Download Article 1

RAF LEADERSHIP
Below is an extract from Leadership: An Anthology. It comes from the chapter
on ‘Vision and Decisiveness’ but could just as easily be used as an example
in many areas of leadership. WO Pittock’s story could sit as an example of
Mission Command or of the ethical dilemmas that so often face our people, of
courage and determination or of leading by example. The reader could
measure the story against the core values of the RAF – RISE - or the
Attributes for RAF Leaders. The explanation of one of those Attributes is
included below for consideration.
WO Andy PITTOCK
Recounting an incident at Kabul airbase in Afghanistan, where he was Chief
Fire Officer during Operation Fingal. He was awarded the Queen’s
Commendation for Bravery following the incident.
From an RAF Leadership Centre Interview 2004
My section was responsible for providing for fire cover at Kabul, but a lot of
our time was spent on non-fire duties: force protection and guarding issues
and so on. The setup at Kabul had a military area and a non-military side but
the fire section was located next to the non-military activity. On the day in
question a situation had been brewing throughout that day as no aircraft had
taken off for the past few days and a crowd of people had gathered on the
dispersal and were becoming very agitated. Late on in the day the Minister
for Transport and his aide had been shown to an aircraft that was ready to
depart and the crowd became very rowdy in response to this, firing into the air
and shouting. They crowded round the aircraft, which already had its engines
running, and then a few of them managed to break into it, attacking and killing
the Minister for Transport and throwing his body in the back of a taxi. On
seeing this, his aide and another man began running away across the
dispersal pursued by the rioters. All this activity was taking place outside our
area of responsibility and I had received orders in the build up of the situation
that we were not to get involved but, as the events escalated and the crowd
moved closer towards us, I saw that action was necessary.
I formed my manpower into a line and although we were only 12 people we
were of course armed and so immediately looked quite threatening. At that
stage in my mind we were purely acting as a deterrent and guard for our area
of responsibility but fairly quickly the two men who were fleeing from the
crowd saw us and started running towards us. I had to make a decision then
and there as to what to do and in my mind it stopped being a decision based
on areas of responsibility and became a moral decision where people’s lives
were at stake. I shouted orders to move forward, by this stage there was only
about fifty feet between the crowd and us but we managed to surround the
two men and get them to safety. I think the sight of, albeit a small number,
but a group nevertheless, of military well disciplined personnel advancing in a
well ordered manner was enough to ensure the safety of the two men in
danger. The situation had the potential to escalate further and become quite
nasty but once we moved forward in a decisive way, shouting orders and
making a stance we were lucky and they backed down.
The following paragraphs are intended to expand on the issues behind this
Attribute for RAF Leaders and are not comprehensive. They should be
regarded as a guide. It should also be noted that adherence to the Attributes
will not make a leader; they are the contribution that the RAF requires of its
leaders.
They complement those that the Defence Leadership and
Management Centre identify for those at the Strategic level in the Services.
Warfighter, Courageous Being a warfighter first is important, as it is
the core business of the RAF to exploit the air environment for military
purposes. All RAF personnel must be focussed on the organisation’s core
business - to create precise campaign effects at range in time. There are
more than 60 different career specialisations in the RAF used to provide
expeditionary air power and every person engaged in those specialisations
must contribute to the precise campaign effect at range in time that is required
– in other words, they must be a warfighter. To do that well they will have to
be highly skilled in their specialisation but focussed on the purpose of the
RAF. They must all be military minded with a knowledge of air power and air
warfare and of a determined fighting spirit, able to overcome the adversity of
circumstance that any member of the RAF may be called upon to face on
operations. The teams the RAF sends to carry out its mission cannot afford to
have members that are unable to look after themselves in the field or unable
to defend themselves should either circumstance be necessary. Furthermore,
traditional RAF distinctions between those who fight and those who support
are breaking down. Not only is the “support space” vital to the “battle space”
but so is the “business space,” for example by providing urgent operational
requirements. NEC and the advent of UCAVs bring personnel who are
remote from the actual battlefield into direct contact with it. The need to
understand the people ‘at the other end of the technology’ and to build trust
within the extended teams to carry out the RAF core business has never been
so great.
Physical courage is necessary to face the circumstances of operations
whether that be the lonely ‘2 o’clock in the morning’ courage or the
maintenance of the esprit de corps of the close-knit team. The moral courage
required of RAF leaders is linked to the integrity and ethics that all personnel
need to have to be part of a fighting force. Those that live the core values of
the RAF will find the moral courage to do the right thing. That moral courage
supports the trust that is vital to building effective teams both in the immediate
environment and in the wider defence community. Without the deep and
enduring trust, both up and down the command chain, Mission Command
cannot work. A person with moral courage must understand and have
confidence in their own moral framework and be able to recognise and
intervene appropriately in, for example, harassment incidents.
They must be able to provide constructive dissent at any level while
understanding that, once a decision has been made, no matter what that is,
they must assume personal responsibility for its implementation. This display
of loyalty will be vital to the retention of team cohesion. They must have the
strength of character to not give in to morally unjustified actions. Those who
have moral courage will not only take responsibility for their own actions but
also for the situation around them. They will act rather than avoid what may
be uncomfortable. They will do the right thing rather than the easy thing.
They will not abrogate their responsibility as a leader.
Moral courage is linked to humility – the courage to admit one’s own mistakes
and learn from them, to know one’s own weaknesses and be able to work to
improve them. A leader with moral courage will have the humility to know and
acknowledge that results are the achievement of the team even if the
leadership of the team created the cohesion and vision that inspired it.
Finally, moral courage is linked to emotional intelligence – the awareness of
others as well as self-awareness.