Latest / Five Questions for a General / Major General Pat Work

Transcript

Major General Pat Work · Five Questions for a General

• 0:03
  Speaker A: You're listening to Five Questions for a General, a production of the Modern War Institute at West point. I am Dr. Charles Feint, the team lead for this podcast series, which features interviews of senior military leaders conducted by specially selected and trained West Point cadet hosts. These exchanges produce timely, relevant, and inspirational insights for professional development of leaders at all levels.
• 0:24
  Speaker B: Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the class of 1974 recording studio and the five questions for a General Podcast. I'm Cadet Zach Olson, your host. It's my pleasure to be here today with Major General Pat Work, the commanding general of the 82nd Airborne Division. General, welcome to the show.
• 0:38
  Speaker C: Hey, thanks for having me, Zach. It's great to be with you, sir.
• 0:42
  Speaker B: Briefly, this podcast comes at kind of a unique time in your career as you're changing command from 82nd Airborne commander to deputy commanding general of the 18th Airborne Corps. You previously said earlier today that the mind is a workshop, and it's only as good as its tools. How are you retooling your mindset as you prepare for your next position?
• 1:01
  Speaker C: Officers who can transition well can be really effective. And I live by this sort of mantra that what got you here won't get you there. One of my criticisms observing our officer corps is that many officers stumble into their next job rather than prepare for the next job. So I would offer the reasoned way to transition is, you know, you finish strong, you continue to do your duties with all your energy and all your intensity that you can while you have them, but at the same time that you know that something else is on the horizon, we should start paying attention to what's coming around the corner. We should start anticipating. We should start studying what the next role is so that we can hit the role with momentum. So, you know, leaving division command where it's 24 7, 365, where you're responsible for everything that happens and fails to happen, and where the central task in the 82nd Airborne Division is to provide responsive combat readiness to the joint force. And when we're not at war, we prepare for war to being the Deputy Commanding General of the Corps again. What got you here won't get you there. Being the deputy is different. The Corps is different than the division. My role will be fundamentally different. So I look forward to getting into it, and I'm thinking about how to do it effectively from day one.
• 2:12
  Speaker B: That's awesome. Thank you, sir. In many venues, including a previous podcast you did right here at the Modern War Institute, you've spoken and written about the importance of advising partner forces, emphasizing the importance of not just imposing solutions, but guiding them. This is exemplified in your statement during the Mosul campaign, where you said how we advised ISF commanders was as important as what we advised them to do. What are some of the challenges of advising foreign military leaders in combat?
• 2:39
  Speaker C: A style of war, particularly the style that you're referring to. Back in 2016-2018, I commanded the 2nd Brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division when we helped the Iraqi Security Forces with the counterattack on Mosul. This style of war was by, with and through. So the combat was conducted by the Iraqis. It was done with our enabling. And the combat and the enabling all functioned through a set of agreements, the arrangements that we had made with them, the sorts of support that we would provide. And I offer that the army has a responsibility to prepare units for war. We employ as a joint force. But the United States of America will go to war in coalitions. We always have and we always should. It's one of our asymmetric advantages over many of our adversaries, is that we can build coalition. It's important because there's a context for every contest. And I've learned with coalition warfare to listen, you know, listen to the partner, listen to. To the allies so that you understand where their interests lie and where you can map out interests that intersect, do so. We should also be realistic when we fight as part of a coalition. Our style of war, our capabilities, vastly different than many of our allies, vastly different than many of our partners. That doesn't mean we shouldn't keep expectations high. We just need to remain realistic. We also have to assist in order to advise. Money talks. When you fight in a coalition, you've got to deliver intelligence information, you've got to deliver fires, you've got to deliver results so that you build up your leverage. You know, it's deposit, deposit, deposit, so you can make withdrawals on the hard day. And then when you have leverage, you have to have the guts to turn it up and use it. So when we think of this style of buy with and through, and you think of this context in which we fought with the Iraqi Security Forces against the Islamic State, and we had interest, too, and the only reasonable way to describe our success was through their success, okay? And that was a specific type of war with a specific context in a specific time. And every coalition is going to behave differently. But I think those are some useful rules of thumb or at least some perspectives on how to contemplate. And everything I say here is just my perspective. My opinion certainly doesn't reflect the department's position on any of this.
