"Aftermath" Chpts 24-26

I really enjoyed reading We Were Soldiers and I thought it related well to our lectures. There were numerous examples of leadership throughout the book, on both sides, which helped me to develop my own definition of a leader. To be effective, a leader must gain the respect of their subordinates and maintain that respect by not only talking the talk, but also walking the walk. The leadership of LTC Moore and Crandall stuck out to me as truly exceptional. Both men went above and beyond and I think that made a difference in the Ia Drang.
Hal Moore is plain-and-simple a good leader. I can think of numerous different examples of why his leadership was exemplary. However, the one that stuck out the most to me is how much he took the Warrior Ethos, especially I will never leave a fallen comrade, to heart. In the movie Moore tells his soldiers that they will all come home and in the book you see that he does everything possible to make this a reality. He searches the battle fields himself and even goes back to Albany to find the final soldiers that were MIA. Not only did Moore impress me with his commitment to his soldiers, but he was also committed to their families. I think by going to Jack’s family he showed how much he cared for his soldiers and that he did not take their sacrifices lightly.
The other leader that really stood out to me was Crandall. The thing that amazed me about him was that he never hesitated; Crandall saw the needs of the soldiers on the ground and just got the job done. Throughout the battle he made sure Moore’s men had the supplies and ammunition they needed. When the medevacs refused to land because the LZ was hot, which seems like the most backwards thing to me, Crandall loaded the wounded onto his own Hueys. Crandall utilized transactional leadership many times throughout the battle. He never forced his men to come along on the extra flights; they did it on their own accord in order to work for the greater good. The actions of Crandall at X-Ray made me realize that leadership has to be a truly unselfish action; he could never have been as effective if he had only been thinking of his own well-being.

"Albany" 21-23

“There had been 108 men on the fit-for-duty report the morning we left for Albany, and only eight on the duty report the day after.” This line stuck with me more than any other one in the section; it is a staggering statistic. I cannot imagine losing that many people, or having that many injured, in a single battle. I was appalled when they described the NVA just walking among the American dead and killing the injured. Lt Col Nguyen Huu An mentioned the amount of respect he had for the Americans, but the actions of his men speak otherwise.
Lt. Rescorla is a fine example of transformational leadership at Albany. Upon landing he had a positive attitude which rubbed off on the other soldiers and significantly raised the morale. Rescorla relied on the component of inspirational motivation; he walked among his men and individually pepped them up by telling them what a good job they had done. I don’t think there is any way that transactional leadership would have been effective at Albany because of the number of casualties, the men would not have responded to a system of rewards and punishments when that many of their friends had been killed. Rescorla realizes this and because of his ability to utilize transformational leadership he is a valuable leader during the battle.

"Albany" Chpts 18-20

Two topics really caught my attention during this section. The first is the objective principle of war. This principle says that every military operation must be directed toward a clearly defined, decisive, and attainable objective. However, Lieutenant Colonel McDade and his troops were not given a clearly defined mission; rather they were just told to walk through the jungle until they arrived at LZ Albany. This caused numerous complications and I think is linked to the heavy number of casualties the battalion took. Had McDade been given a more thorough mission, he would have been more tactical and not allowed his troops to just be lolling around.
This leads to the second issue that caught my attention, command and control. Basically there was none. The soldiers in the companies at the rear of the formation were lounging around and no one was giving orders because their commanders had moved to the front of the formation for a quick meeting. During the battle, the battalion was split up and there were many instances where soldiers were not sure whether they were being fired upon by their soldiers or by the North Vietnamese. McDade was out of contact with his people and unable to report on his accountability to higher, which was problematic because this limited their ability to call for air strikes. The lack of command and control on the side of the Americans had fatal results for the 2nd Battalion, 7th Cavalry.

