# Leadership and Social Media



## DAA (27 Aug 2012)

Those who are currently serving, both Regular and Reserve, or who have served our Country in the past, pretty much understand or have been exposed to the concept of leadership, whether they know it or not.  Sometimes it’s taught or sometimes it’s learned through experience or in some cases, it just comes naturally.  With the impact of “social media” having such an effect on today’s society, do you think that the concept of “Leadership” needs to be expanded into this type of medium???


----------



## Good2Golf (27 Aug 2012)

Yes. 

I think that leadership at all levels, which means right from Pte up to Gen, needs to appreciate how social media forms a significant (I won't go as far as to say 'integral') part of modern society.  Since society is also the source of the morality and ethics from which a Nation's military derives it's Ethos, it stands to reason that the manner in which some/many in society interact and further develop/modify contemporary morality and ethical bases should be considered by that Nation's military forces.

To do so in an educated, responsible manner, mindful of the potential pitfalls (security, PA, legislative compliance, etc...) is quite reasonable, I think.  The challenge is to determine what framework can best serve to see awareness of, as well as use of/interaction within social media streams, while maintaining those elements of the military Ethos that remain valid, yet may be influenced by a military's less mindful/educated participation with social media.

It is a naive position to entirely restrict CF interaction, believing that would somehow 'shield' the military from potential negative effects of social media. Education and sound guidance from leaders in its use is the way to go, IMO.

Regards
G2G


----------



## Haggis (27 Aug 2012)

If you want a good example of leadership in social media, check out the CFCWO's Facebook page.


----------



## Good2Golf (28 Aug 2012)

There is a difference between CF leadership being mindful of how social media and CF members' involvement using it, and the CF using social media explicitly to conduct business that should otherwise be conducted within the CF's organizational capabilities.

Your initial question and your most recent post appear to have very little connection conceptually.  

Are you saying that someone (a CF member [and how is that validated online?]) who visits Army.ca to ask a question about administrative, training or operational issues should be answered formally by CF leadership using Army.ca as the means to address the issue?  If the CF element that is not giving the member the help they require, or to which they believe they are entitled, that is an issue that should be dealt with as a CF issue.  The reaction should be to pursue the issue through the CoC and/or using peers to support further pursuit of assitance or a resolution through the CF, not by going to an unofficial (albeit often very useful) internet site to provide the assistance that the CF should be providing.

Don't confuse CF leadership being mindful of the impact of social media interaction on CF operations with a concept of supplementing official CF leadership's responsibility to lead and mangage through the use of unofficial means to affect Command.


Regards
G2G


----------



## Blackadder1916 (28 Aug 2012)

DAA said:
			
		

> . . . . . With the impact of “social media” having such an effect on today’s society, do you think that the concept of “Leadership” needs to be expanded into this type of medium???





			
				DAA said:
			
		

> . . . . . What I am referring to is providing "leadership" from a "social media" perspective, specifically within Army.ca or any other type of venue.
> 
> . . . . .  responses like "use the search function" for this site because that should be a given.  But when someone is reaching out and it appears that either they aren't getting help from within their current organization or cannot help themself for whatever reason, should we not be providing "leadership" via a "social medium" to one of our own or even one of our future own?



In your opening post, I was somewhat confused by what you meant in your reference to "leadership concepts and social media".  But your next post narrowed the discussion to nothing more the almost mandatory, semi-annual Army.ca chatter of "tone and content", "staying in lanes" and "provide a reference for answer".  I'm not trying to minimize your point of view, but a wider discussion about the benefits, pitfalls and even the possible methods of using social media as one of the "communication tools" for military leadership (both institutionally and individually) would probably be of interest.


----------



## DAA (28 Aug 2012)

Points noted and maybe I am off track and confusing counsel in an open forum with leadership at the personal and instituitional levels.  I will have to think about that one for a bit.


----------



## Haggis (28 Aug 2012)

> But when someone is reaching out and it appears that either they aren't getting help from within their current organization or cannot help themself for whatever reason, should we not be providing "leadership" via a "social medium" to one of our own or even one of our future own?



This, in my mind is akin to the soldier who can't get a straight answer out of the BOR, QM et al, so he takes his issue to the Mess to sort out.  Remember, the Mess was the original "social medium" in the Army and "use the search function" has identical meaning to "look it up in the pams".

There is nothing wrong, in my opinion with a member seeking advice or information here on Army.ca, BUT ONLY if that advice or information is simply used to set him on the path to validating it on his own (via the c of c, experience etc.).


----------



## a_majoor (28 Aug 2012)

Social media is a communications tool, rather like a telephone or standing on a soapbox. Obviously you can use it effectively to pass on information, or to pass on nonsense.

I would suggest that social media is a tool which can be used to augment leadership, rather than substitute for it (which I am afraid might be the case ii.e. people only communicating via email chains), so leadership skills still need to be taught and exercised throughout a person's career in order to be able to effectively utilize social media tools effectively.