• 4:59
  Speaker B: And so you expand the advise and assist to six different A's. Can you go over some of those?
• 5:04
  Speaker C: What I learned in that context with that experience? Advise and assist, that's the shorthand. You advise, which is really intelligence information. That's what drives your advice. You assist with lethal fires specifically. That is more or less how we provided the assistance. So it's intelligence driven advice. Lethal assistance. You accompany and to accompany. Leadership's about contact, it's about staying in contact with people. So whether you're fighting by, with and through, or whatever it is, it's really about leading. And sometimes you're leading from behind, sometimes you're leading from beside, sometimes you're leading from below. In that style of warfare, in that context during the battle of Mosul, the fourth A is assure. So if assure means to give someone confidence amidst uncertainty, you know, us being there provides some level of assurance. It's not ensure insure means you're making physical facts on the ground. In fact, it's really hard to ensure anything in combat. But I can assure you by staying there with you, I can assure you by sticking with you on the hard days and by trying to ensure that we are moving together. Anticipate. We would frequently reposition and adjust with 40 to 70% of the information. Our mantra in second brigade 80 the second was they'll never have to wait for us if we start to sense that they're going to make a move. And we had to set conditions, set the logistics architecture, set the fires architecture, do something with our C2 nodes, anticipate. That was the fifth A and then the sixth A for all six A's is that you gotta be agile. They should never have to wait for us. So if you advise, assist a company, if you assure, anticipate, and you're agile, you can move fast enough at the pace of combat to set conditions. Because the reality is in that battle in particular, the same way that I would fight our infantry was how the Iraqi security forces fought their infantry. In other words, we set logistics conditions or help them set logistics conditions. We help set the fires conditions, the intel conditions, and it's their infantry that attacked to stimulate an ISIS response so that we could strike isis. And that's what we did. We essentially killed the enemy in front of them to keep the momentum going through the city.
• 7:19
  Speaker B: That's fascinating, sir. So it sounds like a massive integration synchronization effort on behalf of the American forces to complete and fully, fully get the grasp on all six A's how do you counsel, how do you lead through that kind of scenario? How do you ensure that it's getting done from top to bottom, that everybody's bought into all six A's?
• 7:40
  Speaker C: And if there was a seventh day, Zach, it would be alignment.
• 7:43
  Speaker B: There we go.
• 7:44
  Speaker C: And so one of the, one of the real kind of secret sauce inputs to the whole thing for the Battle of Mosul was alignment. You know, it was General Votel at Central Command, it was General Townsend at 18th Airborne Corps, it was General Martin, Joe Martin at 1st Infantry Division, followed by General Pat White at 1st Armored Division, then it was me. And colonels are strategically positioned in our system within the chain of command. So if you think of the hierarchy, the chain of command goes Captain, lieutenant Colonel, Colonel, Major General, lieutenant General. The colonel sits right in the middle. And so the colonel's job is to pump perspective down and in, pump context down and in help subordinates understand so they can anticipate and be agile. The colonel's job in the middle of that hierarchy is also to flip it on its head and help the two and three star headquarters understand the risks that are accumulating, understand the consequences of action, understand what's really at issue when they make decisions. So Colonel's actually got a very strategic position in our hierarchy and I tried to leverage that. But the final comment I would make about that experience in particular is if you think of what happens in a combat training center where a unit enters the so called box and a series of observer controller trainers surround them and you've got people moving with everybody and you got somebody in that case they're really evaluating you or assessing you. We were like a Lethal OCT network. So imagine if the OCS at the training center were also trying to kill the opfor. Imagine if the OCS at the training center were also incentivized to share information as they stumbled across it or to unlock their own analytics. So you got twice the staff horsepower trying to solve problems. We were like a Lethal OCT network. Now there's blind spots for the OCTs. They don't know everything that's going on. They don't know all the puts and takes or all the personalities. But on the other hand, because they're one step removed from the fray, there's a sense of calm and the information with the discipline, battle rhythm kind of runs as a backstop. We were like a Lethal OCT network. That's a way that I think people can wrap their head, head around our sort of paradigm for how we behaved.
