At some point in one’s career, leaders, supervisors and managers typically develop their philosophies regarding how best to prioritize the balance between Airmen and the Mission. You’ve heard or seen these philosophies, right? At Commander’s Calls, Right Starts, Professional Military Education seminars or perhaps even base paper commentary articles. Maybe you’re familiar with the following: “People First — Mission Always,” or “Mission First — People Always.” Or how about, “People First — Mission First” (but at least People First is mentioned “first”)? Many may resign themselves to an unspoken or unwritten “or” connotation when reflecting on which does or should come first — people “or” mission.
With respect to the old adage “which came first — the chicken or the egg?” we can spend a considerable amount of time debating the chicken or egg phenomenon. Likewise, we can do the same with the proverbial people or mission (first) ideology. Perhaps rather than thinking in terms of an “or” perspective, why not an “and” perspective? Not to suggest indecisiveness, but do we really have to choose between the two? Not between the chicken or egg of course, but between people (our great Airmen) and the mission. Can they both be first? Intuitively, while that may seem at odds, it is a concept that lends itself to continuing exploration and reflection. So, let’s pull this thread some and contemplate this intriguing People or Mission First dynamic.
People first. What does that really mean and what are some practical manifestations? It’s fairly easy to embrace the notion that, “If you take care of the people, the mission will take care of itself.” Obviously, that idea is hard to dispute and, if executed appropriately, will indeed likely render the desired mission results.
But, can a misguided focus on people first have a negative impact on mission and possibly on our Airmen as well? What does it really mean to take care of our people? For some, a take care of at all cost people-first approach could contribute to struggling with holding Airmen accountable. Do you know someone who thinks that providing a deserved letter of counseling — “one” LOC — will end or severely stagnate a career? Or greatly impact the chance of receiving a PCS medal? Or how about possibly impacting that firewall five enlisted performance report? The irony is this: Leaders and supervisors who care about people first, should not view certain counseling tools (written or verbal) as ending careers, stagnating careers or ruining the chance of that firewall five performance report. But rather, these could be the very techniques that positively develop Airmen as they reap the benefits of receiving straightforward honest feedback from supervisors who are willing and capable of providing it. Some might view this as a “tough love — people first” approach.
Another “take care of people first” example might include the hesitancy to hold Airmen accountable for fitness. There is an abundance of reasons why some Airmen cannot pass enough four-component fitness evaluations in a 24-month period to evade the risk of negative consequences. Do you know people-first supervisors that, despite the Air Force standards they are charged to uphold, struggle with recommending to the commander “tough love” fitness-fail ramifications? Have you ever heard a people-first supervisor mention something along the lines of, “well, there have been several issues that have made it difficult for Airmen X to maintain their fitness over a 24-month period and you know Sir/Ma’am/Chief, they are ‘one of the best’ technicians we have?” It’s not a stretch to think that fit Airmen will execute their mission better while also living a healthier and hopefully happier life. So, “people first” and “mission first?” With a “tough love — people first” approach, perhaps the answer to this question really is “Yes.”
Let’s shift gears a bit regarding the “people first” part of the equation. A supervisor/leader who really knows their Airmen’s stories is more likely to get the “people first” focus right. The more we know our Airmen’s stories, the more potential we have to affect positive change and have lasting impacts in their lives. Do you think knowing your Airmen’s stories might have a positive impact on mission execution? It likely will. And why shouldn’t a more successful mission execution goal be at the very top of our priority list? After all, being on top of our “mission first” game is more conducive to beating the bad guys, wherever and with whomever that may be.
On a truly indisputable “people first” note, the Air Force Assistance Fund campaign recently concluded. This year’s campaign ended on an extremely high note with the airlift wing far exceeding its $91,000 goal. It was exciting to be a part of a wing effort and to watch wing Airmen chipping in to help achieve this goal. While not totally surprised, as the MXG/CC, it was uplifting to see maintenance group Airmen demonstrate a phenomenal “people first” mentality with this year’s campaign. They opened up both their hearts and their bank accounts, contributing $26,000 and exceeding the wing established MXG goal of $11,000. Equally encouraging was the fact that over 40 percent of MXG Airmen donated to this year’s campaign. Dedicated group POCs, Airmen sharing their personal testimonies, and Airmen simply caring about Airmen all played a vital role.
