Extreme Ownership

II – The Laws of Combat

Chapter 5 – Cover & Move

Sniper Overwatch – The mission was for SEALs from Charlie Platoon and Task Unit Bruiser to provide sniper overwatch while our SEAL combat advisors would manage a platoon of Iraqi soldiers participating in the clearance on the ground. The plan was to set up two separate SEAL sniper overwatch positions (OP1 & OP2) to cover the U.S. Army and Iraqi Army as they entered buildings block by block across the sector. Within about two hours of sunrise, the Army Soldiers, Jocko, and the small team of SEAL combat advisors with their Iraqi soldiers had cleared every building in the sector. That was also a testament to good planning and execution by the U.S. forces involved and a tribute to the effectiveness of the SEAL sniper overwatch teams. With the cordon and search force back at COP Falcon, both SEAL overwatch teams—OP1 and OP2—had accomplished our objectives. Our standard operating procedure (SOP) dictated we remain in position until nightfall and then patrol back to base under cover of darkness, when we could more safely move through the dangerous streets.

For OP2 remaining in our current position  presented significant risks. The enemy knew where we were, and there was a high probability that with enough time, enemy fighters would mount a serious attack. We can stay where we are and wait until nightfall. Or we can quickly break out of here and foot patrol back to COP Falcon. If we stayed in position until dark following SOP, we would almost certainly have to fend off increasingly violent enemy attacks for another eight to ten hours. Should those attacks exploit the significant weaknesses of our defences, we might be pinned down and unable to depart without calling in massive fire support and putting more forces at even greater risk to bail us out. If we pulled out on foot immediately and quickly patrolled back to COP Falcon, we would probably get shot at. But it would likely be a hasty attack that the muj wouldn’t have enough time to coordinate for maximum effectiveness. No options were good options. We had to choose the least bad option. I had to make a call. I decided to pull out. Our OP2 radioman contacted OP1, the other sniper overwatch team, to tell them we were moving back on foot to the combat outpost. OP1 was only 300 meters from COP Falcon. They radioed that they, too, were pulling out. Our focus was entirely on getting OP2 moving out in a hurry. Within a few minutes, everyone was ready. We quickly briefed the team and emphasized that we needed to move fast. Within our OP2 squad, we had four elements of smaller teams. One team covered, their weapons trained on threats, while the other team moved. Then those teams reversed roles. In this way, the teams leapfrogged in bounds, constantly utilizing Cover and Move to ensure we were prepared to fend off an attack as we maneuvered through the streets.

For about five hundred meters, OP2 moved along steadily, making our way back toward COP Falcon. Then all hell broke loose. Fully automatic gunfire erupted. Insurgent fighters had followed us and heavily engaged us with AK47s. We responded immediately. The courageous SEAL machine had provided the cover fire that enabled us to move safely. We were breathing hard after running and gunning in the late morning heat with heavy gear. But we had all survived without a scratch. The LPO and I smiled and laughed at each other. We had just gotten into a solid gunfight on the street, hammered the enemy, and brought everyone back unscathed. It was awesome. We were fired up.

At COP Falcon, the Chief wasn’t happy. He asked, Why didn’t you leave the other SEAL sniper overwatch position OP1 in place to cover your movement back here to COP Falcon? I understood that his logic was correct. I was so focused on our Squad’s dilemma I didn’t think to coordinate with the other team OP1 to work together. The first rule of Combat Cover and Move.  I had broken it. We used Cover and Move within my immediate OP2 team, but I had forgotten about the greater team and support available. We had operated independently, failing to support or help each other. Had we left OP1 in place, they would have had an excellent vantage from the high ground and could have covered our OP2 movement much of the way.  It was a rude awakening for me. I had become so immersed in my team’s details, decision points, and immediate challenges that I had forgotten about the other team, what they could do for us and how we might help them.

PRINCIPLE – Cover & Move – It means teamwork. All elements within the greater team are crucial and must work together to accomplish the mission, mutually supporting one another for that singular purpose. Departments and groups within the team must break down silos, depend on each other and understand who depends on them. It falls on leaders to continually keep perspective on the strategic mission and remind the team that they are part of the greater team and the strategic mission is paramount.

Pointing fingers and blaming others contributes to further dissension between teams and individuals. These individuals and teams must instead find a way to work together, communicate with each other, and mutually support one another. The focus must always be on how to accomplish the mission best.