• 9:50
  Speaker B: So kind of moving with this in A speech you delivered at West Point in 2022, you highlighted how decentralized execution, one of the essential elements of army mission command paradigm is vital as the army shifts back towards large scale combat operations. How have combat experiences informed your perspective on mission command? And how do you see it evolving into multi domain operations?
• 10:12
  Speaker C: The essence of command and control has always been getting the right information to the right leader at the right time so we can make decisions when it's uncertain and it's violent. That's always been the essence of command and control. It's a matter of trust. And I believe real people in the real world don't just give away trust. We train people, we test people so we can trust people. That's the whole point of training. It's train, test trust and this idea of competence and the lowest level of competence, you know, I think that we trust down to the lowest level of competence. So as a commander, what you're trying to do is train your organization well enough, deep enough so that you can trust down to squad leader, team leader level, and that very much a full time job. Brilliance in the basics is a full time job in our Army. It takes constant attention, constant commander affection. You got to stay on it all the time. So if you agree with me that command and control is about getting right information, the right leader is essential to that is decision making. There's also this powerful idea in our doctrine called commander's intent. And the commander's intent is an expression of the commander's expectations that should dominate the decision making and the actions taken. I mean, if you think about that, we all know what the boss wants generally. So we're going to make decisions and we're going to act so that all the energy, you know, if you think of a division or you think of a brigade, I think of it as a weapon. What are we aiming the division at? What are we aiming the brigade at? Commander's intent is a powerful tool. So is order. That's another powerful tool that a commander has. Issuing an order. And the more clear and concise you can make your orders and you start stacking command and control, both the processes and the signal architecture to pull that off. You start stacking commander's intent and then you stack useful and timely orders. You've really unlocked your subordinates for dramatically decentralized operations.
• 12:06
  Speaker B: Sir, for some of the most critical pieces of intent that you've ever given in combat, how do you ensure that that intent is both delivered and understood to the people who need to understand it and hear it?
• 12:18
  Speaker C: I Think there's two superpowers. One of those is focus, and the other one's consistency. So focus means saying no to certain things. Can't do everything. This is what we do. And your focus should start with your mission essential tasks. Your focus should probably start with those tasks that soldiers are going to have to perform most frequently in combat. And your focus should start with whatever's going to deliver mission accomplishment. So focus is a superpower then. Consistency is a superpower. You can never be consistent enough. And so when your message begins to zig and zag, when your behaviors don't match the message, when your commanders are not aligned against the message or the behaviors, you start to lose consistency. And I'd argue that if you're not building a consistent team every day, your team's already unraveling. So for me, if I can keep it simple, if I could keep it concise, and I can stay consistent, and we do the same things in the 82nd Airborne Division. My mantra was, when we're not at war, we prepare for war. No one can misunderstand that the number one job of a leader is to make more leaders. No one can misunderstand that physical fitness, every paratrooper, every day. No one can misunderstand that, you know, simple, sticky, repeatable, consistent. And you start to penetrate the organization. The other thing you gotta do is you can't expect what you don't inspect. And tools to support mission command. I'd offer you that. Here's four of them right now that no platoon leader, no commander should ever apologize for using. One of them is inspection. You cannot expect what you don't inspect. You should never apologize for inspecting. That's a way of ensuring that whatever you're pushing down, you get a sense fingertips sense your own evaluation too. You can always do what we call battlefield circulation. Just walk around and talk to people if you don't see it, if you don't see it happening, if people are not aware when you talk to them, then that's an indicator to you that something about your messages are resonating. You can always do an after action review for everything. We can always talk about what happened, what failed to happen, how we fix it, who's responsible for fixing it, because you're always growing or dying. You should do that. And then the final one's a back brief, a way to future proof. Your plan is just take a back brief from your people before they execute. Hey, tell me how you tend to do this, what's the plan? And listen. And so those are four Tools to assure your mission command, help you penetrate, help you stay consistent, help you remain focused.