"X-Ray" Chpts 14-17

I think all 9 principles of war are readily observed, on both sides, in the Ia Drang. Although you can make a case for all 9 principles, I have chosen to focus on mass and unity of command because they were two of the most vital characteristics of this battle.
Mass is when you overwhelm the enemy by utilizing all elements of your combat power at a certain place and time. LTC Moore and his men used mass very well by calling in artillery strikes on the enemy when it became too much for the line to handle. Numerous times during the battle they would have machine guns, grenades, riflemen, and air strikes all concentrated on one area of the battlefield. I think mass is what allowed the US to have an advantage in this battle, even though they had inferior numbers. The North Vietnamese did not employ mass in the same way as the Americans; rather they relied on concentrating forces. I think this is what led to heavy casualties on the enemy side because as one American soldiers says, “It was like a shooting gallery; waves of NVA were coming in a straight line.” The North Vietnamese thought they could win the battle by numbers, but I think if they had effectively used mass we would have been in much more trouble.
Unity of command means that one person is ultimately in charge. There was never any confusion that LTC Moore was in charge during this battle. Even when Tully’s battalion arrived, Moore was still in command until his battalion pulled out. I think this is important because had the two commanders or members of Moore’s battalion tried to overpower him, the battle could have ended poorly for the Americans. If more than one person is giving orders it can lead to confusion on the battlefield and even split-second hesitations can be fatal. You do not hear a lot about the command of the North Vietnamese, but I also feel like they had a solid unity of command. Often the book talks about how disciplined the soldiers were and I think this can be directly related to the command. They used bugles and hand-signals to direct their soldiers during battle and I’m sure the people giving the signals were not just making them up on their own, but rather they had been directed by their commander.

"X-Ray" Chpts 11-13

I think we need the Warrior Ethos because they provide a standard for all soldiers throughout the Army. Without the Ethos, everyone would be able to set their own values and this could get tricky, especially in combat situations. For instance, one soldier may value ‘never leaving a fallen comrade behind’ but another may value his own personal safety. In this case soldiers would be acting from different value systems and it would diminish the effectiveness of the Army. The Warrior Ethos is necessary for accomplishing the mission because it ensures that every soldier is on the same level.
The soldiers in the Ia Drang exemplify the Warrior Ethos, notably ‘never leaving a fall comrade behind’. There have been many examples of soldiers going above the call of duty to rescue a friend. For example, Lieutenant Geoghegan gave his own life trying to rescue one of his men and Crandall used his Hueys to transport the dead and wounded from LZ X-Ray. Even LTC Moore and SGM Plumley personally helped to carry the dead battlefield. Throughout the reading the lost platoon has been a source of worry because they do not like the fact that they currently have to leave their own men stranded.

"X-Ray" Chpts 8-10

There were numerous examples of leadership in this section, but I thought the actions of Crandall really stood out. He realized that the fate of 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry was in his hands and he more than rose to the occasion. Crandall started his extra servitude by bringing in supplies and ammunition, but upon seeing that there was no one to evacuate the causalities he loaded them into his own Huey. Eventually Crandall took over control of directing all flights into the LZ; he kept the mission in mind and the hot LZ barely phased him.
Many of leaders in the Ia Drang Valley utilized the decision making process we discussed in class. Cpt. Nadal's decision to pull back after trying to rescue the cut-off platoon was one example of this. He identified the problem, which was they were in an intense battle, one of their platoons was cut-off, but they were unable to make significant headway in their rescue mission. Nadal then gathered information based upon the number of casualties they were taking and the time of day. He generated possible solutions which were to keep trying or to pull back. He analyzed and compared these solutions, using his NCO's to help in the process and eventually executed the decision to withdraw.

"X-Ray" Chpts 5-7

LTC Moore exhibits many examples of good leadership in this section. The major one, I believe, is that he is the first one on the battlefield. In the chapter he talks about how SGM Plumley flashed some of the troops a smile in the field. I think this is important because it is motivating for the troops knowing their commanding officers are on the field are right there with them. LTC Moore also showed good leadership skills by continually adjusting his company positions as the battle progressed based on what his instincts told him about the enemies avenues of approach. Although he was under immense stress during this, he never became flustered. This is important because if he were to lose his composure it would surely transmit down the ranks.
The one critique I have of Moore in this section is that he is too compassionate towards Lt. Herrick in his writing. it seemed like he was almost praising Herrick, even though he messed up. I thought Lt. Herrick actions represented bad leadership because he forgot about the overall mission which led to his platoon being cut-off and taking a substantial number of causalities.

"Going to War"

I have actually read this book before because it is one of my dad's favorites. When he was stationed at Ft. Hunter Liggett we went out to visit and he showed us where parts of the movie had been filmed there.

The thing that amazes me most about this book is the amount of respect LTC Moore has for the enemy. This is apparent, even in this first section, because he devotes an entire chapter to General Man and his soldiers. Never once does he refer to the enemy in a negative light; he realizes the North Vietnamese had their own beliefs and that is what they were fighting for. I think this was an advantage for LTC Moore because it caused him to never underestimate the enemy during the planning and battle.