“The enemy is out there,” I said, pointing out the window to the world beyond. “The enemy is all the other competing companies in your industry vying for your customers. The enemy is not in here, inside the walls of this corporation. You must overcome the ‘us versus them’ mentality and work together, mutually supporting one another. Engage with other teams and build a personal relationship with them. Explain to them what you need from them and why and ask them what you can do to help them get you what you need.

Chapter 6 – Simple

Combat Outpost – COP Falcon A massive explosion shook the walls of the building in the middle of COP Falcon—seconds later, another explosion. Insurgents had lobbed 120 mm mortar rounds smack-dab into the center of COP Falcon with deadly accuracy. A third 120 mm mortar hit the roof of the building but thankfully it didn’t explode.

One of the primary objectives in placing this combat outpost in the heart of enemy territory was to show the local populace that we, the coalition of American and Iraqi soldiers, were here to stay. This could not be accomplished by sitting and hiding inside heavily reinformed bases. The troops had to go out and into the neighbourhoods surrounding the COP. They had to conduct a presence patrol. It required a group of soldiers to push into enemy-held areas to establish their presence among the populace. The mission called for a combined operation, including Iraqi and American Soldiers working together. A U.S. Army officer (MiTT) planned to lead a group of Iraqi soldiers into the neighbourhood. He was excited to get out on patrol with his Iraqi soldiers. He had been working and training with them for several months. He outlined a path that snaked through treacherous city streets and stretched across Central Ramadi to the next U.S. combat outpost to COP Eagle’s Nest. This was two kms through some of the most hostile territory in Iraq held by a determined and vicious enemy.

None of the roads had been cleared by the U.S. minesweeping teams so no doubt massive IEDs lay buried along the route. His route passed through battlespace owned by different American units, including two U.S. Army companies. Each had unique standard operating procedures and utilized separate radio nets. That would mean coordinating with all these units prior to launch and setting up contingency plans for help should something go wrong. I suggested the MiTT leader to keep things simple. The MiTT leader responded it’s just a patrol. How complex can it get? I told him we could simplify this by cutting down the distance and keeping the entire patrol inside the battlespace owned by one company, Team Bulldog. This will be only a few hundred meters out. The MiTT leader agreed to a shorter, simpler route.

Twelve minutes after the patrol stepped off, gunfire rang out. Volleys of gunfire rattled back and forth between the patrol and enemy fighters. When direct radio communication was established, the team spoke in simple clear instructions informing us that there were two wounded. Need CASEVAC and fire support. Within minutes, Team Bulldog’s tanks and M113 arrived at building J51. At the sight of the tanks, most of the enemy fighters quickly disappeared into the urban landscape, hiding their weapons to blend in among the civilian populace. The patrol made it back to COP Falcon. the MiTT leader was clearly shaken.

Had this gunfight happened where he had originally planned to go—much deeper into enemy territory, out of the range of COP Falcon, with separate supporting Army or Marine elements with different radio frequencies and operating procedures – it would likely have been catastrophic. 

PRINCIPLE – Combat, like anything in life, has inherent layers of complexities. Simplifying as much as possible is crucial to success. When plans and orders are too complicated, people may not understand them. And when things go wrong and inevitably do go wrong, complexity compounds issues that can spiral out of control into total disaster.

Plans and orders must be communicated in a simple, clear, and concise manner. Everyone who is part of the mission must know and understand his or her role in the mission and what to do in the event of likely contingencies. As a leader, it doesn’t matter how well you feel you have presented the information or communicated an order, plan, tactic, or strategy. If your team doesn’t get it, you have not kept things simple and have failed. You must brief to ensure the lowest common denominator on the team understands.

Chapter 7 – Prioritize and Execute

Our SEAL platoon had chosen this building for its commanding views of the area. Most important, it was right in the enemy’s backyard. Here, insurgent fighters had enjoyed complete safe haven and freedom of movement. The frequent and intense onslaught of enemy machine gun fire and RPG rockets now served as a testament that our presence here was most unwelcome. We had stirred up a hornet’s nest, but it was exactly where we wanted to be. Our plan is to go where the bad guys would least expect us to seriously disrupt their program, kill as many enemy fighters as possible, and decrease their ability to attack nearby U.S. Army and Marine combat outposts. We wanted the enemy to know they could no longer enjoy safe haven here. This neighbourhood was no longer theirs. We owned this ground.