During the past two or three months while “people first” actions such as the AFAF campaign were underway, rest assured there were daily “mission first” scenarios playing out as well throughout the entire airlift wing by all the wing’s groups. As for the 86th MXG, mission-focused maintainers dispatched over 11,000 aerospace ground support equipment items, repaired 40 aircraft wheels and tires, overhauled 16 C-130J aircraft brakes, and performed thousands of other precision measurement equipment, sheet metal and aircraft inspection repairs.
Additionally, Airmen scheduled, coordinated, and launched 1,180 sorties, approximately 800 more sorties than what would have typically been flown this same time last year, enabling the wing to fly more than 3,200 hours. This “surge” facilitated the Operations Group in accomplishing 100 percent of their semiannual training needs one month ahead of schedule as just one part of wing leadership’s emphasis toward an enhanced state of readiness. The aforementioned actions and hundreds of others throughout the airlift wing didn’t just casually occur. A “mission first” together with a “people first” mentality were key.
So, which did come first, the chicken or the egg? That question may do nothing more than serve as a philosophical brain teaser. The more important and everyday practical question to ponder that has real world impact centers on our Airmen and our mission, not chickens and eggs. What is your philosophy? People first or mission first? Or perhaps, they both come first. Are you a “take care of at all cost” so everyone can feel good “people first” leader or a do what it really takes to make an Airmen better and more effective “tough love — people first” leader?
With respect to one’s “people first” approach, there is too much at stake for the “mission first” part of the equation to suffer.
The type of “people first” leaders we are will have serious impacts to successful and sustained mission execution. What type of “people first” leader are you?
Twitter
Facebook
At some point in one’s career, leaders, supervisors and managers typically develop their philosophies regarding how best to prioritize the balance between Airmen and the Mission. You’ve heard or seen these philosophies, right? At Commander’s Calls, Right Starts, Professional Military Education seminars or perhaps even base paper commentary articles. Maybe you’re familiar with the following: “People First — Mission Always,” or “Mission First — People Always.” Or how about, “People First — Mission First” (but at least People First is mentioned “first”)? Many may resign themselves to an unspoken or unwritten “or” connotation when reflecting on which does or should come first — people “or” mission.
With respect to the old adage “which came first — the chicken or the egg?” we can spend a considerable amount of time debating the chicken or egg phenomenon. Likewise, we can do the same with the proverbial people or mission (first) ideology. Perhaps rather than thinking in terms of an “or” perspective, why not an “and” perspective? Not to suggest indecisiveness, but do we really have to choose between the two? Not between the chicken or egg of course, but between people (our great Airmen) and the mission. Can they both be first? Intuitively, while that may seem at odds, it is a concept that lends itself to continuing exploration and reflection. So, let’s pull this thread some and contemplate this intriguing People or Mission First dynamic.
People first. What does that really mean and what are some practical manifestations? It’s fairly easy to embrace the notion that, “If you take care of the people, the mission will take care of itself.” Obviously, that idea is hard to dispute and, if executed appropriately, will indeed likely render the desired mission results.
But, can a misguided focus on people first have a negative impact on mission and possibly on our Airmen as well? What does it really mean to take care of our people? For some, a take care of at all cost people-first approach could contribute to struggling with holding Airmen accountable. Do you know someone who thinks that providing a deserved letter of counseling — “one” LOC — will end or severely stagnate a career? Or greatly impact the chance of receiving a PCS medal? Or how about possibly impacting that firewall five enlisted performance report? The irony is this: Leaders and supervisors who care about people first, should not view certain counseling tools (written or verbal) as ending careers, stagnating careers or ruining the chance of that firewall five performance report. But rather, these could be the very techniques that positively develop Airmen as they reap the benefits of receiving straightforward honest feedback from supervisors who are willing and capable of providing it. Some might view this as a “tough love — people first” approach.
