“Trust is the basic bond of leadership.” General
(R) Frederick M. Franks, Jr. For those
of you who don’t know “Franks, the Greater”, a nickname given by General (R)
Tommy Franks, read Tom Clancy’s book, written with Fred Franks, “Into the Storm”.
He is also featured in “It Starts with Humility” , by Dr. Merwyn Hayes.He is one of America’s greatest military
heroes, the architect of the Desert Storm's 100 hour war (sorry, General
Schwartzkopf) and the most inspiring leader I ever met. I worked directly for GEN Franks for three
years at VII Corps and when he commanded Training and Doctrine Command. His emphasis on trust as the keystone of
leadership was driven by his deep belief in values as the bedrock of any
organization. Shared values engenders
trust. Trust inspires the joint pursuit of a
well articulated vision and shared vision leads to ultimate success. With out it, the people perish.
So what? The
so what is that the American public has lost faith in the government's ability to
get things done, specifically, the creation of a shared vision for an energy policy. But, apparently, the current administration took
heed of the last several polls on “Confidence
in Institution” by Gallup. The U.S.
Military has been the most trusted institution in America for years. That trust
may now be transformed into leadership in the energy sector. After the disaster that was Solyndra, the
Administration is looking for someone to lead us out of the wilderness of, not
a failed energy policy, but no energy policy.
Where other budgets are shrinking, the energy budget for DOD may be
expanding.
When the President (7th on the trust
list) roles out his 2013 budget this week, it is expected that funding for DOD
energy programs will be plused up. A dysfunctional
Congress (dead last on the trust list) who would be unlikely to support funding
for DOE programs, will back DOD running with the ball. Republicans appear to be lining up behind the
idea already. As quoted in the article:
“I do expect to see the spending,” said Rep. Jack
Kingston, R-Ga., a member of the House Defense
Appropriations Subcommittee, when asked about increased investment in
alternative-energy programs at the Pentagon. “I think in the past three to five
years this has been going on, but that it has grown as a culture and a practice
– and it’s a good thing. If Israel
attacks Iran, and we have to go to war – and the Straits of Hormuz are
closed for a week or a month and the price of fuel is going to be high, the
question is, in the military, what do you replace it with? It’s not something
you just do for the ozone. It’s strategic.”
This is very encouraging. The President, Congress and the American
people trust DOD to get it done.
Republicans see it as a strategic move for energy security. Democrats see it as backing a proven track
record to develop a nascent industry.
Wouldn’t it be a great thing to have agreement on a single issue? Trust is the basic bond of leadership and
leadership in energy is what the country needs.
An American energy industry (not just oil companies) could be the driving force behind the economy that information technology once was, an industry sparked to life by DOD
needs. Why DOD would do this is simple and straight
forward. It is about energy security
that has tactical, operational and strategic relevance. That it will have a positive effect on the
economy, that grid security could improve and that climate change may be
beneficially affected are merely bonus effects.
Trust me. Coach, put DOD in; halftime is over. Dan Nolan
8 comments:
Dan my brother, you are no doubt surprised that I will disagree with you. Even if the American public's trust in the DoD is well placed, it does not follow that the DoD should assume this role. First, the DoD is an authoritarian organization and methods that work inside the DoD, dont work so well outside. The DoD does a remarkable job shaping young men and women into warriors, but the techniques used in bootcamp don't translate well to civilian institutions. The DoD can choose equipment and TTPs that support a particular goal regardless of the cost, but not so for the civilian economy. Government can try to regulate behavior through fiat or legislation, but unlike a military unit where common purpose causes individuals to pull together, individuals in society will always seek solutions that benefit themselves and resist all normative artificial pressures. This selfish outlook isn't good or bad, it just is. As you know, I strongly encourage the DoD to seek operational and tactical energy solutions, but attempting to lead strategic change is a recipe for failure.
SF TC
TC, It’s true that the DOD’s internal leadership strategies, directly employed, would not be successful in engendering a cultural shift in the American public with regard to energy use. I don’t believe, though, that the DOD believes this either; the way in which DOD can (and has already begun to) affect cultural change is much more subtle, through dissemination of information –and trust – via its warfighters. As soldiers return from war with not only a new understanding of the strategic importance of energy but also a new openness to energy substitution and conservation, this new mindset may be diffused to others upon their homecoming. Americans may not fully trust the DOD, but we trust our soldiers trained by the DOD and made aware of the need for strategic energy security by carrying out its operations. The “other 1%” of the population that comprises the military has always been revered as heroes we can trust, if not the institution that employs them. In a sense, then, the DOD’s seeking tactical and operational energy solutions will lead to strategic change by the nature of our (trusting) relationships with the warriors it shapes.
Relying on the behavior of returning service men and women to change society depends on two questionable assumptions. The first is that their number is sufficient to actually affect the system; the 2.3million American service members who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan will need to change the behavior of the remaining 310 million. But even more problematic is the fact that very few of this "other 1%" will actually return with "new understanding of the strategic importance of energy." Unless things have changed dramatically since the fall of 2009, only the very few who operate at the tactical edge have any idea of the value of energy security. The rest are comfortably ensconced behind the walls of main operating bases in Afghanistan where energy is being squandered by the megawatt and water comes in disposable 1/2 liter bottles. For too many of those returning from theater, energy, food, and water are were more transparent in war than they are in CONUS. Back in the states, they at least have to drive to the gas station and face the sticker shock, in theater everything comes without a visible cost. Few of these folks are bringing back "a new openness to energy substitution and conservation."
Great
Quran Academy Online
Best custom boxes wholesale are only created by Custom Boxes Zone (CBZ) and you could buy custom boxes with logo. You can realize this once you go through our website and make a comparison of our custom printed boxes with the rest.
I appreciate your post thanks for sharing the information.
Cosmetic packaging Connecticut
Cosmetic Display boxes California
It is very informative post thanks for sharing the information.
Tie gift Boxes
Hair Extension Boxes manufacturer
Hello There. I found your blog using google. This is a very well written article. I'll be sure to bookmark it and come back to read more of your useful information. Thanks for the post. I will definitely return. If you want write for us please visit here:mobile app development guest post
Post a Comment