The apartment building our SEAL platoon now occupied provided an excellent tactical position. With a higher vantage point above the building around us, it’s thick concrete walls provided some protection from enemy fire. There was only one problem: the building had only one entrance and exit from the second story. the narrow stairway leading down to the street. there was no way of watching the entrance or the street surrounding it during daylight without exposure to enemy fire. This meant the enemy could possibly place IEDs near the entrance while we were inside and detonate them on us as we excited. Since we didn’t have enough manpower to watch the entrance, we planned a meticulous sweep for explosives before our anticipated departure later that night. The enemy fighters attacked from multiple directions throughout the day, and SEAL snipers engaged and killed many of them. The attacks diminished as the day faded and the sun dipped below the horizon. Gunfire and explosions subsided.

Our SEAL platoon and Iraqi soldiers packed our gear and prepared to depart. Remembering the vulnerability of the single exit to the street, our two EOD bomb technicians went to work. Peering over the second-story balcony through their night-vision goggles, they scanned the area around the exit door. Something was out of place. It looked suspicious.  It was most unwelcome news, as the stairway to the street was our only easy means of departure. We needed to figure out another way out of here.  We decided to break the concrete wall of the second floor with no windows and doors and go through it. A handful of SEALs rotated every few minutes as they hammered through the thick wall.  It was painfully slow, but we needed a hole big enough for operators with rucksacks and heavy gear to walk through onto the flat rooftop of the one-story building next door.  The EOP operators, through meticulous investigation, uncovered two 130mm rocket projectiles whose nose cones were packed with Semtex, a plastic explosive. the EOD operators notified me and waited for the command to “pop smoke” and ignite the time fuse that would initiate the charge. After 20 minutes of furious sledgehammering, they broke through the concrete wall. I gave the command to pop smoke. The EOD tech popped smoke and started a stopwatch that counted down to detonation. We now had only a few minutes to get everyone to a safe distance from what would be a significant blast. As we pushed through the jagged hole in the concrete and onto the dusty rooftop of the adjacent building we decided to take a head count. Suddenly a SEAL moving along the edge of the rooftop steps ahead of me crashed through the roof and fell twenty feet to the ground, landing hard with a loud smack on the concrete. When we made contact via his radio there was no response.

This was bad. We were dreadfully exposed on a wide-open rooftop with no cover, surrounded by high, tactically superior positions in the heart of an extremely dangerous enemy-controlled area. The clock was ticking on an explosive charge that would set off a huge IED blast. We didn’t have a total head count to ensure all our personnel were out of the building. And now one of our SEALs lay helplessly alone. The massive pressure of the situation bore down on me. How could we possibly tackle so many problems at once?

 Prioritize and Execute. Even the greatest of battlefield leaders could not handle an array of challenges simultaneously without being overwhelmed. They risked failing at them all. I had to remain calm, step back from my immediate emotional reaction, and determine the greatest priority for the team. Then, rapidly direct the team to attack that priority. Once the wheels were in motion and the team’s full resources were engaged in that highest priority effort, I could then determine the next priority, focus the team’s effort there, and then move on to the next priority. I could not allow myself to be overwhelmed. I had to relax, look around and make a call.

Amid the noise, mayhem, and uncertainty of the outcome, we practiced remaining calm, mentally stepping back from the situation, assessing the scenario, deciding what must be done, and making a call. We had learned to Prioritize and Execute.

Though I wanted to help the wounded man, the best way for us to do that was first to address the threats all around and above us. We needed SEAL shooters in covering positions with weapons ready to engage any enemy threat to the men on the exposed rooftop. Within moments, we had weapons and machine gunners in key covering positions and had security set.  Second the next priority: find a way down to get everyone off the exposed rooftop and get to our wounded man. We had to break through the locked iron gate to a stairwell and reach to the wounded man.   Third priority: Ensure a full head count of all personnel and confirm all including the injured SEAL have exited the building to a safe distance from the imminent explosion.  Thankfully the  SEAL operator had fallen on his rucksack which helped break his fall. He was shaken up, with a nasty laceration on his elbow but was otherwise ok.

PRINCIPLE – On the battlefield, countless problems compound in a snowball effect, every challenge complex in its own right, each demanding attention. But a leader must remain calm and make the best decisions possible. To do this, SEAL combat leaders utilize Prioritize and Execute. We verbalize this principle with this direction: “Relax, look around, make a call.”

Even the most competent leaders can be overwhelmed if they try to tackle multiple problems or tasks simultaneously. The team will likely fail at each of those tasks. Instead, leaders must determine the highest priority task and execute it. When overwhelmed, fall back upon this principle: Prioritize and Execute.

