Decentralized Decision Making . . . the Marine Corps Way

Many of the techniques the Marines employ to decentralize decision making can be generalized to other environments and applied in your organization to inspire a higher level of performance at all levels, while minimizing the risks associated with a lesser degree of control.

Trust Tactics

The Marines successful employment of decentralized decision making begins with the notion of trust tactics , which represents an implicit agreement between junior and senior Marines that is not to be violated. The senior places his or her trust in the junior, expects the junior to be actively involved in all decision-making efforts, and gives ample latitude to the junior during the execution of operations. The junior, in turn , makes decisions without asking for permission, keeps his senior informed of unfolding events, and exercises initiative that is within the limits of commander s intent without constant supervision.

Specific Decision-Making Training

With an inviolable agreement between seniors and juniors reached in principle, Marines receive specific training to ensure the success of decentralized decision making in actual implementation. At Officer Candidates School (OCS), a ten-week boot camp for aspiring officers, the on-the-spot decision-making abilities of officer candidates are put to the test in the Leadership Reaction Course (LRC). A series of problem-solving exercises that force participants to lead their peers under simulated conditions of uncertainty, the LRC provides candidates with a dramatic introduction to the demands of decentralized decision making and weeds out weak, indecisive candidates.

Immediately after a team of candidates completes an LRC problem, they each receive candid and constructive feedback on their performance. Indeed the main purpose of the LRC is to test candidates not on their ability to solve the problem but on how they went about solving it: how clearly the plan was communicated, how long they deliberated before acting, whether all team members were involved, and who emerged as the leader of the group .

Teach-Ins

In the active-duty Fleet Marine Force (FMF), unit commanders at all levels regularly conduct teach-ins , interactive sit-down discussions with their Marines, to convey their leadership philosophy and give junior Marines perspective on how they think about tactics and operations. The aim of these teach-ins is to enable the Marines to better anticipate and act in accordance with their leader s plans.

Commander s Intent Two Levels Up, Mission Orders, and Explaining the Why

In actual implementation decentralized decision making requires the communication of commander s intent, mission orders, and the why. Commander s intent issued two levels up defines the scope within which junior Marines may exercise initiative and serves as the all-important first step the leader takes toward arming his Marines with the bigger picture ”the larger context into which their actions fit. Leaders deliver to their Marines not only their own commander s intent but also that of their direct superior ”two levels above the Marines receiving the order. And, like Patton, Marine leaders communicate their plans with mission orders , which state what needs to be done without prescribing how it must be done. And, going one step further, Marine leaders explain the why. To those who perceive the Marine Corps as a rigid, top-down hierarchy, explaining the why is a surprisingly democratic communication technique in which the leader provides his subordinates with the rationale for his plan and for the operation as a whole. Democratic considerations aside, explaining the why to junior Marines reinforces the larger context into which their actions fit and provides additional rationale not covered in commander s intent.

The S in BAMCIS

Marine leaders remain ever-vigilant of their subordinates activities, without interfering unduly in those activities. Supervision is a never-ending task, and Marine leaders know that the S in BAMCIS ”a well-known acronym that stands for Begin the planning, Arrange for reconnaissance, Make the reconnaissance, Complete the plan, Issue the order, and Supervise , ”is the most important letter. Marine leaders, who adhere to the saying Inspect what you expect, continually walk the lines, ask tough questions, correct mistakes on the spot, and counsel underperforming subordinates. Mistakes that stem from bold zeal or inexperience are treated as learning opportunities, provided they are in the scope of commander s intent, but indecision, timidity, and lapses in integrity are punished swiftly and forcefully .

Ultimate Responsibility

In a similar vein, all Marine leaders personally accept responsibility for the actions of the subordinates to whom they delegate authority. Indeed the Marine Corps s equivalent of Harry Truman s venerable The buck stops here is The leader is ultimately responsible for everything his or her unit does or fails to do.

Common Tactical Picture

Always seeking to hone its proficiency in decentralized decision making, the Marine Corps has turned to technology in recent years to enable better-informed decisions among its frontline units and accelerate the upward flow of information within its fighting forces. The Common Tactical Picture (CTP) initiative, under development since the late 1990s, promises to link several previously disparate tactical systems and provide all Marine commanders ”from general to captain ”with a common, current, and relevant picture of the battlefield and, therefore, improved awareness of unfolding events. To access the system, frontline leaders carry portable computers, which provide alerts of key events, track reports of enemy sightings, call for supporting fire, and offer larger views of the battlefield than otherwise available. These portable computers connect to field headquarters units via distributed collection devices, and field headquarters units use CTP to tailor information available to frontline commanders and track the locations and actions of frontline units. While CTP has the undesirable potential side effect of excessive supervision of frontline units by overly nosy higher headquarters, the system does enable pervasive information sharing and enhanced decentralized decision making.