• 14:48
  Speaker B: Switching gears a little bit, sir. Reflecting on your experience leading the 2nd Brigade Combat Team during Operation Inherent Resolve, what was a leadership moment, perhaps a failure or risk taken that shaped how you cultivate leaders under pressure?
• 15:03
  Speaker C: I think in the 2nd Brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division, I made a number of mistakes, some big, some small. And I kind of go to Cato. Cato said I can forgive anybody's mistakes except my own. I think that's an indicator of character, actually, if you're able to stay humble enough, self awareness enough, self critical enough to stay focused. So in second brigade of the 82nd, we had a tendency early on, because of the style of combat advising that we were doing with the Iraqis. And you gotta understand it happens in a context. Iraqi generals fight like we would expect our battalion commanders to fight. We expect our battalion commanders to move to the breach to get to a place we don't all need them to be Medal of Honor recipients. But we want to get them far, far enough forward where they can actually lead at the point of decision. That's how rocky generals command. They have to, they have to spur their people, they have to energize their people. And so that would draw the more senior combat advisors forward, the battalion commanders, the brigade commander, that would draw us forward because the generals went forward. And I learned early on that their risk tolerance and their risk assessment isn't mine. And the minute we get ambushed, the minute we end up in the beaten zone, we become the main effort. And not helping the Iraqis attack isis. So that's something I'd offer anybody is never become the main effort. Rescuing an advisor or solving a problem that could have been foreseeable should never become the main effort because it distracts your finite resources and your energy from the main thing. And that probably happened to us a couple times. And it's understandable. Part of life and part of combat is you just move on to new mistakes. Just don't do it again. And that's fair. People are going to make mistakes, okay, move on to new mistakes.
• 16:54
  Speaker B: So what's the most potent action that you can take to avoid making some of those big mistakes? Is it preparing beforehand? Is it research? Is it talking? Is it training? Is it? What would you advise young leaders to do to avoid those big mistakes?
• 17:09
  Speaker C: Well, you're going to make mistakes, and I don't know that there's any way to future proof against all of it. But you know, if you think of these simple things like principles of patrolling. If the first principle of trolling is common sense, well, how do you develop common sense? We need to educate you, we need to train you, we need to give you experience. How do you develop competence? I believe real people in the real world follow real expertise. You know, they'll defer to rank, they'll follow experts, they'll follow competence. So all of training is really trying to future proof the small unit for combat. The whole point of doing a battle drill at the squad or platoon level is to buy the platoon leader or the company commander time to think. Troops in contact, everybody responds instinctively. They deploy, they suppress, they report. Now, the PL isn't in their directing actions. The PL can do assessment. The company commander can do assessment. Small unit drills. I think the most critical task in combat is combat shooting. Can you kill at the range of your optics and lasers? When you choose to? Do you fight high explosives effectively? That's lethality. Can we direct attack helicopters to strike the targets that we want them to strike? We're all going to bleed. There's no universe that exists in combat where we don't have to survive wounds. Can we competently medicate in combat? Can we stop bleeding? Can we survive? So I just think the simpler and cleaner and clearer you can. Number one job of a leader is to make more leaders. Let's ensure that we're physically fit and ready for the hard days. Fatigue will make you a coward. As soon as you start getting tired, you start thinking about yourself, not about the mission, not about each other. Right? Can we kill at the range of our optics and lasers day and night? Are we good with fires, et cetera, et cetera. So you just really try and again, focus is a superpower can't be awesome at everything we're trying to be A minuses are the main things, sir.
• 19:04
  Speaker B: It's sometimes said that officers are supposed to be somewhat experts on a lot of things, but not a complete expert on one thing. How do you apply that stratagem to training plans? How do you apply that strategy to garrison preparing for war? Not just in war, but you're preparing for it.
