I have been studying some British military literature around ‘Small Party Taskings' and I discovered some interesting information on the systems utilized by the Special Air Service (SAS). The SAS are basing a significant portion of their force around Small Party Taskings with sections of four troopers each. Each section member is trained in a specialty discipline (i.e.: demolitions, medical, signals, etc.).
Could the 'specialist' model be applied to your team or volunteer group? Quite often our processes require tasks to be performed in the absence of a specialized discipline.
Some organizations base in-house training around the untrained team member, employee or volunteer. We often concentrate our finite training opportunities on developing basic skills.
While this occurs our high performance people are not always effectively challenged and if the model persists we risk losing them. We invest resources recruiting new people but not always on retaining our experienced contingent.
I think that an organization's leadership should spend 80% of their focus and investment on the high performing and proficient staff and 20% directly on the less skilled chapter. We do not want to ignore untrained workers but we shift the culture of focus to high performing people, celebrate and recognize their achievements and give less experienced individuals an example to follow. In other words leaders delegate a strong measure of training authority to adept workers. As a result inexperienced workers receive quality training through information transfer & mentoring from experienced & skilled members while at the same time providing experienced staff with a new challenge.
The untrained person holds some accountability to ensure they possess some basic knowledge and equipment and are asking appropriate questions. This conceptual idea isn't new but it is designed to provide a venue for high performing individuals who can become the training body that brings the team's over-all skill levels up. Accountability for a training plan can be delegated to members but ultimate responsibility to ensure the training is being effective rests with the Leadership.
All team members should eventually be proficient with basic skills and I believe that all people have a special enthusiasm for certain aspects of their organizations mission or vision. People whom proactively and consistently demonstrate enthusiasm for these aspects should have an opportunity to develop their ‘Field of Practice’ into a specialization.
We could offer a person the opportunity to choose a specialization from a list of skill sets that the leadership considers prevalent. There is an expectation that once certification in a skill set is achieved that the individual will be prepared to instruct the material and be available to develop internal capacity within the team. This represents an institutionalized advancement path for high performing people sponsored by Headquarters in partnership with the local leadership.
The ultimate objective would be to populate a team, and its sections, with a balanced portfolio of empowered workers that are well versed in skill sets appropriate to the conditions in their 'Area of Responsibility'. Additionally these individuals could be delegated authority to train and maintain a program area for the team.
It is important to underscore the importance of restricting specialist training to high performing and enthusiastic members only. If non-performers enter the advancement path ahead of our achievers the intent will have the opposite desired effect. Additionally once a specialization has been achieved, further specialist training in another field can only be permitted if that person can demonstrate that they have been successful in advancing the team in that skill set (or can demonstrate that they have made reasonable attempts to do so). It is encumbant upon the leadership to ensure that experienced members have been provided with the space and the opportunity to be successful.
Conclusion:
Many of your members have been workers for a significant period of time and the challenge of remaining an ‘Engaged Worker’ can be a difficult one. This concept would provide people with an advancement strategy based on good performance. Over all I believe any organization would enjoy measurable benefits from investing in an expansion to the Basic Skills portfolio, especially in areas that could conceivably require a due diligence defence.
The program would provide incentives through its benefits to the team but equally to the nominated individual. Members that can call a discipline or program area “Their Specialized Contribution to the Team” are more likely to stay engaged and involved.
Engineering Specialist:
• Limitations and Statistics for of common military vehicles;
• Estimations if military vehicles can successfully traverse deactivated roads or brushed-in access roads;
• Turn around requirements;
• Safely cross bridge spans and box culverts;
• Assess & Identify wood box culverts and spans for potential reduced load capacity due structure failure;
Client Requirements & Logistics:
o Who are our Clients and how do Rangers fit in?
o Composition of a Company;
o RCMP, PEP
o RJLO
o Environmental Stewardship - Proximity limitations of refuelling stations and vehicles to sensitive areas (riparian, streams, etc..)
o Site Planning
o Native Resources & LARR Composition
Weapon & Marksmanship Specialist:
• SOP Carrying in the Field
• SOP Engage a target in the field
• SOP Night Watch
• Bear Defence
• Maintenance & Safety
• NCSS / CFSAC
• Coaching Techniques
Could the 'specialist' model be applied to your team or volunteer group? Quite often our processes require tasks to be performed in the absence of a specialized discipline.
