Chef's Special of the Day: Leader's Intent

(Photo: Kyle Miller/Wyoming IHC)

I thought we could unpack the picnic basket of Leader’s Intent in order to better understand a tool that is more important than ever. 

Similar to what the military has experienced in the last 20 years, the emergency management and response environments have become increasingly more volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA). That’s the clinical term for off-the-charts chaos. 

Leader’s Intent is the best tool for providing guidance to those who will carry out jobs and assignments because it’s built to counteract Murphy’s Law. If it can happen it will… usually at the worst possible time. This year has already proved that to no end and it’s only July. 

The recipe for Leader’s Intent is equal parts Task, Purpose & End State. It’s a more nuanced and flavorful dish than it appears at first glance. 

The ingredients breakdown:

Task. Pretty simple. This is the what you want someone to do. 

Purpose. A more complex ingredient. Some refer to this as the why. That’s true… at the same time ask yourself. “What is the purpose of purpose?”

The answer is to empower the “operator” to dynamically manage risk. Purpose defines the “Gain” in the “risk versus gain” equation. 

Even if you do a thorough and effective risk assessment and know and brief it to others; if they don’t know the “Gain,” what are they supposed to if the risk level goes up or down?  Should we change from advance to defend? Should we double down and reinforce? Without purpose, they lack any context to make that decision.  

Consider the task of delivering food and water to a Red Cross shelter for earthquake survivors. The end state being the shelter is maintaining a three-day supply of food. 

If the purpose is “in order to stock supplies for the following week” and the troops encounter an area with downed power lines, what risk level is acceptable?

Now what if the purpose is “in order to alleviate immediate hunger and imminent food rioting?” 

The task and the end state did not change at all. But how do the two different purpose statements change the acceptable risk level? 

Because Purpose defines the Gain, it is always tied to a Value at Risk (VaR). Tactically that could be to protect a subdivision or keep some green slime from contaminating a water supply. Administratively, it might be to preserve the trust of the organization in meeting an interagency commitment or getting a requirement accomplished with minimum impact on staffing readiness. 

I always like to use the word track “in order to…” as my connector between task & purpose.  We’re doing X in order to [protect, defend, minimize, preserve, maximize….] this VaR. 

End State also has a correct form. Commonly referred to as “What you want it to look like when it’s done?”

The best way to do that is to visualize the conditions that need to exist that define success. 

• The spot fires were contained by 1930. 

• The dog does not jump up on guests when they walk in. 

• The grade on the new trail is 7% or less. 

Notice the tense is important. Effective end states are written in present or past tense. In order to… ensure absolute clarity when success has been achieved. This avoids mission creep and unnecessary exposure to risk any longer than needed. 

I like using bullet statements for tactical end states. Strategic end states like vision statements can be more narrative. 

In our yard, we have a path between two pine trees and the limbs need trimming each spring. 

Ready to go with my various shears, my then 6- and 12-year old granddaughters ran up. “Can we help!?!”

Dilemma. Knock this thing out in 15 minutes or risk being out here for 2 hours (this is guy thinking). 

But I have learned that given their ages this could be the last time they will ever volunteer to help. I decided to play the long game. 

“Absolutely,” I said, handing over the tools. 

“What do we do?” They asked. 

“See these branches around the path? They grow long each year and the needles poke you when you walk on the path.” I demonstrated by walking between the trees.  “You’re going to cut those back.”

“Which ones? How far?”

“Well, you’re going to figure that out. Cut just enough in order to not get poked because we still want it to look natural.”

“Okay, but which ones? How far?”

“That’s up to you.  What’s important is that when you’re done:

• A grown up can walk between the trees and not get poked by needles. 

• It looks pretty.

Let me know when you’re done.”

I walked away thinking my next task would be to call a tree surgeon to repair the damage about to befall these two innocent evergreens. 

Thirty minutes later they report in. Ready for inspection. Prepared for the worst, I was blown away to find that, not only could I walk the path needle-poke-free, but I couldn’t really tell where they cut branches, in spite of a fair sized pile on the ground. 

The teacher became student as I’ve tried to emulate their work in all the years since. 

Ants are here. Pack up the picnic!

Mark

---

Reprinted with permission from Mark Smith, Mission-Centered Solutions. All opinions are those of the author.