Arguments about _how_ social media tools work are beside the point; Pharoh Ramses II probably did't spend much time debating the virtues of clay tablets over human runners, but simply used what was appropriate for his purposes. If a commander decides that Twitter or Google+ do the job he needs to get done, then he will use those tools. Writing orders on a piece of FMP paper won't be superceded for a long time to come either.


----------



## daftandbarmy (29 Aug 2012)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Social media is a communications tool, rather like a telephone or standing on a soapbox. Obviously you can use it effectively to pass on information, or to pass on nonsense.
> 
> I would suggest that social media is a tool which can be used to augment leadership, rather than substitute for it (which I am afraid might be the case ii.e. people only communicating via email chains), so leadership skills still need to be taught and exercised throughout a person's career in order to be able to effectively utilize social media tools effectively.



You mean, kind of like Army.ca?  ;D


----------



## DAA (29 Aug 2012)

I apologize for the rather vague question and had to delete some “bad” posts that I made afterwards (a "what was I thinking" moment over came me).  So seeing as I shot myself in one foot, I will now try for the other foot as good things generally come in two’s.

To use social media (ie; blogs, forums, etc), or not use it, is a choice.  However, given the proliferation of this aspect of todays society, should we not be considering this as an opportunity to augment our leadership skills, whether on an institutional and even personal level?  And by default, giving further consideration to adding this type of medium to leadership courses at all levels?  The only time I have seen the topic come up, is in the context of "Don't do this, Don't do that" and for your own sake "Don't identify yourself".  As opposed to, "Here is what is out there and this is how you can use it to your advantage".

I don’t know how to ask the question any better, so before responding, please have a read and you will see just what I am getting at.....

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203753704577255531558650636.html


----------



## a_majoor (20 Sep 2012)

There are lots of debates still raging over the so called RMA, where the thought/hope was digital communications tools would lead to massive increases in tactical effectiveness, close sensor to shooter loops, provide Generals with real time information on how Sgt Bloggin's was doing with the section attack etc.

As many experiments and real applications (Operation Desert Sabre in Gulf War One and OIF in Gulf War 2) demonstrated, these plans ran into big trouble as commanders and staffs could not absorb and process the information fast enough and the digital trunklines were not robust enough to send useful information back and forth to units in the front line, in anything approaching real time. I would suggest that the current command and control system is not capable of dealing with digital comms, being created and perfected for horse mounted couriers and telegraph communication links. "Flat" command and control structures, such as WalMart with a reported five layers of management between head office and the associates stocking the shelves (while managing tens of thousands of employees, a global supply chain and competing against a host of other companies) can provide valuable lessons on how to deal with complex environments .

A flattened command and control structure can also support social media tools (even web 1.0 like this message board software); the US Army and Marines have various forums where people can trade knowledge "horizontally", such as deploying platoon commanders can read tips and lessons learned from returning ones, or even ask the poster directly. This is far faster than wating for AARs to be colated, analyzed, published and distributed. Other tools like Google+ with its ability to subdivide large organizations smaller ones will facilitate communications by directing them to the proper individuals

That said, soldiers will also need to be issued standard means to access these tools, ideally something like a BlackBerry, Samsung Galaxy or iPhone in a hardened case and loaded with standard milspec apps such as mapping software, GPS, a standard database and a "theater or mission specific data base, and so on. The real trick is to train the NCO's since they will be answering most of the questions and making it work,


----------



## Fishbone Jones (20 Sep 2012)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> That said, soldiers will also need to be issued standard means to access these tools, ideally something like a BlackBerry, Samsung Galaxy or iPhone in a hardened case and loaded with standard milspec apps such as mapping software, GPS, a standard database and a "theater or mission specific data base, and so on. The real trick is to train the NCO's since they will be answering most of the questions and making it work,




What about cell phone jammers?

I see tons of money going down the hole for EW, and counter EW, because people don't use map & compass and a field message pad.


----------



## a_majoor (20 Sep 2012)

Frankly, we have been ignoring the issue of EW for decades (I was trained to operate in an EW environment, but had very limited "tools" to deal with actual EW once enemy barrage or silent jammers started to operate. Most of the drills were to simply identify if you were actually being subjected to EW or had radio issues).

This mismatch between EW and ECM was possible since our prospective opponents were trained to operate using drills, timetables and the occasional flag signals; in today's environment we would either have a huge technological edge (we could probably disable the Taliban's use of cell phones and the Internet without doing too much damage to ourselves), or in a peer conflict both sides wold need to keep "holes" open in the spectrum so they could operate at even a minimal level of effectiveness.

It would be interesting to have a signals SME weigh in on this.


----------



## aesop081 (20 Sep 2012)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> This mismatch between EW and ECM



Getting the language right would be a good start.


----------

