ARRC Journal 2019 | Page 92

ARRC JOURNAL However, an unintended consequence of the comprehensive approach is that although some military and non-military organisations can add greater value when working collaboratively, there can be mistrust, concern or hesitation from non-military actors, which prevents effective and efficient working practises from being established. For example, in the case of humanitarian groups the use of humanitarian aid for political or military purposes represents a direct violation of the fundamental humanitarian principles of humanity and impartiality. When aid is allocated on a strategic basis to win popular support rather than on the basis of need alone, humanitarians risk losing their protected status as impartial. Even if they are not directly involved in military- led relief operations themselves, such actions can easily blur the distinction between humanitarian and military actors, leading to the perception of humanitarian relief as supportive of, or associated with, military operations. Therefore, in order to create positive working relationships with open and transparent dialogue, CIMIC staff often underpin their interaction and liaison duties with non-military actors with the use of modern management and psychology theory, as this helps prepare the ground for effective collaborative working practises. Akin to incorporating interpersonal and communication skills in CIMIC delivery, such approaches are not immediately obvious or explained in our own standard operating instructions (SOI). Additionally, such skills are easily transferable to other situations, such as domestic, personal and professional contexts, which is an added bonus for the CIMIC operative. The first theory that is considered is that of Kurt Lewin, a social psychologist and change management expert. 1 Lewin noted that people often take on distinct roles and behaviours when they work in a group. Coining the phrase ‘group dynamics’, he describes in detail the effects of these roles and behaviours on other group members and on the group as a whole. In brief, he states that a group with poor group dynamics disrupts work and as a result, the group may not come to any decision, or it may make the wrong choice, because group members could not explore options effectively. Building upon this foundational knowledge, more recent research, which has become central to CIMIC’s effective leadership and management practises, by psychologist Dr. Bruce Tuckman adds further cognitive guidance on how to maximise interactions when applying the comprehensive approach.2 Tuckman came up with the memorable phrase ‘forming, storming, norming and performing’ in his 1965 article, Developmental Sequence in Small Groups. Later, he added a fifth stage, ‘adjourning’, which is sometimes known as ‘mourning’ (Figure 2). He used this framework to describe the path that most teams follow on their way to attaining high performance relationships and output, starting with Forming and working sequentially towards Adjourning. Each time CIMIC deploys and is required to engage with other actors in the operational area, the team prepares itself mentally to go through these five distinct stages, identifying which stage is in play, and tailoring their behaviour and communication style to match. Figure 2 – Tuckman Developmental Stages in Small Groups Whilst Tuckman highlights the ‘what and why’ of group forming, he unfortunately does not elaborate on the ‘how’ with regards overcoming it. This is purposely done as he rightly advocates that, when it comes to working with human personalities, there is never a one size that fits all and therefore each new group must create a bespoke approach. Forming Clarify roles Build goals (SMART criteria) Storming Communicate & collaborate Negotiate Ideas Establish timeline Resolve Conflict Identify/assign tasks Give effective feedback Discuss working agreements Esclate appropriately Identify indvidual strengths Tools: deBono’s 6 thinking hats, ask/speak/ listen, ladder of inference, L-column Tools: technology use Time management For the sake of awareness within this essay, some of the tools that CIMIC has found to be effective in helping the group transition through the stages are provided below. Norming Reflect on group process Experiemen (trial & error) Learn/move beyond failure Test assumptions Conduct interim check-ins Present outcomes Tools: Kolbs Experiential Cycle Figure 3 – CIMIC suggested activities for each stage of Tuckman 1 Kurt Lewin, “Frontiers in Group Dynamics: Concept, Method and Reality,” Human Relations 1, no. 1 (June 1947): 5–41. 2 Mary Maples, “Group development: Extending Tuckman’s Theory,” The Journal for Specialists in Group Work 13, no. 1 (1988): 17-23. 92 ALLIED RAPID REACTION CORPS Performing Adjourning After action review Share lessons Learned Self/group evaluation