'Why We Write' Series: Why I Write

Why I write

“Pay strict attention to what I say because I choose my words carefully and never repeat myself.”
Dalton Russell, Inside Man

Whenever the subject of communication arises, I am drawn to this particular quote from arguably the most underrated heist movie of the modern era. This single sentence provides a basis of why communication is important, and why writing is such a powerful tool. Why do I say this? Let’s take a closer look...

Clarity is king

All communication aims for clarity. Communication is a two-way street between the transmitter of a message who intends a certain meaning, and their recipient, who interprets that message through their own contextual lens. We’ve all been subjected at some point in our PME to a Chinese Whispers practical to prove how a simple message can be miscommunicated, but far more often it’s misperception that is the core of the issue. For example, when Air Force says it is employing talent management for promotion and posting decisions, it needs to be clear to the audience what it means by ‘talent’. No one looks at themselves in the mirror and says “I lack talent,” because they all believe they are talented. So in the absence of a definition, Air Force unintentionally sets an unrealistic expectation that everyone will now be personally managed for the specific attributes they perceive they bring to the organisation, rather than for those which Air Force values.

Not everyone can be as clear as Dalton Russell. Consider the many times you’ve stood in a semi-circle or sat in an auditorium to be briefed by ‘a leader’ (from an NCO to a star-rank – or perhaps it was you). Did this leader convey a clear and unambiguous message that everyone took away in exactly the manner they intended? Or were elements of it open to cherry-picking by the bush-lawyers in our midst? I find writing to be the best way to achieve clarity, regardless of whether my thoughts will be eventually expressed in verbal or written form. I can choose my words carefully to convey my intended meaning precisely and unambiguously. I can do so without the pressure of an audience in front of me. I have the opportunity to consider what I am saying from my audience’s perspective, to hear my words in their head and reflect upon how they may respond. Have I articulated my points clearly and supported them logically without labouring the point? Are they likely to interpret my words the way I intend? Or do I need to reconsider my approach and the level of detail I am providing?

Concise counts

We are already inundated with ‘information’, the sheer volume of which distracts and detracts in terms of both attention and understanding. “In 2000, the average attention span of an internet user was measured at twelve seconds. By 2015, it had shrunk to eight seconds.”[1] Given that, (and ignoring that by this rationale you stopped reading by the end of the opening paragraph) your communications need to be succinct. This imperative is reinforced by the value people in modern society place upon their time and the sense of annoyance created when they perceive that you have wasted this commodity. During our aforementioned briefing, did our leader get to the point within the audience’s attention span? Or did they choose their words poorly and have to repeat themselves to get their message across? If so, did they simply rephrase each repetition slightly such that your attention wandered and you were left unclear on the specifics as a result of the subtle shifts? Worse still, was the time allotted for the brief more than was needed had it been more concise and, like the 1000-word essay squeezed into 5000, their presentation ballooned to fill the space available?

Again, writing is helpful to achieve the succinct outcome Dalton Russell would appreciate. The quote, “This letter would have been shorter had I had more time,” has been attributed to many sources[2], but that does not make it any less true. Once you have achieved clarity, you should next ensure that your thoughts are sufficiently concise to avoid wasting other people’s time and your own. A benefit of economy of words is that all of them matter. This lack of ‘filler’ increases the likelihood that your audience’s attention will not be lost before you get your point across.

Alternative viewpoints can’t be ignored

No matter how well-crafted your argument, there will always be a question or a contrary point of view. Perhaps you’ve built your case as a stalking horse or straw man specifically to generate discussion on a contentious topic; one of the many conversations that we, as military professionals, need to have rather than default to multipartite collegiality. In our briefing from Leader Wrong, how did they deal with questions and alternative points of view? Did they respond in a considered and thoughtful manner that showed they understood the subject matter well and lent authority and credibility to what they said? Did they take the question on notice with the generic, ‘Good question, I’ll get back to you on that,’ (and did they)? Did they MSU on the spot in the assumption that, as the smartest person in the room they could get away with it? Or was there no time for questions or challenges because they digressed and waffled and repeated themselves endlessly suggesting they didn’t really get the issue themselves or hadn’t prepared appropriately? Or, from a more cynical perspective, was this an intentional effort to minimise the opportunity for audience response or challenges to their point of view.

We claim that the Air Force appreciates diversity of thought. If that is true, we should be seeking out counter arguments either to confirm we are on the right path or to ensure we don’t miss opportunities to make appropriate course corrections. Some organisations actively engage an audience through the Socratic method to inform, or to stimulate a competition of ideas in order to generate arrive at an optimal option.

