Collaborative Decision Making
Several months ago as a relatively new Desk Officer to a country in Africa representing a special operations command, I had inquired about how to get specialized communications equipment down to that country in a timely and secure manner so the personnel who will be working there can safely retrieve and use the equipment as soon as they arrive. It turned out that there was not a process in place, and no one had yet been identified to look into options of feasibility.
Those that were in the pre-collaborative process was more less meeting for the sake of identifying alone through fact gathering, what the current understanding was of our Diplomatic Pouch (DIP) process, who was leading it, and what the expected end result would be. During this meeting, these concerns were brought up by my boss, as well as another high ranking officer who was in charge of ensuring the correct equipment was properly prepared in time for shipping. A question asked by this communications Officer-in-Charge (OIC) was, who is the Action Officer? As I looked around to see who that might have been, my boss looked at me and said, go ahead, raise your hand. As I raised my hand, I could feel an overwhelming sense of embarrassment come over me as if to say, why did I not know this? Truth be told, I was never informed I was the 'Action Officer'. In addition, the communications OIC, a Lieutenant Colonel, assumed I knew what an Action Officer was. Luckily, the collaborative process came next.
The next meeting, a couple days later, myself, our logistics officer, a communications technician and trainer, and our Non-Commissioned Officer in Charge (NCOIC) met to discuss what options we had for getting our equipment from our office to a particular country in Africa in a secure and timely manner. Our Logistics officer would follow through with the Frankfurt Consular Office in the event we determined if the DIP process, or an escorted flight proved most beneficial. If it was determined the equipment would go down to the continent with the actual service members that would use them, then our NCOIC would ensure that all consulate offices en route to the final destination were kept informed of the equipment traveling through their respective country.
Entering and throughout this meeting, each of us shared a similar vision of finding an established method, and or methods to ensuring the specialized communications equipment traveled quickly and securely to the respective country. However, each member of the group had a different idea as to how to accomplish it best. Thankfully, there was some constraints, as well as guidance.
As I opened the discussion on the topic, I had asked the group what they all thought the preferential method would be. As we discussed each method in as much detail as possible, one at a time, we came to some conclusions; 1) non-standard aviation (NSAV) aircraft would not be accepted to land in all countries; 2) there could be issues with the consulate's office of countries the service members would need to travel through with the specialized communications equipment; 3) the DIP process was fairly unknown since it had never been used before; and 4) the procedure may be determined by the destination U.S. Embassy and country team. Each member was given the task by the NCOIC to take a deeper look into each of the processes now that all four methodologies have been identified, and to return in three days with all information gaps filled.
Three days later, we had all reconvened to collaborate on the way ahead for getting specialized communications equipment down to African countries. Having been the Desk Officer for one of the destination countries, I had discovered over the past few days what the method would be for that country. However, while feeling an urge to share what I had learned, I restrained myself to just listening, as the NCOIC opened the floor for discussion. Naturally, everyone wanted to share what they had learned. Bennett & Gadlin (2013) shared that "self-awareness can provide a foundation for self-control in a wide variety of situations." In this case, as the Action Officer, I felt compelled to hear everyone else's finding first before I inject my own along with a final decision.
Some of the benefits that came from the stakeholders that were involved in the decision-making process included presenting ideas based on personal experience, or based on creative thinking, the disposition to agree, or disagree and providing reasons as to why, the ability to help gather relevant information, and help trouble-shoot and test methodologies and processes from different point of views.
In the end, it was determined that all processes of shipping the specialized communications equipment could be utilized and tailored for each country's requirements. In this respect, the outcome went beyond my expectations, as well as my hopes for a single reliable and secure method, alone. The only other asset that could potentially have added value to the collaborative decision making process may have been the experienced OIC. However, due to the embarrassing pre-collaborative meeting with him, I was not inclined to include him in the decision-making process. In fact, in designating me the Action Officer, he had preferred not to be part of the process.
In the future, in the name of saving everyone's valuable time, I would seek out all identifiable stakeholders and request a period of fact and information gathering prior to convening for a collaboration session. In addition, I would identify who exactly the final decision rests with if delegated to one person, and I would ask more often, who, or what is missing? (Levine, 2009).
References:
Bennett, L. M. and Gadlin, H. (2012, June). Collaboration and team science: From theory to practice. HHS Author Manuscripts, 60(5). 768-775. doi: 10.231/JIM.0b013e318250871d
Coleman, D. & Levine, S. (2008). Collaboration 2.0: Technology and best practices for successful collaboration in a web 2.0 world. Retrieved from http://www.fg.uni-mb.si/predmeti/gi/Viri/Collaboration%202.0-DR.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment