Let me introduce you to the SITREP or Situation Report. The SITREP is a military term abbreviated for use in tactical communication. In combat we had to communicate in short sentences or singular words to prevent the enemy from intercepting our signal. A commander could call another unit or person by their call sign and ask for an update by stating, "SITREP over." 'Over' means end of transmission.

Delegation is a problem in many organizations. Leaders do not delegate for three reasons - fear, guilt, or laziness. They fear that a subordinate will get something wrong, hurt the organization, or make them look bad. They are too lazy to invest the time training and developing someone so they do it themselves. Or they feel guilty delegating work to an already busy person.

When I counseled (appraised/coached) my people in the Army I would always have a career timeline handy. It was important to review it and to offer sage advice on what jobs the individual needed, what skills they needed to develop, and where they needed to position themselves for career advancement - rank, pay, and assignment. In the Army I could see more than a decade into the future of one's career and it was a vitally important part of my counseling sessions. The wrong move could make an officer or non-commissioned officer less competitive for advancement or even bring their career to a halt. I enjoyed passing on my career lessons and helping my people achieve not only higher rank but also fulfillment in their lives. It was my duty as a leader.

Last week I learned of the death of Queen Elizabeth II, like most big headlines these days, on my phone. It was an all too casual, anti climatic, and disappointing way to receive such big news - incongruous of her majesty. I guess I'm just old fashion and accustomed to learning of such headlines more formally. It gave me pause. It was more than a passing headline, it was the end of an era - the closure of an unprecedented reign of leadership. It was hard to fathom what this woman had seen and experienced in her life - how she had been thrust into a position of leadership and remained steadfast and loyal for more than 70 years.

Consider this scenario. Leader: "Can you please work on your tardiness to meetings and your arrival to work in the morning? It is not fair to the rest of the team and it is not emblematic of who we are as an organization." Subordinate: "Yes. I'm sorry. I will." Leader: "Ok, thank you." Note the 'how' is left out and that, in my experience, is a leadership error.

Loyalty is defined as a strong feeling of support or allegiance but the word and concept of loyalty is incomplete without some direction and, moreover, demonstration. Where does your loyalty arrow point? For me it is mainly in four directions. I'll call them the cardinal directions one might find on a compass. Everyone knows the four cardinal directions; North, South, East, and West. Here we will use up, down, left, and right.

What in the world? Do we really have a term like this or, moreover, people engaging in this activity? It seems so. According to Wikipedia (yes, Wikipedia actually includes quiet quitting in its archives) quiet quitting emerged in mid 2022 as a term and trend meaning, not quitting one’s job but rather, doing only what is required and nothing more. The concept is centered around loyalty to self - avoiding work burnout and achieving a better work/life balance. When I first heard it, I confess, I was angered. I’m 55 and I’ve been employed since the age of 15. I was taught by my parents to be an exceptional employee – to work hard. While I may not have always been the best employee, I’ve almost always gone the extra mile for my co-workers and my company. I excelled under this philosophy, and I enjoy the fruits of that hard work today. Add to this my twenty seven years in a military uniform and three combat tours – quitting is not in my vocabulary. I detest people who chose to quit and sleep like a baby a night.

Have you ever heard this, "They are going to be upset when they see this..." or "They want us to..."? Who is being referred to in this statement? As a leader I do not let my people escape statements like these. I ask them to define they. They by itself is ill-defined and, as a leader, unless we (the subordinate and I) clearly know who we are referring to, I ask for clarity. I do this not as punishment or out of anger (yes, I can get frustrated) but to gain understanding, avoid confusion, and prevent chaos.

I've seen many a leader reluctant to direct someone unless they knew how to do what had to be done. It is a feeling of guilt and incompetence which can stifle leadership. Indeed I've felt it but I've had the good fortune to watch other leaders, mostly Army Non-commissioned Officers - sergeants lead without knowing exactly how to do something. What I learned was that while they may not have known the specific steps and resources required to fix a problem, they knew enough to know there must be a fix. Stay with me.

Many years ago as an Army Captain, I served as a company commander - a leader of about 100 soldiers. Command was an assignment typically two years in length and my time in the position was coming to a close. I needed to schedule my change of command ceremony - a requirement to relinquish command officially, but I didn't want it to look like I wanted 'out' of this leadership duty. I went to see a senior officer close to my boss to discuss it with him. He was busy as we all were but he pulled up the unit calendar and said, "when do you want it to occur?" Perplexed, I replied, "Sir, I can't schedule my own ceremony. Doesn't the boss determine that?" Right then he offered a piece of advice which stuck - "Rob, sometimes it is best just to place the event on the calendar. Doing so will make it official enough."

I do come across leaders who find themselves frustrated at the reaction, even lack of action of their people. They feel their intent or instructions are misunderstood or they wonder why their people react to them the way they do. Of course I always coach them to look in the mirror first. It is hard and the human ego will steer us away from self-criticism. "What did I do or not do to cause this?" "Where did I fail in my instructions?"

When I took command of an Army Brigade in the 101st Airborne Division in 2013, my wife Leslie was worried about the repercussions if I were to say or do something that offended someone. She cared because she knew me as a selfless, compassionate, man of character. We had seen too many commanders relieved of command for a variety of reasons, some simply over what they said. While many of these relieved commanders deserved their ultimate demise, we both knew how simply and rapidly this could happen and that I would find myself on the defensive - a place a leader does not want to be.

I've always said knowing oneself is step one in leadership. Know yourself before you lead others. Know yourself so that you know when you are at your very best or worst. Know yourself so that you know if you are the right fit for a certain situation - for instance, you are not a details person and a situation requires you to be. It is scenarios like the last one which I'm referring to in this blog. When we are forced to be someone we are not, our brains, and thus our body are working harder.

There is one constant in organizations today - change. Perhaps it has always been a constant. Organizations are always adapting, growing, and changing to meet new demands, expansion, and environmental changes. Sitting in the middle of change is a resistant force called people. People yearn for order in their lives where things are predictable and where they can navigate their work and world with little thought and energy. This stated, people can and will embrace change but only under good leadership. It starts with communication. In periods of change, especially when it comes on quickly and is ill-defined, communication is key. Here are three of my thoughts on announcing and communicating change.

In the fall of 2013 I was an Army Colonel in command of an infantry brigade - a large organization nearing 5,000 people. Though I had a ton of authority, I still had a boss. One of my senior officers approached me to ask if I would promote him to Colonel. It was customary, even courteous of officers to ask their commander to host these types of ceremonies but there was a hierarchy - an unwritten rule of what rank could promote what rank. Officers were typically a few ranks above the one being promoted, for instance, a General promoting an officer to Colonel, not a Colonel promoting an officer to Colonel. I had the authority to promote this individual and I knew my boss's schedule was overloaded. I was touched that he had asked me, but for this promotion, it was right for me to ask permission.

Paid Time Off, a term I have come to know in my encore life after the military. We called it leave or liberty in the military. Same concept - one takes leave of work to enjoy family, a hobby, or just to decompress and relax. I call it bucket filling. Leaders, indeed, all people need this. Doing those things which bring you fulfillment and re-energize you is bucket filling. We come back from these events better leaders and better people, but only if we do it right.

What to do, what to do? Leaders can profoundly affect their organization through their words and demeanor. Toxic boss, toxic organization. Weak, complacent boss, mediocre organization. What then, is the role of the led? It certainly is not meeting toxicity with toxicity, frustration with frustration.

Men·tor noun - an experienced and trusted advisor. Life is hard. Leadership is hard. Business is hard. We all need a mentor, and a coach I posit. This person or people are important in our lives and they must be selected carefully. I've seen mentor and mentorship used cheaply in my time helping businesses, mostly in entrepreneurship. A person claims they are a mentor because they shared their contact information and are ready to help another person. Or a leader claims they have a mentor but they don't actually engage with and learn from that person. Here are my thoughts on mentors and mentorship.

"Are we meeting today?" I've heard this often in my years leading and it indicates a few things.

1. We as an organization are not loyal to our meeting rhythm.

2. We as an organization are being managed, not managing a busy schedule.

I'm certainly not one to meet just for the sake of meeting or to conduct a meeting of little value. I'm also aware that sometimes the day, week, or even month is so chaotic, it prevents people from coming together.

The other day I was communicating with my team about a customer interaction. From what they shared, the customer sounded a bit curt and abrasive. My inner flame was lit. I have this 'mama bear' loyalty to my people. Mess with them and I'm coming after you. This is, of course, psychological safety I'm referring to. Your people must know they are safe under your leadership - safe to offer criticism, safe from outside threats, and safe to make mistakes.