How to communicate clarity
Clarity. It’s a short word. It seems simple to understand. But it’s incredibly difficult to achieve, especially in a dynamic situation.
Clarity requires discipline. It requires disciplined communication. It requires the strategic leader to communicate what, in military jargon, is called intent.
Intent = Purpose + Method + Endstate
Here’s an example from the military:
The purpose of X Brigade’s operation is to protect the Corps, rear and build-up of follow-on friendly forces. In support of Division and Corps, we must attack rapidly to the west in the Central Corridor, destroy the lead motorized rifle battalion (MRB) of the XXX Motorized Rifle Regiment (MRR) between Phase Line (PL) IMPERIAL and PL EXCALIBUR, and then seize defensible terrain along PL EXCALIBUR.
To do this, X-X Infantry (Light) will infiltrate to secure Hill 780 (NK4411), deny the enemy
its use, and block to the west to prevent the enemy’s use of the mobility corridor between Hill 780 and the south wall of the Central Corridor (Avenue of Approach 3). Task Force X-XX, the brigade main effort, will move to contact in zone, fix the advance guard main body (AGMB) and destroy it with an enveloping attack in depth. Brigade deep artillery
fires, close air support and scatterable mines will be designed to attrit its commitment into the Brigade zone, and force the AGMB into the southern avenue of approach, where TF X-XX can destroy it by direct fires. After destruction of the MRB in zone, TF X-XX will continue the attack to seize defensible terrain along PL EXCALIBUR.
End state visualized is lead MRB of XXX MRR destroyed; brigade with heavy forces in control of Brown and Debman passes; and brigade postured to conduct defensive operations to destroy follow-on enemy regiments.
(LTC Lawrence G. Shattuck, Communication of Intent in Distributed Supervisory Control Systems, (Unpublished Dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1995), 41).
Here’s what it might look like in a business context:
The purpose of this project is to advance market share for XYZ brand from 10% to 15% or greater.
In order to do this we will create three new derivative products that are additive to our customer base.
The end state visualized is that there will be a total of 15 total products in the XYZ brand with three of them accounting for a net increase of 5% of market share and moving XYZ to second place in the category.
It’s important that there be little to no ambiguity about the “why”: we’re here to grow market share or to sell 1mm units or to “take the hill.”
It’s important that there be little to no ambiguity about the “what”: no less than 15 total products in the line with three of them being new and additive.
There should be appropriate ambiguity around the “how.” Tactical leaders like line individual contributors and line managers need to have the freedom to adapt their approach to the actual situation on the ground in the marketplace.
If the intent spells out the methodology too specifically then these leaders will get stuck when the context of their mission changes.
Take a few minutes and write down how you might use the IPME approach to giving direction for projects.