• 19:23
  Speaker C: So I've never been the best in anything. And I'll use my own personal experience. What I was the best at is managing training. In other words, when I grew up as a lieutenant, there was always someone who was faster or fitter than me. There was always someone who was a better marksman or a better marksmanship trainer than me. There was always someone who was a better breacher than me. There was always A sniper, there was a better forward observer. All of those things are true. I just had to be the best in managing the training organization is often overlooked strategic skill set. Can we keep it organized? And one of the main questions we're trying to ask ourselves is what are we trying to do? If we agree on what we're trying to do, we have a chance. And so if you can manage a training schedule three to six weeks out, where you adhere to one through eight of the training mall step, I would tell you, my observation is training schedules tend to be dominated by step six execution. Your best trainers focus on steps one through three. We have a training plan. We certify our leaders. We recon the land. And you do that for every step six, it assures success. Of step six, 80% of training is preparation. And this idea of garrison versus combat. I don't think anybody can live two lives. I mean, there's only one me. I don't try to live two lives. I would suggest that when we're not at war, we prepare for war. It's integrated. It's yin and yang. You can't pull it apart. You can't decouple these things. And does that mean I'm a bit of a fanatic sometimes? Sure. But that's the job. You know, the pressure is the privilege of leading in our army.
• 20:59
  Speaker B: So for young leaders who are going through Bullock right now, whether it's cadets or they're in an ROTC program, they're an ocs, they're in the pipeline, whatever it is. What's the most effective way for them to move and anticipate into what they need to accomplish in their unit without overthinking? So they need to anticipate. They need to think about what's going to go happen. But how do they not overthink? How do they stay simple and beat the complexity?
• 21:21
  Speaker C: There's something to be said for just focusing on controlling what you can. There's something to be said for letting some of it come to you. We can't give you experience fast enough. On the other hand, there's something to be said for making the most of every opportunity. So my counsel to all lieutenants is understand what the term lieutenant means, the etymology of the word. What does the term mean? In lieu of what? In lieu of who? A placeholder for who. We only have one commander, therefore we have who. We have the lieutenant. Lieutenant's responsible. It's the commissioned officer at the point of decision. It's at the farthest edges of the organization, you know, and so if the non commissioned officers are generally the doers, generally the small unit fighters, if the non commissioned officers are the now guys, the ones who deal with now, and the commissioned officer at the point of decision is the one who's dealing with next, anticipating the next move. I mean, there's to grow one of those that's highly skilled. I mean, the only technicians in our army aren't doctors and aviators. Being a really good close combat fighter takes a lot of repetition, takes a lot of training, takes a lot of education, takes experience, you know. So make the most of all your opportunities. Create opportunities. Organize your steps one through six on your training schedule repeatedly. But at the same time, you know, ultimately you as the lieutenant, never lose sight of the fact that you're responsible. You're responsible. Trust. But you're responsible, Lieutenant. That right there will keep you on edge. That's a good thing.
• 22:56
  Speaker B: Sir, do you think a prerequisite to making those strong mental decisions is having a strong back, having that physical fortitude?
• 23:05
  Speaker C: I think there's something to be said for toughness. And here's what I'd offer you if you think of this idea of discipline. Patton, complicated guy for sure, but Patton said discipline needs to be greater than the excitement of battle. You know, you don't do discipline for discipline's sake. You do discipline so that when you're terrified, you do discipline when your friends are bleeding. You can still perform. You still have the willpower to overcome your circumstances. Discipline. So when you talk of strength or fitness, nobody becomes fit on accident. You got to pay the price. It takes extraordinary discipline to eat right. It takes extraordinary discipline to be willing to die on the treadmill, you know, make your back strong. No one just gets strong, right? The fish don't jump in the boat. You got to do the work. So I do think there's something to be said for the discipline implied in your physical fitness. Plus, you know, army, we fight. So when you boil it all down, this whole thing exists to fight. And fight means I'm imposing my will on you through violence. Okay? There's something physical about that. And how can. How can I withstand the punishment? Something physically demanding about withstanding the punishment as well. So when your body's right, that kind of checks off. One thing again, I said earlier, fatigue makes you a coward. When your body starts to wilt on you, you tend to look inward rather than focusing on the mission and taking care of each other. So there's something to be said for the discipline required to be fit and for fitness itself in helping you cope with hard times? That's a good question, Zach. Thanks, sir.
