.
I think the most important step is to first establish the group and it's terrain. Once you have done that, I would have everyone list what they are good at as well as their experience in performing those tasks. Next, a group would have to define the areas of survival needed, such as security, construction, gardening, food preservation, etc. There could be as many as 10 or so areas. Each area would need a leader, one who has the best related experience. The actual governing board would be made up of a council of these leaders. Try to have an odd number to avoid vote deadlocks. This way, the will of one cannot be imposed upon the entire group and when issues are discussed, every area would have it's concerns addressed.
My situation and two cents, my partners and I dont have an assigned leader and I see no reason for there to be one yet. We have a bugout plan. A route, alternative routes, and a detailed plan on how to get to our bug out location, and how to deal with certain situations along the way(weather, time of year, martial law and military checkpoints, natural disaster etc.) We are all agreed on the plan already. And the alternatives plan(s). So we just worry about getting to our location as fast as possible. Once we get there, then leadership might be decided (hasnt been discussed), or more then likely it will sort itself out.
Aaron
In any situation a leader will ultimately surface in the group. The immediate situation will determine who will be the leader based on experience and skill set. As situations change so will the leader. No one is perfect for every situation. If the group is large enough then there may be a leader who will have "leutenants" based on knowledge and experience who will advise and manage defined areas. The leader will keep his or her place based on the outcome of decisions made. For a group to be successful there has to be respect and mutual agreement that the leader will be followed. This is the only way that it can be procuctive and defeat the challenges that will arise. IF a member doesn't see fit to follow the lead and or has issues with decisions then discussion can take place. If in the end the group makes a decision that reinforces the leader's view and the individual or smaller group refuses to accept it then the only alternative is to leave to form their own group. In the immediacy it will NOT be a democracy for some situations.... IE defence. Everyone will have to have a level of trust and action that will be for the better good AT THAT TIME based on previous decisions. I guess what I am saying is that 10 people running around doing their own thing with no central idea or evaluation of outcomes WILL fail. I don't know if my point is understandable.. Hope so...
Cheers
Actually Denob, we've got the people designated for those roles. It's up to me to decide which area of need takes priority at any given time. For example, when it comes time to harvest and put up food preserves, I have to decide what areas to put on hold to provide the needed manpower. Our leaders will council but it's up to me for the final decision.
As time goes on, I sometimes think, "Oh crap, what am I getting myself into. I'm responsible, these people are friends and family. I care about each and every one of them. A wrong decision can create untold hardship for them and it would be my fault. If I could go back, I may have done things a little different but I'm committed now. The decisions I make at work have relatively little impact if I'm wrong. If TSHTF and I make the wrong decision it could have a catastrophic impact on people I care about.
I'm going to stop now before I talk myself into just grabbing my rucksack and gun to disappear into the woods in the event of TSHTF.
Those who are unwilling to defend freedom, will become unfree.
Taz,
seems I hit a nerve...sorry about that.
I was under the impression that this was a discussion beyond the scope of YOUR group.
There are several other groups of preppers on the forum who are in the planning stages of a retreat who need to mull over this topic.
I was just putting in my two cents, and was not trying to challenge the authority bestowed upon you in your group.
Denob: You didn't hit a nerve. I was just trying to clarify my groups dynamics. I thought that if groups explain how their group dynamics work then people can get ideas to incorporate or disgard for their own groups. Hitting a nerve didn't even occur to me. If others come on and put forth their ideas then everyone can learn from it. I wouldn't be surprised if I'm forced to change some of my thinking. I certainly know that I don't have all the answers. If someone hits a nerve, then it was probably a nerve that needed to be hit.
Those who are unwilling to defend freedom, will become unfree.
Howdy All,
Leadership & Group Dynamics. If your group is just coming together, these are two topics worth investing some time on.
If you are a new group leader, post your questions or concerns here and you should receive a health supply of replies in short order. Those that have had a group going for many years please shed some of your lessons learned and pitfalls to avoid. This Forum can be used to transfer years of knowledge to those that need it most. I hope that can be achieved.
For those new to trying to figure out group dynamics, keep this tidbit in mind.....in any group of 12 people you will have one natural leader. In the prepping community that dynamic may not be true, as many of the persons drawn to prepping are all leaders. Some stronger, more skilled or more talented than others. If you are established as the "Top Dog" in your pack, understand that there will be challenges to your leadership from time-to-time, by those who want to be the "Alpha Dog". This is natural. A possible solution to this is to give every leader in your group something or someone(s) to lead. There can only be one "Top Dog". Everyone else has to fit in a hierarchy below the "Top Dog". If, as time goes on, there are members who do not fit in the hierarchy, it will be time for them to exit the group and start their own. Depending on charisma, the departing leader may take a few followers.
Noisy leaders and quiet leaders. Not all good leaders are loud. And not all loud leaders are good. Another point to remember.
Let the flood gates open and the opinions and comments flood in, to revive this topic.
Cheers,
Mountainman.
This is an article on leadership.