Another “take care of people first” example might include the hesitancy to hold Airmen accountable for fitness. There is an abundance of reasons why some Airmen cannot pass enough four-component fitness evaluations in a 24-month period to evade the risk of negative consequences. Do you know people-first supervisors that, despite the Air Force standards they are charged to uphold, struggle with recommending to the commander “tough love” fitness-fail ramifications? Have you ever heard a people-first supervisor mention something along the lines of, “well, there have been several issues that have made it difficult for Airmen X to maintain their fitness over a 24-month period and you know Sir/Ma’am/Chief, they are ‘one of the best’ technicians we have?” It’s not a stretch to think that fit Airmen will execute their mission better while also living a healthier and hopefully happier life. So, “people first” and “mission first?” With a “tough love — people first” approach, perhaps the answer to this question really is “Yes.”
Let’s shift gears a bit regarding the “people first” part of the equation. A supervisor/leader who really knows their Airmen’s stories is more likely to get the “people first” focus right. The more we know our Airmen’s stories, the more potential we have to affect positive change and have lasting impacts in their lives. Do you think knowing your Airmen’s stories might have a positive impact on mission execution? It likely will. And why shouldn’t a more successful mission execution goal be at the very top of our priority list? After all, being on top of our “mission first” game is more conducive to beating the bad guys, wherever and with whomever that may be.
On a truly indisputable “people first” note, the Air Force Assistance Fund campaign recently concluded. This year’s campaign ended on an extremely high note with the airlift wing far exceeding its $91,000 goal. It was exciting to be a part of a wing effort and to watch wing Airmen chipping in to help achieve this goal. While not totally surprised, as the MXG/CC, it was uplifting to see maintenance group Airmen demonstrate a phenomenal “people first” mentality with this year’s campaign. They opened up both their hearts and their bank accounts, contributing $26,000 and exceeding the wing established MXG goal of $11,000. Equally encouraging was the fact that over 40 percent of MXG Airmen donated to this year’s campaign. Dedicated group POCs, Airmen sharing their personal testimonies, and Airmen simply caring about Airmen all played a vital role.
During the past two or three months while “people first” actions such as the AFAF campaign were underway, rest assured there were daily “mission first” scenarios playing out as well throughout the entire airlift wing by all the wing’s groups. As for the 86th MXG, mission-focused maintainers dispatched over 11,000 aerospace ground support equipment items, repaired 40 aircraft wheels and tires, overhauled 16 C-130J aircraft brakes, and performed thousands of other precision measurement equipment, sheet metal and aircraft inspection repairs.
Additionally, Airmen scheduled, coordinated, and launched 1,180 sorties, approximately 800 more sorties than what would have typically been flown this same time last year, enabling the wing to fly more than 3,200 hours. This “surge” facilitated the Operations Group in accomplishing 100 percent of their semiannual training needs one month ahead of schedule as just one part of wing leadership’s emphasis toward an enhanced state of readiness. The aforementioned actions and hundreds of others throughout the airlift wing didn’t just casually occur. A “mission first” together with a “people first” mentality were key.
So, which did come first, the chicken or the egg? That question may do nothing more than serve as a philosophical brain teaser. The more important and everyday practical question to ponder that has real world impact centers on our Airmen and our mission, not chickens and eggs. What is your philosophy? People first or mission first? Or perhaps, they both come first. Are you a “take care of at all cost” so everyone can feel good “people first” leader or a do what it really takes to make an Airmen better and more effective “tough love — people first” leader?
With respect to one’s “people first” approach, there is too much at stake for the “mission first” part of the equation to suffer.
The type of “people first” leaders we are will have serious impacts to successful and sustained mission execution. What type of “people first” leader are you?