Writing is a useful method through which to consider the pros and cons of competing points of view. As you lay out your key arguments, you should also consider what questions they may generate or what contrary viewpoints may arise. If you are briefing your workforce on organisational policy, this will help you be better prepared for likely questions and have answers at the ready, both increasing your credibility, but more importantly also a sign of respect for your thinking audience. If you encouraging a competition of ideas, you need to have a handle on several viewpoints to be ready to facilitate the debate. If you are expressing a specific view, it is always useful to outline the likely challenges to that view and why they are not sufficiently compelling to sway you, lest you be accused of being wedded to a single idea.

Written word as fact

Notwithstanding the post-truth world in which we now reside, the written word remains a crucial reference point when needed. We have all had staff who have selectively quoted a document, presentation or speech that supports their argument (or perhaps have done so ourselves). Doveryai, no proveryai, the Russian proverb meaning trust but verify, is a central element of leadership. Confirming facts through reference to the written word is far simpler and more authoritative than from a recollection of something that was said, or, as is more often the case, what was inferred from what was perceived to have been said. Irrespective of whether you choose to express yourself entirely in written form or to speak from notes comprising your carefully chosen words, if what you are saying is important enough to communicate, it is important enough to create a lasting reference of the words used. While you may not avoid entirely a debate over what was meant and what was inferred, you now have a better starting point in the future than vague recollections, misquotes, or misrepresentations proffered as immutable fact.

Why write?

There are many reasons to express your thoughts. You may wish to convey knowledge or the wisdom of your experience to others. You may need to present a compelling business case to the Government seeking approval for a billion-dollar project. You may want to inform your workforce of an organisational policy decision that affects them or you may want to explain to the organisation why you think that policy shift is ill-informed or has a high risk of failure.

There are also many means by which you can express those thoughts. Some have the face for radio and matching wit – for them a podcast such as The Dead Prussian or War for Idiots may be the go. Some have the gift of sarcasm and satire – their message may be best conveyed through the Duffel Blog, Doctrine Man or the (lately silent) Raspberry Creek Bugler. Any approach has inherent risk. In the case of the former, the dialogue may seem forced and unnatural, in which case your listener’s attention and therefore your message may be lost. In the latter instance, you may encounter the sarchasm across which your wit cannot reach, leaving the audience that takes you literally confused or, worse, offended.

If your aim is to engage with your audience and communicate your message effectively, you could do worse than aspire to Dalton Russell (minus the armed robbery). Writing is a useful tool to aid you in this effort, but like all skills worth having, it takes practice. The good news is that, from The Central Blue to the Strategy Bridge, there are many forums available through which to hone those skills. So, to poach a line from a favoured podcast, grab a pen and crack on!

Group Captain Jason Begley is a Royal Australian Air Force officer currently undertaking a National Security Fellowship at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. He is a graduate of the Australian Defence Force Academy and Australian Command and Staff College, and holds Masters degrees from UNSW and the ANU. He is mid-way through a research PhD co-sponsored by the Air Force and the Sir Richard Williams Foundation, but is thinking of switching topics (again). Views expressed are his alone and do not reflect the opinion of the Royal Australian Air Force, the Department of Defence, or the Australian Government.

Footnotes

[1] Singer, P.W. and Brooking, E.T., LikeWar – The Weaponization of Social Media, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston, 2018, p 158.

[2] ‘If I Had More Time, I Would Have Written a Shorter Letter’, Quote Investigator, https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/04/28/shorter-letter/ accessed 02 Sep 19.

Cite Article

Comments

Within this area, Defence’s newest members will be exposed to the conflict spectrum and theories associated with its employment. While additional emphasis will be afforded to one’s own Service, consideration will be given to joint operations and planning processes. The topic will also include an exploration of current ADF operations and emerging technological impacts on future preparedness.

The ADF’s contribution to Australian National Power through shape, deter and respond activities will be understood in general terms. Tied with this awareness will be ADO roles and responsibilities, including civil-military relations. The importance of Defence’s contribution in this regard will be linked to a general sense of Australia’s strategic environment. Resource management fundamentals will help underpin responsible expenditure of Commonwealth funds.

All members of Defence will also need to be competent in military administration, ADF roles and structures, and undertake all initial mandatory training. This foundation will continue to develop in subsequent JPME levels and increasingly expand opportunites for Joint Stream (out-of-category) postings and roles. APS does not require core military skills.