Inside-Out Again

In this final chapter Covey talks a lot about the gap between stimulus and response. I had never really thought about this gap before, but I found it really interesting. Since there is a gap between stimulus and response everyone is able to choose their response, it's not an automatic decision. By working on ourselves and our relationships with others from the inside-out we are able to come up with more proactive responses and these proactive responses can lead to a synergy in the outcome.

Looking at this book as a whole I think Covey made a lot of good points. Occasionally I thought his examples were a little extreme, but he made up for these with several very strong stories. Several of the habits seem like common sense (put first things first, think win/win) but people do not always practice them. It is easy to get caught up in life and not focus on our relationship with ourselves and other people, which is one of the most important aspects of life.

Habit 7 Sharpen the Saw

This chapter was almost a summary of all the rest because I felt like this habit combined all the others. Sharpening the saw is about improving yourself in four dimensions. Covey says these dimensions are highly interrelated, so improvement in one area leads to improvement in the others and I agree. For example, I will have weeks when I am proactive about working out (physical) and these are the weeks when I am best able to stay on top of my homework (mental). Because I am able to stay on top of my homework I have more time to spend with my friends (social/emotional).

The section about scripting others is applicable anytime in life, but I found it to be especially relevant to the Army. Eventually we will be leaders in the Army and in positions to influence our troops. If we are positive social mirrors others around will notice and hopefully develop their full potential.

Habit 6 Synergize

This was the hardest habit for me to understand. I think this is because synergy is not a common practice today, but also because I felt his examples in this chapter were more abstract. A lot of his examples did not have a clear solution in which the people used synergy. For example, when the husband and the wife were having problems he ended the story with himself saying, "You must have valued the differences." That is more the definition of synergy, not showing how the husband and wife used synergy to solve their problem.

The one part of this chapter I really liked was the story about the animals. I thought it was a good representation of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts because each animal had its own unique talents or parts. However, they did not take advantage of these talents and the end result was negative. This can be related to the Army because every soldier has their own strengths and as a leader if you recognize these strengths and capitalize upon them your group will have a stronger whole.

Reflection on Mission Statement

The process of writing my mission statement took much longer than I originally thought it would because I did not realize how much thought needed to go into it. I had to take time to figure out not only my mission statement, but also what my main roles and values are. This mission statement really made me think about how I want others to see me and how I want to see myself. I realized many of my strengths, but also my weaknesses. For each role I tried to pinpoint a value which would help me to mature in that identity. I think this mission statement will be useful for me because I do better when I have something concrete to look at. I am much more likely to succeed at a goal if I write it down. I will be able to change my mission statement as my roles evolve, but this is a good starting place.

Habit 5 Seek First to Understand, Then to be Understood

This section focused a lot on empathic listening in order to understand someone. The part I found the most interesting was autobiographical response vs. the empathic listening conversation. You could really see how much better empathic listening skills are during the second conversation because the son was able to figure out his own solutions to his problems, rather than just getting frusterated with his father.

I was kind of surprised that was the second habit on the road to interdependence because I feel like it should come before Think Win/Win. I mean how can you try and reach a Win/Win agreement without understanding the other person and then being understood by them. Seeking First to Understand... is almost like a step in the process of creating a Win/Win situation.

Habit 4 Think Win/Win

This section began by talking about competition vs. cooperation and I thought this was interesting because we already talked about this in one of my classes. In America we value competition and are taught it from a young age with sports and so on. Not every country is like this though and when cooperation is valued there is a higher productivity.

The one idea from this chapter that took me a while to grasp was No Deal. At first I thought of this as the easy way out, like you were just giving up on the problem. However, after Covey explained it more No Deal makes sense because in these situations no one would win at the expense of another. I could see this relating to the Army because you want to make sure the needs of your people are being met without sacrificing your own needs or the needs of the mission.

Paradigms of Interdependence

This section focused on the emotional bank account, which was a metaphor I really liked. By making little deposits over time you are able to build a trusting relationship. Covey also points out that you can overdraw the emotional bank account and then trust is lost within that relationship.

It is kind of ironic that this is the section we are reading this week. I had a little falling-out with one of my best friends from high school when I came to Notre Dame. This had been bothering me a lot, so I sent her a card at the beginning of this week. She called me Friday afternoon and we had like a two hour conversation and everything is great. I was building up my emotional bank account with her without even realizing it.

Habit 3 Put First Things First

In this section Covey focuses on Quadrant II activities and the fourth generation of time management. These two ideas are complementary and could be very beneficial for both a college student and an officer in the Army.