I just finished reading Patriots by James Wesley Rawles. One of the decisions making structures described had 3 distinct methods for the group: For decisions relating to the retreat and property, final say went to the owner of the land/retreat with input from every one else; decisions relating to security or situations where there was contact with a hostile force had a (sometimes ad-hoc but) clearly defined chain of command with one person at the top (SoPs defined for security and defence by the "tactical coordinator", who also defined the command structure for patrols or planed operations); decisions relating to the direction of the community/group where made by majority vote after everyone's input. I thought I was kind of interesting.
Personally, I have a lot of experience with consensus decision models. In a smallish group of like-minded people, it's what makes sense to me for non-tactical type decisions (with those decisions going to some sort of command structure model predefined by consensus).
In the book A Distant Eden by Lloyd Tackitt (another excellent read) there was a somewhat similar division of leadership. During normal conditions there was a leader who made decisions with input from the group. Under conditions where security and defence became important leadership was handed to another predefined leader or if you like "tactical coordinator". The tactical coordinator had the skill, knowledge and experience to fulfil that specialized task on which the whole group depended on for its survival in those circumstance.
As MMG says these kinds of structures make sense. You need leaders, you need input from the group and you need consensus but every decision cannot be reached by consensus. While offering some freedom and input from individuals these structures are not democracies but would most likely be more effective in turbulent times.
Evenin',
For those looking for a pre-made command structure - just fill in the blanks. Look to ICS - Incident Command System. It is used by the police, fire, search & rescue (SAR) and EMS. Google it and you will quickly find the forms, including a org chart. Use as is, or modify to meet the needs of your group.
Cheers,
Mountainman.
Evenin'
Another good topic. One that best be decided before you need to use it - Leadership.
I am no expert, but I will input my two cents, just in case it is helpful.
People and leaders. I was taught that any group of 12 people contains at least one natural leader. You throw any 12 people on an island, in a room or on a life raft, and in short order the leader will emerge. For this reason, Canadian prison try very hard never to exceed 20 prisoners per unit. Why?? Once you have 24 in a unit, you will have two natural leaders. Two leaders = conflict. If you want harmony, you only want to deal with one leader. That leader will keep the rest in line. Now, you are asking how does that transfer to a survival group.....
Easy, if you want to work toward your group survival you need to have leaders and these leaders need to be working toward the same goal. So, to prevent in-fighting you will benefit from a chain of command or a heirarchy of leaders. In warrior societies the strongest most combat proven warrior is the chief of their clan. He is the top dog. Anyone wanting to challenge the top dog, it was usually a fight to the death. Winner takes all. Oops, I digressed. Use the unit/sub-unit method of dividing and employing your leaders. The best leaders control the larger units of your group and directly under these leaders are the leaders of the smaller units. So, a strong leader should be able to have effective control over at least 100 persons. By employing 10 junior leaders who have 10 followers each. You have 111 working together.
A good leader needs to be able to make decisions, has to communicate effectively with the group, has to be able to plan, has to be able to think - especially for the best benefit of the group, be honest, honourable, trustworthy and being charismatic, likeable does not hurt. But charm alone is not enough in a survival scenario. Politicians DO NOT make good leaders in time of crisis. Their nature of back room, underhanded, backstabbing deals that benefit them first and the group second will not work in the new world order.
I guess that is it for now. Just some food for thought. Who would you prefer to share your foxhole with??
Mountainman.
Sorry but I'm a federal correctional officer and I have to say there are far more than 20 inmates per unit in the prison system. I've seen lots of people with leadership abilities and I've seen lots of these people with great abilities fold under pressure. I've seen lots of quiet "behind the scenes" people step up in dire circumstances and take the reins and do well with it. I've been a leader in alot of situations. I used to pride myself in it. Now I sit in the background and watch others walk the line with leadership. We have all these qualities in our heads on what makes a leader. Remember as humans we are fallible, The best quality a leader or any person can have is to communicate...listening skills are essential, being able to communicate your ideas and to have humility, the ability to leave your opinions at the door and be objective. Their are alot of people in leadership positions that aren't there because of skills or abilities. Natural leadership will only take you so far. Only when the rubber hits the road will you be able to tell if a person truly is a good leader.
JimyB,
How are things tonight in the big house??
I appreciate your input.
Of course, when you are in school they try to teach a perfect world type of view of the world, even the world inside concrete walls trimmed in razor wire. Correctional facilities are for the most part outdated and there is no budget to keep them up to date to house a growing population. So, double and triple bunking becomes acceptable even though that starts to endanger working conditions for the correctional staff. Politics, budgets are put ahead of officer safety.
Your comments, I agree with. Leadership is not black and white. But many who visit this Forum and many other forums, who want to start a prepper group do not have any formal instruction on group dynamics nor leadership training. This thread I believe has provided a lot of information to those who are new to the subject. The more people who post on this thread provide a more rounded view of the topic of leadership. You are very observant that Natural leadership is a limited resource and is not the end all, be all. But in time of crisis, the natural leaders will rise to the calling whether they want to or not. Good leaders are hard to find, but well worth the time to develop and encourage. A good leader is easy to follow.
Keep safe,
Mountainman.
Charismatic Leadership is usually the type in a SHTF scenario. IMO.