Recommendation Saturation
Fellow staff officers; too often we allow recommendation saturation to happen to our senior leadership due to filter failure. This filter failure is a consequence of information availability, ambiguity of decision impacts, and in some ways to simply CYA and can lead tied to the fear of decision making — or more appropriately, the fear of making a wrong decision. So what happens? Decisions get pushed up the chain. Staff officers will offer updates, situational awareness, and even recommendations; but will seldom just “make the call.” Next time you feel the need to push a decision or recommendation up to the boss, try asking yourself if it is more appropriate and effectual if you just made it!
The HQ staff officer is an interesting position. They do not qualify as middle management yet are most likely mid career. They are not in charge of groups or in a leadership position but are most certainly being groomed for them. They must build coalitions to get work done. They are the implementers, the initiators, the drivers of actionable change. You can find their fingerprints all over organizational priorities and focus. Arguably, their most operational duty is to filter what goes up to the senior leadership.
I find the importance of the word filter is often lost on people filling these positions. The need arises due to inefficient hierarchies, data saturation, and leadership duties that are generally extra-curricular as compared to an organizational mission. Add in the colossal planning and strategy documents to review and approve, the newest research and development efforts to be aware of, and the necessary stakeholder engagements — when will they have time to effect change and lead an organization?
So, how are staff officers doing at this supporting role? Well, I would say we have some work ahead of us (personal perception based on generally on things I've seen in my organization). I would also mention, any recommendation saturation I see is easily tied to the best intentions. I find the staff officers I interact with very motivated, intelligent, engaged, and always looking out for their chain of command. That’s why they were picked for the job in the first place!
No one wants to be in that spot where they kept the leadership in the dark on something that becomes and issue. If this does happen, the immediate reaction is sure to be negative from leadership and the staff will posture themselves to ensure it never happens again. The easiest way to do this: pass everything up. Even if it isn't passed up, staff officers will be prepared to answer any question the boss might ask. The end game is a staff ensuring that the leader is aware of everything — actionable and of value or not.
Let‘s start introducing a bit of anarchy to our jobs and start resisting the urge to push things up the chain unless they are 1) obviously decisions for leadership or 2) baked enough to be actionable.
This includes eliminating the “good salesmen” approach commonly used to push an idea or recommendation during transit times or at the gym etc… I mean, there is a reason we get so well at framing our “elevator speech,” but honestly it’s time to close the doors on them.
This is not an easy task. Analyzing the amount of information that comes across a desk in an headquarters unit is numbing. Sometimes, just figuring out where it belongs is difficult enough — adding in the requirement to make the decision is just not fair. Here’s another rub; we are sure to make mistakes, and the fallout will sting! However, I expect this would be fairly infrequent, considering the caliber of people that fill these positions.
Lastly, this isn't a one sided issue. Leadership thrives on this “just in time information.” Many meetings are designed just to fill this craving. Waning off of recommendation saturation will require a team effort. Decision makers and staff officers alike will have to be prepared for a long haul and be willing to support each other.
