Military Review English Edition January-February 2015 | Page 36

between commanders, their staffs, and their subordinates. Mutual trust and team building are the key
enablers of this principle. Typically, staffs achieve shared
understanding of their mission and operational environment (OE) through the receipt of an order from higher
headquarters; analysis of the order and OE through staff
processes (e.g., the Army design methodology [ADM],
the military decisionmaking process [MDMP], or
troop leading procedures [TLP]); and the application
of knowledge management principles to process and
analyze data coming into the command post (developing
information into knowledge). One could easily assume
that a good, timely operation order provides the basis
for building shared understanding. However, these
processes and tools are only a few manifestations of all
the elements that go into ensuring shared understanding
between commanders, staffs, and subordinate units.
Institutionally, the Army is relatively successful in
applying the principle of shared understanding as a staff
function. When delving more deeply into the principle,
it becomes clear that to be completely successful, there
must be dialogue. The Oxford Dictionaries Online define
dialogue as “a discussion between two or more people or
groups, especially one directed towards exploration of a
particular subject or resolution of a problem.”14 When
a person understands that dialogue is not merely idle
conversation—but a purposive, positive task—the benefits should become apparent. However, the Army faces

34

two significant roadblocks to the institutionalization of
dialogue.
First, and perhaps most easily addressed, is the
common but unfortunate misconception that mission
command is only for officers. Nothing could be further
from the truth. As Sgt. Maj. Dennis A. Eger stated at the
2013 Association of the United States Army Mission
Command Symposium, “Mission command isn’t officer
business, it’s leader business.”15 The role of the noncommissioned officer (NCO) in mission command is as an
enabler. The NCO leads, mentors, and coaches soldiers
to understand the commander’s intent and carry out the
mission. However, if the NCO corps believes that NCOs
have no role in mission command, and the commissioned officer corps believes essentially the same thing
about NCOs, how does the Army change this notion?
The solution is dialogue.
To support the exercise of mission command, NCOs
and officers must dialogue continuously to create a
shared vision. If NCOs feel they are on the outside
looking in, it is very difficult for them to commit to the
mission or the commander’s intent. Therefore, NCOs
must be included in staff processes and decision-making
processes. NCOs can make substantial contributions.
Besides the NCO role as a trusted agent for action in
completing missions, an NCOs’ knowledge and insight,
acquired from experience, are invaluable in planning
operations and training. Consequently, if the Army

January-February 2015  MILITARY REVIEW