• 24:40
  Speaker B: Kind of leading with this, giving advice to lieutenants, helping them figure out what they're going to do, how they're going to do it. What advice would you give yourself, knowing what you know now? What advice would you give to Lieutenant Pack Work, 75th Ranger Regiment, 101st Airborne Division. What would you give? Advice. What advice would you give to him?
• 24:57
  Speaker C: It's the same advice that I give you all. I'm looking around the room right now for the audience that's not in there. Got a second lieutenant and four cadets in the room with me and Zach and I are having the conversation. But you know, I boil it down to three simple ideas, three words each. Number one is set the example. That's a choice. And whether you're a two star general or a second lieutenant or a staff sergeant, you never outgrow the requirement to set the example. People need role models and you're competing to be their role model. Set the example. And you need to choose role models. Well, as well, humans, the species can copycat very, very effectively. That's how children learn to walk and talk, right? So be the one that they want to copy and then you choose your examples. Well, set the example. Number two, complete the mission. This gets at this idea of the term lieutenant. We only have one commander, therefore we have who? We have the lieutenants. The lieutenant's responsible for completing the mission. So when it's too violent, when it's too uncertain, it's too bloody, it's too much burnt flesh, whatever it is. Deliver the mission. That's your job. Complete the mission. That's the whole crux of leadership. If you see what the doctrine, if the doctrine says, it's the activities to influence by providing purpose, direction, motivation to accomplish the mission and improve the organization. Leadership is not an end to itself. It's about accomplishing the mission and improving the organization. So complete the mission and then number three, solve the problem. We pay you to think. When I left the academy, I thought that small unit leadership required me to get a short haircut and run fast and go to ranger school. We actually value your minds. We get paid to think. And the second lieutenant, who can think and solve problems and organize teams to solve problems, has a distinct advantage. Because everybody's fast, everybody's got a strong back. That's not the thing. The thing is your ability to, to recognize, decide and act fast enough. So set the example. Complete the mission, solve the problem.
• 27:02
  Speaker B: General work. Thank you for sharing your time with us. Today and for the great discussion on partner force operations and leader development, on behalf of Colonel Pat Sullivan, the director of MWI, and Dr. Charlie Feint, the director of this podcast series, I'd like to present you with this rare and coveted MWI travel mug as a token of our appreciation.
• 27:19
  Speaker C: That's great. Thank you very much. And for you all, I'm sitting in the room right now and looking at four cadets and a lieutenant. I recommend the following. You know, crack a book here. Here's what I recommend you read. I recommend you read Gates of Fire by Pressfield, if you haven't already. My favorite character in there is Dainikis. He's helped me explain many different aspects of war fighting, one of which is, you know, he's trying to dispel the myth of war. And he explains to the young Spartans in the agoge, war is work. It's that simple. War is work. So Gates of Fire, I also recommend that you read by Blabor, the Mission, the Men and Me. It's about small unit leadership, problem solving, and then I recommend you read A Message to Garcia. It's a 22 page pamphlet, century old, very, very simple read, but it's about this indomitable lieutenant's initiative, guy named Rowan. Okay, So I recommend to all of you for junior officers that you read those three books. All right, really good to spend time with you today. Thank you very much, Zach.
• 28:25
  Speaker B: Great stuff.
• 28:26
  Speaker C: Really nice to meet you all. All right. Enjoyed it.
• 28:28
  Speaker B: Awesome.
• 28:29
  Speaker C: All right, this has been an episode.
• 28:33
  Speaker A: Of Five Questions for a General, a production of the Modern War Institute of West Point. If you like what you heard today, please download, like, subscribe and share this podcast to help us reach an even larger audience. All statements in this podcast represent the personal views of the speakers and do not represent an official position of the United States Military Academy or the United States government.