Following on from their respective recruit or commissioning course, ADF personnel will commence their Initial Employment Training (IET). This period can include workplace experience and periods of on-the-job training.

Graduation from IET marks the formal transition from Level 1 to Level 2. It is at this point when they are considered effective in the workplace.

Defence members at this level will have a sound understanding of their own Service or domain warfare systems and capability. As they progress through Level 2, they will display a stronger understanding about the ADF’s holistic contribution to Joint Force warfighting domains. This will extend to the nature and theory of war, which has developed through an academic study of historical case studies and contemporary military issues. Importantly, such awareness will help inform their understanding of the impact of technology on current and future warfare. Awareness of gender perspectives on operations will contribute to their well-rounded application of the Profession of Arms.

By recognising the difference between complicated and complex problems, personnel at this level will ensure their problem-solving strategies and decision making are optimised. In the earlier stages, personnel will employ more transactional, linear thinking, decision support tools (such as the Joint Military Appreciation Process or variations) but they will increasingly apply alternate thinking strategies to seek more sophisticated options. Greater availability of human-machine teaming systems will progressively reduce our reliance on lower order cognitive activity and thus facilitate more nuanced considerations to complex problems.

Australia’s approach to the formulation of military strategy and its strategic environment (including international and geopolitical) will strengthen as members advance in this Level. Through both courses and experience, they will also acquire a stronger understanding of interagency strategies, policies and decision making processes.

As they progress through Level 2, Defence personnel will progressively develop awareness and then expertise beyond their initial employment category.

These broader systems and processes will expand to include one or more of the five key Joint Streams: Military Support, Operations, Capability Development and Delivery, Strategy Policy and Engagement, and Intelligence.

Within JPME Level 2, Defence personnel will become increasingly proficient in their initial employment category. Through both their formal courses (initial employment training and subsequent intermediate courses) and workplace experience, they will display competency in their contribution to military power. As they develop greater technical expertise, senior personnel at this level will become suitable for growing the next generation, by seeking instructional roles.

Those operating at this level will understand both internal Joint Force command relationships and international engagement with coalition partners. Their employment of operational art will consider instruments of national power and campaign design, while the relationship challenges between strategic, operational and tactical levels of war will be clearly understood. Continual professional development will keep Level 3 practitioners abreast of emerging trends and future warfare techniques. Expertise will be apparent in the planning requirements for force generation and the factors that shape the execution of joint operations. National and military strategic planning considerations for Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, Ambiguous and Novel (VUCAN) environments will mature. Personnel will be increasingly aware of the influence technology has on current and future warfare as well as whole-of-government response options.

Those operating at this level will be increasingly comfortable with systems thinking to perceive and influence complex adaptive systems. Various alternative thinking strategies, such as Design Thinking and Multi-Criteria Decision Making, will allow them to thrive in the challenging multi-domain environment.

Importantly, they will be able to translate complex strategic issues into tangible ideas for their subordinates.

This level is noted for its integration of civil-military functions and instruments of national power. This includes strategy and public policy development as well as contemporary operating environments and implications for military and security forces. Awareness of both Joint and multinational logistics will complement resource management systems of the Joint Force.

Expertise in one or more of the Joint Streams specific processes will continue to develop with staff and/or leadership responsibilities aligning with roles held.

Examples of the advanced knowledge base likely to be demonstrated include: One Defence Capability System (or its successor) and FIC management, Joint Force staff roles, advanced Human Resources systems and processes, Whole of Government and international engagement approaches, as well as legislative requirements associated with the relevant Joint Stream.

Through more senior category appointments and opportunities, those at Level 3 will display expertise within their specialist category employment. Completion of charge courses, deployments, exercises and pre-command courses, personnel will increasingly expand their specialist expertise to support joint effects.

Increasing leadership expectations will develop within their category’s specialist vocation.

This level is recognised for its future Joint Force planning, development and sustainment challenges. Those operating in these positions will resolve military resource challenges and understand limitations of contracted support to operations. Operational artists will be adept at integrating strategic objectives to planning through the exploitation of emerging and non-traditional concepts for joint and multinational warfare. These skills will manifest in their ability to design and lead theatre strategies, campaigns and major operations. They will also be seeking opportunities to exploit technology’s influence on current and future warfare as well as its role in whole-of-government response options.

Cognitive performance will be enhanced through active seeking of diversity and a tolerance for ambiguity. Dealing with Defence-related wicked systems will be normal.