Some organizations base in-house training around the untrained team member, employee or volunteer. We often concentrate our finite training opportunities on developing basic skills.
While this occurs our high performance people are not always effectively challenged and if the model persists we risk losing them. We invest resources recruiting new people but not always on retaining our experienced contingent.
I think that an organization's leadership should spend 80% of their focus and investment on the high performing and proficient staff and 20% directly on the less skilled chapter. We do not want to ignore untrained workers but we shift the culture of focus to high performing people, celebrate and recognize their achievements and give less experienced individuals an example to follow. In other words leaders delegate a strong measure of training authority to adept workers. As a result inexperienced workers receive quality training through information transfer & mentoring from experienced & skilled members while at the same time providing experienced staff with a new challenge.
The untrained person holds some accountability to ensure they possess some basic knowledge and equipment and are asking appropriate questions. This conceptual idea isn't new but it is designed to provide a venue for high performing individuals who can become the training body that brings the team's over-all skill levels up. Accountability for a training plan can be delegated to members but ultimate responsibility to ensure the training is being effective rests with the Leadership.
All team members should eventually be proficient with basic skills and I believe that all people have a special enthusiasm for certain aspects of their organizations mission or vision. People whom proactively and consistently demonstrate enthusiasm for these aspects should have an opportunity to develop their ‘Field of Practice’ into a specialization.
We could offer a person the opportunity to choose a specialization from a list of skill sets that the leadership considers prevalent. There is an expectation that once certification in a skill set is achieved that the individual will be prepared to instruct the material and be available to develop internal capacity within the team. This represents an institutionalized advancement path for high performing people sponsored by Headquarters in partnership with the local leadership.
The ultimate objective would be to populate a team, and its sections, with a balanced portfolio of empowered workers that are well versed in skill sets appropriate to the conditions in their 'Area of Responsibility'. Additionally these individuals could be delegated authority to train and maintain a program area for the team.
It is important to underscore the importance of restricting specialist training to high performing and enthusiastic members only. If non-performers enter the advancement path ahead of our achievers the intent will have the opposite desired effect. Additionally once a specialization has been achieved, further specialist training in another field can only be permitted if that person can demonstrate that they have been successful in advancing the team in that skill set (or can demonstrate that they have made reasonable attempts to do so). It is encumbant upon the leadership to ensure that experienced members have been provided with the space and the opportunity to be successful.
Conclusion:
Many of your members have been workers for a significant period of time and the challenge of remaining an ‘Engaged Worker’ can be a difficult one. This concept would provide people with an advancement strategy based on good performance. Over all I believe any organization would enjoy measurable benefits from investing in an expansion to the Basic Skills portfolio, especially in areas that could conceivably require a due diligence defence.
The program would provide incentives through its benefits to the team but equally to the nominated individual. Members that can call a discipline or program area “Their Specialized Contribution to the Team” are more likely to stay engaged and involved.
Engineering Specialist:
• Limitations and Statistics for of common military vehicles;
• Estimations if military vehicles can successfully traverse deactivated roads or brushed-in access roads;
• Turn around requirements;
• Safely cross bridge spans and box culverts;
• Assess & Identify wood box culverts and spans for potential reduced load capacity due structure failure;
Client Requirements & Logistics:
o Who are our Clients and how do Rangers fit in?
o Composition of a Company;
o RCMP, PEP
o RJLO
o Environmental Stewardship - Proximity limitations of refuelling stations and vehicles to sensitive areas (riparian, streams, etc..)
o Site Planning
o Native Resources & LARR Composition
Weapon & Marksmanship Specialist:
• SOP Carrying in the Field
• SOP Engage a target in the field
• SOP Night Watch
• Bear Defence
• Maintenance & Safety
• NCSS / CFSAC
• Coaching Techniques
No comments:
Post a Comment