by Mike Karlson
Twenty years ago, I was finishing Army basic training and Infantry school. My drill sergeants selected me and a handful of other trainees to conduct an After-Action Review with the Battalion Commander. I remember it as a surreal but great experience. As a then-Private, the rank of Lieutenant Colonel felt very distant from where I was. But that experience also ignited my drive and gave me something to shoot for. As a recently pinned LTC, I argue that peering into the future can be productive for military Officers, but there is a point of diminishing returns.
For example, I recently had the chance to hear from the Chairman and Joint Staff directors during a professional development session. The senior leaders in that room have had careers as flag officers longer than my entire Army career. The insights they provided along a wide range of topics were cogent and seemed effortless for them to produce. I left feeling humbled and inspired. Relative to those leaders, a Lieutenant Colonel is barely a journeyman.
Looking far into the future from where I am now and imagining myself in their shoes does not feel productive. If anything, it feels like the opposite. While distant goal setting can motivate, it can often make goals feel too far out of grasp to be attainable. Sometimes, life throws curveballs that shift your distant goals to something completely different. The life stories of the Army’s two most famous Georges–George Washington and George C. Marshall–illustrate how distant goal setting can be helpful if we remain flexible and prioritize immediate, incremental goals.
Lieutenant Colonel George Washington
In May of 1754, a Lieutenant Colonel in the Virginia Militia ignited the French and Indian War. Lt. Col. George Washington had a difficult upbringing and plenty to prove. His desire was to be commissioned as a British officer, and he saw success in the Virginia Militia as an important steppingstone. He received broad guidance from Virginia Governor Dinwiddie to reinforce England’s claim over what is now southwestern Pennsylvania. While there, Washington encountered a French delegation on a diplomatic mission to assert their claim over the same area. Washington led his militia on an all-night march to surprise the encampment and decisively routed the French. Describing his first combat experience, Washington wrote, “I heard the bullets whistle, and, believe me there is something charming in the sound.”
Washington was denied a commission as a British Officer, despite his heroics in the French and Indian War. He was no doubt disappointed. However, years later he would orchestrate a victory over British forces and become America’s first Commander in Chief. If he had stayed committed to becoming a British officer, history might have played out differently.
Lieutenant Colonel George C. Marshall
In the Fall of 1918, a Lieutenant Colonel on General Pershing’s staff planned the Meuse-Argonne offensive, leading to the end of the First World War. But Lt. Col. George C. Marshall wanted out of a staff job. He strongly desired a battlefield command. However, he had a couple of problems. First, Marshall was a planning prodigy. He had a knack for orchestrating complex maneuvers, ensuring the right pieces fit together. Second, Marshall spoke his mind. He became an invaluable advisor to General Pershing because of this. He eventually became Chief of Staff of the Army under President Roosevelt during the Second World War. These same abilities made Marshall too invaluable to the overall war effort—he was never offered an overseas command during WWII.
Marshall went on to serve as Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense. He championed the plan in his namesake to reconstruct Europe and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. He surely could not have imagined all this taking place. If he had gotten his way as a Lieutenant Colonel, he likely would have died in France.
Back to the Future
Washington and Marshall were both successful because they found ways to turn perceived setbacks into opportunities. At a certain point, they abandoned what they wanted to achieve and focused on the circumstances they were presented with. Washington used his deep knowledge of the British officer corps and system to eventually defeat them. Marshall used his extensive planning experiences and knowledge of up-and-coming American officers to engineer victory during WWII.
So, what is the value in distant goal setting? The bottom line is it changes throughout one’s career. The beginning of an officer’s career is like wading out into the ocean from the beach. You set distant waypoints. “I just have to get past the surf zone.” “I just have to make it to the buoys.” That’s what life was like for me as a Private all those years ago. Being a Lieutenant Colonel seemed far off, but I could still visualize it. However, at a certain point you find yourself swimming in the open ocean, staring out at the horizon. Telling yourself, “I just have to make it to [there]” feels less useful and makes imagining where “there” is more difficult. As you move up in ranks and further into the deep ocean, everyone around you is at least as good or better. Luck and timing have an increasingly larger impact on your career as the opportunities for advancement decrease.
I am not advocating for the abandonment of goal setting in the later stages of a military career. I am advocating for holding realistic expectations on increasingly shorter time horizons. For example, I don’t entertain delusions that I’ll read this article as a General Officer someday and smile. It feels unproductive to even imagine that. What does feel productive, however, is focusing on impacts I could have right now. What experiences and insights do I have that can be invested in someone else’s success? What lessons have I learned that might pay dividends for the organization I am currently in? These are the questions that drive me into the future, whatever that may be. If that future is continued advancement, then this mentality should serve me well. And if continued advancement is not in the cards, I will be leaving a career and a profession that I can be proud of.
Mike Karlson is a Civil Affairs officer in the United States Army currently serving as Military Advisor at the Department of State. He has a Master of Arts in Organizational Leadership from UMass Global and a Master of Arts in Strategic Security Studies from the National Defense University. He is a member of the Military Writers Guild.
