Interview:
Generals Win Battles but Sergeants Win Wars
I: That's an interesting title, "Generals Win Battles, but Sergeants Win Wars." How did you come up with it?
WB: The first time I heard that phrase was when I was in the Marines. I was before a board that was evaluating me for promotion to sergeant.
They asked me what career goals were. I told them (it was true at the time) that I wanted to make a career of the Marines, get a commission and eventually become Commandant.
There was an old Major on that board who'd been an enlisted man and fought at Iwo Jima. He had a scar that started above his hairline, ran down his cheek and neck and disappeared into his collar. He also had a chest full of medals.
He told me that I shouldn't worry about the Commandant part because I was up for promotion to the most important job in the Marines. "The generals may win a battle or two," he said, "but it's the sergeants that win the wars."
That's as true today as it was then. And it's true for businesses just as much as for the Marines.
I: That's a pretty strong statement.
WB: It's a true statement. Ask anyone with a job about their work and they'll tell you about their boss. They may or may not mention the company CEO, but they always mention their immediate boss.
That's the person who makes the biggest impact on both productivity and worker satisfaction. That first line supervisor is the one who makes sure that execution happens, that sales are made and that customers are satisfied. It's the first line supervisor that makes sure the accounting gets done.
The CEO is important, but he or she is just one person. A large company will have hundreds or thousands of other bosses who have a daily impact on productivity and worker satisfaction, and ultimately on long term competitive advantage and profitability.
I: All right. How do you get more of those good supervisors?
WB: It starts with recruiting. You've got to find people with integrity and skill and a good work ethic who will fit into your culture.
Recruiting is crucial because the people you hire are the raw materials for your future leadership at all levels. It's like growing things. If the seeds are bad, or if their not right for the conditions, no amount of careful husbandry will get you great results.
I: That make sense. What do you need besides good materials?
WB: You need training. In most organizations there are three kinds of training.
First there is the orientation training. When a new hire comes on board, he or she needs to be introduced to the company and learn what's expected. In some kinds of organizations, this is a very big deal and takes a long time. In others, it's short and informal, but it needs to happen.
After that there are training in two kinds of knowledge and skills. You train folks in basic company policies and procedures. And you train them in the particular skills they need for their job. This would include supervision skills, which very few companies do.
I: They don't?
WB: Nope. In 2003, only about seven percent of corporate training budgets was spent on first line supervisors, even though there are thousands of them.
To make matters worse, a lot of that training wasn't on supervisory skills.
I: What was it on, if not on supervisory skills?
WB: Company policies and procedures. And prophylactic HR stuff, like how to avoid getting sued.
I: But isn't that important?
WB: Sure it is, but it's not the whole story. Most companies would be better off training new supervisors in how to do the kind of supervision that creates top performance, avoids lawsuits, but that can win in court if necessary.
I: I'll buy that. So, effective recruiting and training are what you need to create a cadre of great supervisors that will make your company profitable. Is that right?
WB: It's right as far as it goes, but there's one more thing. It's called development.
Most companies forget that all together. Most "leadership training" teaches leadership like an academic subject. There's lots of discussion of theories and precious little practical advice.
But leadership is a complex art that you don't learn all at once. Leaders develop over time. They grow. And they learn most of what they learn about leadership by talking to other leaders and watching them work and reading about what they do. They learn by trying things out and critiquing their own performance.
I: So, what would you suggest?
WB: First, imagine leadership as an apprentice trade. Then create the kind of environment that good apprentice programs create. It should be more about how leadership is learned and about how leaders develop.
A company needs to provide training and learning resources and opportunities to learn from others and opportunities to develop. There also needs to be a framework to give meaning and direction to the learning and make it more effective.
I: Sounds like a big deal. Is anyone doing a good job of this?
WB: Caterpillar and GE both seem to do a good job. Think about GE. They haven't had to go outside for a CEO since the company was founded. Almost all their leadership is developed at GE. And companies are always knocking on the door looking for GE folks to hire away for a leadership job.
I: So it can be done.
WB: It sure can. It's not easy, because it requires lots of change. And it's sure not quick. It probably takes a generation until the program is up to full impact. That's the bad news.
I: What's the good news?
WB: The good news is that great leaders at all levels have a huge impact and that impact shows up almost immediately. The good news is that the hard work has a payoff in productivity, profitability, competitive advantage and morale. And besides, the sooner you start, the sooner you get results.