Joe and I thought it might be a good idea to write a quick blog each week to wrap up the conversations taking place as a part of A Summer with Grant. Even with almost 100 folks involved, it’s amazing how many of the same ideas occurred in the 8 separate small groups. Before we get to those themes, here’s the opening thought/question we posed to the #GrantSummer crew:

“In the first two chapters of Grant’s memoirs, we read about his early life and are given only a brief snippet of his time at West Point, the only educational experience extant in the US Army at the time. This passage jumped out at us, given its tie to what we’re starting here at A Summer with Grant, “There is a fine library connected with the Academy from which cadets can get fine books to read in their quarters. I devoted more time to these, than to the books relating to the courses of study (Memoirs, 32).” Self-development seemed to always have a high place in Grant’s life…and would seem to with this group, as well.

Overall, Grant’s experiences at the Academy must have had some influence on his way of thinking and development as an Army officer. Today, military academies, along with the other commissioning sources — to include initial entry training — is considered the start of a leader’s professional military education (PME). Let’s delve this week into PME and self/leader-development:

1.) What role do you think PME plays/should play in self/leader development?

2.) Do you think our current systems meet the needs of our military personnel and institutions? What do you think Grant would have thought about the US Military Academy meeting the needs of the Army in his day?

If you aren’t in the military, please feel free to share your views. Additionally, if you have some insights into Grant’s West Point education (i.e. Mahan’s influence), please share them with the group. We’re all reading this with different backgrounds, so try to avoid using acronyms unless you spell them out. To make it easier to keep track of the conversations, please enter your response in the comments section.

Looking ahead, in Chapter 3 Grant continues to weave self-development into his Memoirs, “To help my memory I kept a book in which I would write up, from time to time, my recollections of all I had read since lasting posting it (Memoirs, 40).” As we move beyond this week’s very easy reading, don’t forget that there are some heavy weeks ahead, so plan accordingly…and think about keeping a book of notes and thoughts to help you when you’re reflecting and posting to Glassboard!”

The themes that seemed to come up frequently included:

Self-development

Not surprising in a self-selected group doing a professional development course on their off time, the concept of self-development was heavily discussed. Both through Grant’s thoughts on his education at West Point (on which he spent few words beyond how he preferred to read his own reading list in the library than to study for class) and personal experience, the group frequently addressed how important self-study is, how it supplements professionally directed education, and how both support operational experience…before it is needed and as a means of reflection. As a member of the group said:

“PME definitely has a role in leader development, but only as a supporting effort. Leaders of character, presence, and intellect are developed through self study, robust mentorship programs and operational experience.”

Training vs. education/specialization vs. generalization

Another debate on PME and Grant discussed the tension between training and education, specialization and generalization. Some group members believed that the American system of PME (more of a focus on training than education, particularly at the sub-mid-grade level) was appropriate for creating the tactically proficient officers needed in most the Army. Others favored creating more educationally focused courses at as low a level of PME as possible. For an example of this debate, one member believed that PME should provide the specialization and training required of tactical professionals, while the:

“generalization and achiev[ement of] a broader, ‘mile-wide and inch-deep’ knowledge base should largely be the focus self-development.”

Learning approaches vs. giving the answers

Another theme addressed by almost all the groups was that PME should not provide answers, but develop a structure for learning. This could also be called teaching critical thinking skills. Most group members agreed that what PME should provide more of is approaches to learning, and retaining, appropriate professional information — or “earning how to learn”. This is required to not only continue learning outside of the PME classroom, but better facilitate all learning across an entire career. As one person mentioned:

“Grant took ownership of his education. PME provides a structure, but without commitment its impact is limited.”

Leaders and Leadership

Finally, one of the most insightful themes I came across was the role of leaders and leadership in PME and self-development. I personally wonder if one of the reasons for many of the issues people have with PME stems from centralizing the whole process. Now that “the institution” (read: The Army) owns education, commanders and leaders in the field give up any responsibility they have to educate and develop those under their charge. One cannot blame them — training (both operational and “mandatory”) and operational tempo more than takes up every waking moment of most units. However, if leader development and education is a key priority, it can be wedged in, whether through traditional or innovative approaches (like a brigade executive officer pulling all his staff into A Summer with Grant — and no, we’re not against tooting our own horn here at Read2Lead). As one participant said:

“leaders are failing to emphasis their role in the development of junior soldiers and officers. Leaders, good and bad, are the most influential aspect in the development of future generations — they are the most important aspect in providing us examples of ‘leadership’.”

One of these examples should absolutely be self-development…but that’s not a surprising stance from a few guys that developed a grass roots professional development program to fill such a gap…

We look forward to the next week of discussions on Grant — this week focusing on the time between when he was commissioned and the outbreak of war with Mexico. Here’s the prompt we’ll be using for our groups this week:

This week’s reading discussed Grant’s time as a new officer in the US Army before the Mexican War. He seems to spend significant time describing a peacetime army, as well as his thoughts about the causes of, and underlying reasons for, the Mexican War…from the Army of Occupation to the Army of Invasion. He also discusses many aspects of good (and bad) leaders. These few chapters are a great example of Grant’s ability to discuss everything from the administrative to the tactical, operational to the political. For example, in Chapter IV, U.S. Grant writes the following about the Army of Occupation:

“The rank and file were composed of men who had enlisted in time of peace, to serve for seven dollars a month, and were necessarily inferior as material to the average volunteers enlisted later in the war expressly to fight, and also to the volunteers in the war for the perseveration of the Union.” (p.49)

In this sentence, he alludes to the difference between a “peace-time” and a “war-time” military. Some would argue that a peace-time military tends to develop bad habits that degrade combat effectiveness, because as time marches forward, units lose combat experience within the ranks and training doesn’t necessarily reflect the realities of war. With a decrease in the operational tempo of forces, sequestration budgets, and a reduction of the size of the military, we may quickly become a “peace-time” military.

What are some of the traits that you would say characterize a peace-time military that we must guard against and what can we do to avoid them while we still have combat experience in the ranks?