-adjusted adults “learn how to trust ourselves and others, treat each other with respect, and know how to be kind and affectionate” (Brown and Fortgang, 2012, p. 31). Overall, a conflict can be de-escalated by utilizing emotional intelligence, reflective listening practice, and well-structured thought provoking questions.
Recommendations
If analyzing this situation as a mediator, I would first make observations and categorize this as an interpersonal conflict, due to the fact that the situation stemmed from my Company Commander interacting with individuals on a subordinate level basis (Miller, 2014). As a mediator, I would also analyze the interactions that we had as defensive in context, with an emotional investment due to the ongoing conflict resolution attempts (Miller, 2014). A psychoanalyst, whose job is to “help clients break down resistances and gain a deep level of self-understanding,” would diagnose this situation as having external forces that affect the client both emotionally and behaviorally (Miller, 2014, p. 107). Additionally, I would consider that the individual was suffering from the first dimension of the “Burnout theory,” termed “emotional exhaustion” due to his feelings of fatigue, used up, and that the overall mission was going to fail (Miller, 2014, p. 204). Burnout can have a variety of effects in the workplace and with individuals to include “physiological and attitudinal,” and as seen by the Company Commanders interactions, it is evident that this is a major issue and cause (Miller, 2014, p .205). No individual mind is fit to sustain over 20 months of deployment while going through a burdensome divorce and child custody battle. By diagnosing the situation as a mediator, I can now project efficient ways forward to rejuvenate personnel and the organization. In confronting leadership, gracious action must be taken because advocates assume career risk.
Individuals, and in this case mid-level managers must clearly articulate apprehensions, directly challenging superiors with the use of humility and positive communication skills. “Ethical communication forges collective understanding and the creation of meaning between individuals” (May, 2013, p.137). Prior to the negotiation of the second in charge, the situation was burdensome, and “negative emotions lead parties to escalate the conflict” (Lewicki, Saunders, Barry, 2011, p. 130). However, the fostering of communication and decision to approach the Company Commander created a constructive conflict and rekindled professional relationships. Additionally, the fact that the second officer in charge had an innovative solution (act as liaison with cultural support teams) exposed underlying organizational issues and determined what the true elements of the conflict were. On an individual basis, it showed maturity, empathetic understanding, and how an individual can contribute during a tumultuous time. By recognizing dysfunctional patterns of leadership and bringing them to the attention of leadership, the Company Commander understood the recommendations, and made a monumental shift from defensive to accommodating (Miller, 2014). The individuals took the correct course of action in this situation, as the encounter could have spiraled even more out of control. My final
recommendation as a mediator would be that being deployed to a war zone for over 20 months combined time, is simply too much, the U.S. Military should implement a “time away from home” tracker for individuals. This way, deployments can be accurately tracked, ensuring rest and recovery, and avoiding “depersonalization” which is necessary for organizational interpersonal communication (Miller, 2014, p.204).
Conclusion
Workplace conflicts are all too common, however, if taking place in an active war zone, the situation can cost lives. An appreciation of ground truth could have diverted resources from ineffective development projects towards establishing a level of territorial control adequate to facilitate collaboration and personnel struggles. As Emile Simpson succinctly explains in War from the Ground Up, “One can build medical clinics and schools, and conduct other developmental activity, but if organizations cannot properly implement them, they achieve little.” An emphasis also needs to be placed on the preservation of personnel, as this conflict could have been avoided by replacing the Company Commander with fresh personnel, to avoid “burnout.” By analyzing this feasible conflict, I now have a better understanding of the nature of conflict and the associated behaviors of individuals. Examining the levels of conflict enables mediators to effectively implement theoretical approaches that resolve the situations with humility. Evaluating the situation as a mediator provided me with the knowledge of the importance of incorporating effective communication, and possibly even more vital to future conflict resolution, an active feedback loop. Throughout this process, a major takeaway is that interventions, negotiations and mediations can all be effective in reaching conflict resolution.