Experience Of The Cascade Simulation Conducted

Military leaders make decisions and solve problems every day. Some need a decision quickly while others can take time. The US Army has several decision-making methods to assist leaders. The Army Problem Solving Model (Process) (PSM) is a systematic approach to identifying the best possible solution to an issue or problem and a deliberate method of decision-making (FM 6-0, 2009). Leaders use it to solve a problem when time is not critical and they can put some thought into different solutions. The solution must be objective and based on facts in order for the decision to be relevant and practical. The

Do the elements of thought, as described by Drs. Paul & Elder, assist Army officers conducting the Army Problem Solving Process? Argue why or why not.

Dr. Williamson Murray once declared a want to develop his Expeditionary Warfare School (EWS) seminar students into hand grenades. His comments were, of course, figurative, but Murray communicated a vision: his company grade students would read more deeply, think more critically, write with greater effect, and ultimately be more willing to challenge conventional wisdom than their peers. Murray, with EWS, engineered the course, from initial selection through the final seminars, to meet his goal of a competent, well-armed officer prepared to make and recommend just decisions grounded in history.

What might have been the setback we previously faced in making decisive, clear or sound effective decisions? Was it a defect in how Commanders and Leaders led units or troops, or perhaps the philosophy in which we chose to command and control every aspect of the battlefield? What does it mean to recognize or comprehend the art of Command and the science of Control? The six principles of mission command are key in developing a cohesive team that will support all aspects of the mission. Asking “why” is now encouraged when it pertains to certain situations or missions. Understanding the purpose of why a course of action or desired outcome is necessary, leads to mission success and a cohesive unit with thinking leaders. Thinking clearly usually isn’t an issue for most leaders, but position an individual in a situation of extreme stress or complexity, then there might be a reason to be concerned. Through

This assignment aims to identify and discuss learning and teaching strategies that are particularly effective in meeting learner needs within the military environment. It will review some of the five main areas Behaviourism, Neo Behaviourism, Gestalt, Cognitive, Humanist, and how these can be exploited within our delivery of learning and teaching, that the delivery strategy adopted is suitable to meet the needs of our learners with in the military environment, and to make sure the correct resources are available and ensuring the delivery of

The Bay of Pigs fiasco, the Challenger Disaster, and the U.S. failure to anticipate the attack on Pearl Harbor – all notable examples of how groupthink tends to plague groups with high cohesiveness (What is Groupthink, n.d.). Oxford Dictionaries defines groupthink as “the practice of thinking or making decisions as a group in a way that discourages creativity or individual responsibility” (Groupthink, n.d.). With this in mind, it is no surprise that groupthink is going to be a major problem in an organization, such as the military, that values uniformity and a strict chain of command. There is a lot of research on groupthink and evidence of groupthink is apparent in nearly every social group, no matter the size. So, how does a junior officer in the military go about minimizing groupthink among his subordinates and peers without affecting values such as uniformity and chain of command? In order to minimize groupthink, you must minimize the symptoms by encouraging honesty, accountability, and differing opinions. This paper will demonstrate how a junior officer can combat groupthink within the decision making process, standard operating procedures, and the culture of the command.

Furthermore, research suggests that conflict in the decision making process promotes creativity amongst group members (Nemeth 1986), higher levels of commitment and satisfaction from group members (Peterson 1999), and group members become more knowledgeable about the interests of their co workers (Peterson 2007). In comparison to the first simulation, this result was evident in the second attempt. On the other hand, the decision making process was time consuming. Luckily, there were no time constraints, however, towards the end of the task, group members including myself, became tiresome and overworked. Eventually, I began to lose control of my group and those with the most useful information provided to them during the simulation began to

Developing decision making models and utilizing outside strategies is the key.13 The Military Decision Making Process is an example of a decision making strategy that when done properly removes much of the intuition from the process. The example J.D. Trout uses in his book Why Empathy Matters, is that of Ulysses and the Sirens.14 Ulysses knows he will be unable to resist the Sirens through sheer will and so using an outside strategy lashes himself to the ship’s mast. Perhaps a more relevant example of outside strategy is that of GEN Stanley McChrystal imposing restrictions on air strikes in Afghanistan. GEN McChrystal understood the damage being wrought on the overall strategic mission in Afghanistan by the ever-increasing civilian death toll as the result of indiscriminate air strikes. GEN McChrystal further understood that these air strikes were being called in and release authority being given by Soldiers in hot affective states. He thought it better to sometimes let the Taliban escape when it was uncertain if civilians lay within the target

The main points of this article relate to the changing nature of warfare (think terrorism and advancements in technology) and the adjustments military leaders are obliged to make. Hence, according to the article, leaders must: a) be trained in critical thinking skills; b) be "committed to life-long [and self-directed] learning"; c) be willing to take the initiative to "diagnose" their goals, needs,

Throughout history, The United States has been involved in many confrontations with various types of enemies. As a military force, we try to learn from the mistakes made. We have After Action Reviews in order to find out how we can change our plans for future battles. We change our Field Manuals and Army Regulations in order to fit those plans. However, there are rare instances when things work out perfectly. When the doctrine created for training and organization match perfectly to the battles we face. Unfortunately for us, when things go so well, we think we have the perfect plan. It isn’t until future confrontations that we learn how wrong we are.

Serving in the Army gives a person a chance to experience a number of different challenges, both mentally and physically that may not pertain to your actual job, but pertain to your skills as a Soldier. In my career, I have jumped from planes, helicopters, been exposed to riot control agent, tazed, and many other events to help enhance my experiences that I may encounter in a tactical situation. For this paper I am going to discuss a recent event that I had the opportunity to recently partake in, which is known as the Leader’s Reaction Course (LRC). The Leaders reaction course is a series of obstacles that are designed to subject a group of individuals to apply critical thinking, while working together as a team under stressful conditions,

Over 80 years ago a young Army officer changed the face of battle employing Psychological Warfare that left lasting effects regarding the method of modern-day employment of Military Information Support Operations (MISO) by Psychological Operations (PSYOP) forces. Major General (MG) Robert Alexis McClure was a psychological warfare specialist and is considered the founder of U.S. Army Psychological Operations (source). Soldiers assigned to conventional forces certainly have never heard of him, and even most Special Operations Forces (SOF) soldiers have only a small understanding of the beginnings of special warfare with its roots in Psychological Operations. Since 1989, there has been a very select few that embraced the methodical

The training on perception can be employed in organization in those cases when the officer will be faced with the dilemma of what to do. For instance where two prisoners are at fault and the senior’s wants to favor one of the two for punishment, then the officer will be in a dilemma of whether to stand by the truth or follow the instructions from the seniors. The training on perception will assist the officer in such a case (Clement, 2012).

* With the development of new warfare technology during WWII, the need for a greater understanding of human performance came to prominence. Problems such as how to best train soldiers to use new technology and how to deal with matters of attention while under duress became areas of need for military personnel. Behaviorism provided little if any insight into these matters and it was the work of Donald Broadbent, integrating concepts from human performance research and the recently developed information theory, that forged the way in this area.[4]

In order to survive the fast paced as well as patient driven environment, of the health care organizations it is very essential to implement both critical thinking and problem solving in your day-to-day tasks. Working at the Nursing home, often times we had to use logical reasoning to project and monitor the progress on patients. So, implementing critical thinking towards decision-making became a vital part of my agenda. According to Payne, Bettman, Coupey, Johnson (1976), “When faces with decision problems involving just two or three alternatives, people often use decision strategies that