Communication in Canadian Military: Critical Review (Education Coursework)

Running head: COMMUNICATION IN CANADIAN MILITARY1
Communication in Canadian Military: Critical Review
Student Name
College/University Affiliation
COMMUNICATION IN CANADIAN MILITARY

2

Communication in Canadian Military: Critical Review
1. Part 1
1.1. Explain how communication and motivation can be leveraged to improve organizational effectiveness as a whole.
In military, commanders are mandated to communicate missions and convey a diversity of messages to several audiences making communication key to mission success and, more importantly, go above and beyond in developing leadership skills among subordinates. The connections between leadership, influence and communication is, perhaps, put succinctly and expressively as follows:
There are countless definitions of leadership in existence. Leadership models continue to be developed, and the ongoing debate flourishes with respect to the particular attributes that might best characterize the qualities of effective leaders. Yet there is a single common denominator, influence, which threads its way throughout the various meditations about leadership. No matter how one chooses to think about leadership itself, influence of leaders over their followers will always be a constant factor. For example, the recently published Canadian Forces (CF) doctrine on leadership offers a value-neutral definition of this concept as "directly or indirectly influencing others, by means of formal authority or personal attributes, to act in accordance with one's intent or a shared purpose.” Without even taking into consideration whether the leadership is good or bad, effective or ineffective, the influence aspect is firmly rooted in the definition. However, influence cannot possibly exist if leaders do not communicate their intentions. In short, without communication, there can be no leadership.
COMMUNICATION IN CANADIAN MILITARY

3

(MacIntyre & Charbonneau, 2008, p. 114)
In current state of fluid and dynamic global affairs, leadership-influence-communication connections form a necessary prerequisite for commanders and subordinates to collaborate in order to coordinate mandated missions effectively and achieve operational and tactical independence for lower ranking officers.
From a motivation perspective, a vast body of literature has discussed ways commanders can influence subordinate behavior by means of motivation (Browne & Walker, 2008). CF has, in fact, adopted a fairly straightforward concept of motivation. Namely, rewards and recognition are emphasized in order to achieve individual satisfaction as well as group motivation for more enhanced performance (Browne & Walker, p. 422). This conception of motivation at CF, embedded in a business management-oriented approach, is aligned to CF overall mission of enhancing a sense of pride and duty among service people. To do so, catering to needs of individuals cannot be overemphasized to ensure a healthy and sustainable relationship between commanders and subordinates as well as among subordinates. Then again, military leaders are often overwhelmed by a lack of solid “motivation playbooks,” so to speak, in order to communicate and reward/punish actions accordingly. That is why, actual listening and constant communication, only possible via genuine empathy, are critical to make viable any commander-subordinate relationship in a a rapidly changing warfare context at global scale and, importantly, against a notable lack of any clear-cut playbooks on how to motivate under uncertain conditions.
Intuitively, leadership requires followers. Typically, followers are formed into groups of different sizes, skills and functions. In military contexts, group members do not necessarily have
COMMUNICATION IN CANADIAN MILITARY

4

required knowledge or skills to perform one or more required activities, particularly in unfamiliar
situations. The challenges leaders/commanders face managing different groups of people are, moreover, compounded by differential knowledge and skill sets leaders/commanders have (or not). In an increasingly complex and dynamic battlespace, leaders/commanders as well as followers need to establish a group formation and development strategy agile and effective enough to adapt to ever changing battlespace situations. Instead of a rigid set of do's and don't any given group members should follow, values and principles, well inculcated and maintained, are apt to consolidate group members of differential backgrounds, experiences, knowledge and skills. If anything, integrity, dependability, consistency, loyalty, openness, and fairness are qualities subordinates expects from a leader (Walker, Maclntyre & Bentley, 2008, p. 501). Trust, cohesiveness, commitment and support, and change management are, moreover, values and principles each and every unit in CF should embrace and cherish (Walker, Maclntyre & Bentley,
ap. 501-507). In a final analysis, a general common ground, mediated by adequate leader/commander guidance, communication and collaboration, is a compromise current warfare and battlespace require most for effective and expedited delivery of mandated missions.
1.2. Briefly describe a situation illustrating the transition from direct to indirect influence and explain how that connects with leading the people and leading the institution.
In military, influence is a concept of deep and far-reaching implications. If anything, military is, generally, conceived as a “usual” place for leadership development. That is, military leaders are expected to influence subordinates in numerous direct and indirect ways (Bentley & Walker, 2008, pp. 341-343). Moreover, leadership, as one most common form of influence in and out of military, is not confined to formal forms of leadership exercised by commanders in more
COMMUNICATION IN CANADIAN MILITARY

5

senior positions. Instead, influence could be exercised by subordinates who, having enough knowledge and skills,could change course of actions by example (Bentley & Walker, p. 343).
Leadership, in all forms and styles, is, accordingly, only a conduit to influence.
From a leadership perspective, influence could be direct or indirect (Bentley & Walker, p. 340). Unsurprisingly, “effective leadership for the Canadian Forces has been defined as, "directing, motivating and enabling others to accomplish the mission professionally and ethically, while developing or improving capabilities that contribute to mission success,” a definition applicable “through several pathways or conduits, the ones most frequently referred to being direct or indirect leadership, leading people or leading the institution, those using either the transactional approach or the transformational leadership approach” (p. 341). Thus, a leader managing organizations and institutions is, in a sense, indirectly leading, and as a consequence influencing, subordinates by, say, changing ways activities are performed or by leading change.
1.3. Which one(s) of the 4 components of transformational leadership best connect with the idea of fostering a learning organization and why?
The four components of transformational leadership are: (1) Idealized Influence, (2) Inspirational Motivation, (3) Intellectual Simulation, and (4) Individualized Consideration (Bentley & Walker, 346-347). By stimulating “their [leaders'] followers to be creative and innovative, and to challenge their own beliefs and values as well as those of the leader and the organization,” Intellectual Simulation is one best component connecting with fostering a learning organization. Specifically, Intellectual Simulation is an enabler component creating an organizational climate characterized by a constant passion for learning and intellectual development not so much by imposing any set of autocratic rules yet by providing a learning
COMMUNICATION IN CANADIAN MILITARY

6

environment making learning an ongoing pursuit by all involved stakeholders.
1.4. Identify one national policy document (national security, defence policy, foreign policy, etc.) and provide an example of how it can affect the responsibilities of institutional leaders.
Globally, warfare is changing for good. In lieu of a conventional “hard” and wide-scale military interventions, more and more militaries are experiencing an increasingly fluid state of affairs prior to, during and after military action. Specifically, non-military challenges – including, yet not limited to, failing states, climate change, growing power (and influence) of non-state actors – are reshaping military strategy, and consequently, operational and tactical planning and coordination, in numerous unexp...