Problem-solving will increasingly accept increased risk to reflect the greater depth of wisdom and confidence in one’s judgments. This level is also noted for strategic thinking, visioning and championing a learning culture.

Level 4 leaders will be strong advocates of divergent thinking in their subordinates (when appropriate), to ensure Defence continues to improve systems and processes.

Those operating at this level have a very clear understanding of the impacts on national Defence policy and strategy. They will positively influence military capability development to enhance relevant instruments of national power. A strong awareness of contemporary global affairs and trends, combined with a deep understanding of international relations theories, will enhance their management of national military resources to support national security and foreign policy. Gender, peace and security impacts will continue to guide their strategic policy development.

Those operating at this level will be considered Generalists who possess a wide range of skills and expertise in multiple Joint Stream areas. With the exception of a select few specialists, these personnel will have actively sought out opportunities to broaden their versatility beyond their specialisation. Typical areas will include: strategic planning, civil-military relationships, campaign planning, strategic governance, business and financial acumen, One Defence Capability System leadership, strategic direction setting of emerging capabilities, policy leadership for future capability needs, and industry engagement for sustainment and growth.

At the enlisted level, Tier B and C warrant officers provide a vital link across the ADF, not only championing 75% of the ADF at the strategic table but also helping translate the top-down messaging. To do this, they must excel in understanding both worlds. Strategic level warrant officers also play a pivotal role in the command team relationship not only as advisors to decision-makers, but also in the strategic leadership of organisational culture, ongoing professional development, and the ideological underpinnings of the Profession of Arms throughout the ADF’s workforce

For those still in key roles within their primary category, there will be strong leadership expectations to ensure the delivery of capability, strategic advice on capabilities, limitations and future needs, as well as shaping the professional development system to grow future generations within the field.

Senior officers and their equivalents will be comfortable in crisis leadership situations across all aspects of Defence. They will be highly effective when commanding Joint Task Forces or conducting influence operations. This performance will come from a deep understanding of Joint Force attributes, structures, capability requirements, emerging concepts and risks affecting military strategies and campaign development. Their strategic leadership abilities will extend to synthesising operational lessons learned across all Force elements including deployment, employment and sustainment. All of these areas will be enhanced by their astute awareness of political and resource implications in joint warfare strategy and planning.

Multi-agency, political and global wicked systems are an expected reality of Level 5 roles. Those operating at this level will have the cognitive agility to respond comfortably with these challenges by exploiting paradigm shifting approaches (such as nudge theory) to improve systems to a more advantageous state.

Senior leaders at this level will be expert in strategic communication and information impacts. They will comfortably implement grand strategy through future-focused policy formulation and employment of armed forces. Their expertise in national intelligence community and architecture will help them influence national security and foreign policy. The implications of contemporary challenges on national security strategies will be understood. This depth of understanding will be drawn from a strong awareness of national powers’ characteristics, capabilities and limitations combined with the civil-military relations necessary to deliver national power instruments.

Senior officers and SES band public servants at the highest echelons will be skilled in decision cycles and information/knowledge management systems. They will understand Government processes for capability acquisition and how to exploit technology enablers within enterprise systems.

As leaders of Force Element Groups (FEGs) or Joint Task Forces (JTFs), senior military officers will integrate emerging capabilities and technology to both maintain force-in-being deterrence and deliver operations to meet Government response options. In policy and advisory roles, they will exploit emerging capabilities and technologies when shaping military strategy, policy development and implementation. Industry engagement will enhance support of sovereign capability and Australia’s economic prosperity

A Service Warrant Officer is a unique appointment within each Service, one of influence and advice rather than Command. E10 Warrant Officers have strategic leadership responsibilities as Command advisors to Senior Leadership of their Service to provide critical insight to key decisions through an alternative lived experience and with support from Senior Enlisted Personnel to give a balanced, informed and analysed perspective from the workforce.

They also play a pivotal role in the organisation’s leadership, able to utilise their professional knowledge and experience to provide context and make the complex simple and the simple compelling. The unique appointment ensures the Service WO stays connected to contemporise issues for the workforce and represent those gaps and opportunities at the appropriate delegated level.

Service Warrant Officers deliberately steward, communicate and are genuinely dedicated to their Service; while always supporting strategic organisation culture and setting the conditions for long-term success.

Service Warrant Officers have a concurrent liability to foster relationships supporting Australia’s national power through networking and encouraging active engagement with counterparts to promote a commonality of purpose: – Friendship, Partnership and Leadership.