As a college student I am in the second generation of time management. I rely on my planner for everything and love being able to check things off as done. Covey pointed out the shortcomings of the system and after reading it I totally agree. I go about my homework on a day-to-day basis according to what my planner says, which often gets my into trouble when it comes to essays or long assignments because I have not been planning things out by the week, like in the fourth generation, and have to do it all in one night.

Quadrant II activities are important for officers in the Army because they allow you to focus on the important but not urgent things. One important, but not urgent activity for an officer would be building positive relationships with your people. This would be beneficial when something urgent does come up because they would be more likely to help with proactive solutions. Also, it would be easier for an officer to keep a high morale among their people if they had positive relationships with them.

Habit 2 Begin With the End in Mind

As I was reading the sections about alternative centers I was envisioning people in my mind who reminded me of each one. Then I got to the end of the section and Covey totally called it out how it is easier to recognize someone elses center rather than your own. So then I tried to recognize my own center and it was hard because nobody wants to point out their flaws.

The thing that Covey said that I liked most from this chapter was about the final step of being a principle-centered person. He said you need to feel comfortable with your decision and focus and enjoy it. I thought this was important because so often people play the "what if" game which takes away from your actual choice. This can happen all the time like in college when you wonder what if I would have just stayed in the other night would I have done better on my test? Or I'm sure you can think of numerous other examples.

Habit 1 Be Proactive

This section focused on being proactive. The one point that Covey made that stuck out most to me was when he talked about responsibility. I liked how he pointed out that responsibility "response-ability" is the ability to choose your response. I had never thought about the word in such a way, it makes sense though. Proactive people are responsible and they realize their behavior is based upon their own choices.

One other thing that Covey touched upon was the idea of self-fulfilling prophecies. He says that "a serious problem with reactive language is that it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy." I think this stuck out to me because earlier today I read a study William Chambliss did about self-fulfilling prophecies called The Saints and the Roughnecks. It was about two different groups of students, one was perceived highly by the community and the other was not, and at the end of the article it showed how the students reacted to the labels they had been given. The group who was perceived highly succeeded in life, but the others for the most part did not. Neither group of students were proactive, rather they were just reacting to their situations and this ended up hurting the roughneck group.

Here is the link for the article. If you have an extra 5 or 10 minutes it's worth reading. http://alpha.fdu.edu/~peabody/Lexicon/Chambliss,_The_Saints_and_the_Roughnecks.html

The Seven Habits - An Overview

In the beginning of this section Covey talks about habits and how they are they intersection of knowledge, skill, and desire. I agree with him when he says, "Habits can be learned and unlearned. But I also know it isn't a quick fix. It involves a process and a tremendous commitment." This might not be on the same level, but one of my habits is biting my nails, which is a bad habit. I have tried to quit, but there is no quick fix and it definitely takes commitment.

The last part of this chapter was a little more confusing I thought. I mean I have heard the story with the goose and the golden egg before, but the P/PC balance thing I didn't quite follow. Did you guys understand that??

Part One

The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People

In Part One Covey talks a lot about the Character Ethic vs. the Personality Ethic. He believes that the Character Ethic is what will ultimately lead to success. The Personality Ethic cannot lead to success because it is "manipulative, even deceptive, encouraging people to use techniques to get other people to like them." I agree with Covey that ultimately we should strive to live by the Character Ethic, but the Personality Ethic sounds so much easier because that is what we have always known. Covey says the sayings "Smiling wins more friends than frowning" and "Your attitude determines your altitude" are both part of the Personality Ethic. While I was never told them in those exact words, I have grown up being aware of the concepts of both and I have to say I agree with those sayings and I don't think they are being fake. I mean honestly, if you are having a bad day why wouldn't you still act happy?? If you were to act the way you were feeling for instance by acting really depressed, then you're day would just be doubly depressing. But by putting on a happy face you might actually start to have a better day, and that's not being fake.

Covey describes the Personality Ethic as a type of band-aid that covers up the real problem. It is more of a solution for the short-term, rather than the long-term which is what the Character Ethic is for. This thought came up in Private Practice this week, which just happens to be my favorite show. Dr. Violet Turner, played by Amy Brenneman, finds out she is pregnant, but is nervous about becoming a single mother. Her patient helps her to realize that she does not need to be so afraid because her success as a mother does not depend on her public image, rather her strong character will help make her a wonderful mom. In this case I agree with the Character Ethic because she does not need to worry about how she will percieved in society even though she is unwed and not sure which one of her "boyfriends" is the father...can't wait for next week!