Through careful contingency planning, a leader can anticipate likely challenges that could arise during execution and effectively respond to those challenges before they happen. Staying ahead of the curve prevents a leader from being overwhelmed when pressure is applied and enables greater decisiveness. Suppose the team has been briefed and understands what actions to take through such likely contingencies. In that case, the team can then rapidly execute when those problems arise, even without specific direction from leaders. Priorities can rapidly shift and change. When this happens, communication of that shift to the rest of the team, both up and down the chain of command, is critical.

To implement Prioritize and Execute in any business, team, or organization, a leader must:

• Evaluate the highest priority problem.
• Lay out the highest priority effort for your team in simple, clear, and concise terms.
• Develop and determine a solution and seek input from key leaders and the team where possible.
• Direct the execution of that solution, focusing all efforts and resources toward this priority task.
• Move on to the next highest priority problem. Repeat. when priorities shift within the team, pass situational awareness up and down the chain.
• Don’t let the focus on one priority cause target fixation. Maintain the ability to see other problems developing and rapidly shift as needed.

When you have too many initiatives going, you won’t move the needle on them when you are spread too thin. My suggestion is to focus on one, and when that one is completed, or at least has some real momentum, then you move on to the next one and focus on it. When that one is done, move on to the next, and so on, until you have knocked them all out.”

My job was to command and control thirty-plus SEALs and their partner force of Iraqi soldiers, but I could only manage this effectively through Decentralized Command. On the battlefield, I expected my subordinate leaders to do just that: lead. I had groomed and trained them to make decisions. I trusted that their assessment of their situations and decisions would be aggressive in pursuit of mission accomplishment, well thought out, tactically sound, and ultimately further our strategic mission. They confirmed that trust over and over again throughout our months in Ramadi. they led with authority and courage, making rapid, sequential, life-and-death decisions in harrowing situations with limited information. I trusted them, and they earned that trust through months of training, of getting it wrong and learning from their mistakes as I watched them closely and coached them in the leadership principles I had learned through fifteen years in the SEAL Teams. Both of my platoon commanders were relatively new to the Teams, but luckily, they were both eager to learn, lead, and, most importantly, humble yet confident to command.

Once we were in Ramadi, I could no longer be with them to look over their shoulders and guide them. I had to empower them to lead. Pushing the decision-making down to the subordinate, frontline leaders within the task unit was critical to our success. This Decentralized Command structure allowed me, as the commander, to maintain focus on the bigger picture: coordinate friendly assets and monitor enemy activity. It takes time and effort to perfect Decentralized Command. For any leader, it requires tremendous trust and confidence in those frontline leaders to clearly understand the strategic mission and ensure that their immediate tactical decision ultimately contributes to accomplishing the overarching goals. Frontline leaders must also have trust and confidence in their senior leaders to know they are empowered to make decisions and that their senior leaders will back them up.

My leaders learned they must rely on their subordinate leaders to take charge of their smaller teams within the team and allow them to execute based on a good understanding of the broader mission (known as Commander’s Intent) and standard operating procedures. That was an effective Decentralized Command. So, we divided into small teams of four to six SEALs, a manageable size for a leader to control.

The Junior leaders learned that they were expected to make decisions. They couldn’t ask, what do I do? Instead, they had to state, “This is what I am going to do.”

As they had been trained, the senior leader of each SEAL sniper overwatch element made their decisions based on the underlying commander’s guidance that drove our overwatch operations:

1. Cover as many possible enemy ingress and egress routes as possible.
2. Set up positions that mutually support each other.
3. Pick solid fighting positions that could be defended against heavy enemy attacks for an extended period if necessary.

They were the ones who were on the scene to make the call while I was located over a kilometre away at COP Falcon, tracking the mission alongside the U.S. Army commanders.

The leaders did not call me and ask me what they should do. Instead, they told me what they were going to do. I trusted them to adjust and adapt the plan to unforeseen circumstances while staying within the parameters of the guidance I had given them and our standard operating procedures. I trusted them to lead. My leaders running their teams and handling the tactical decisions made my job much easier, enabling me to focus on the bigger picture.

PRINCIPLE – Humans generally cannot manage more than six to ten people, particularly when things go sideways, and inevitable contingencies arise. Teams must be divided into manageable elements of four to five operators with a designated leader. Those leaders must understand the mission’s ultimate goal—the Commander’s Intent. Junior leaders must be empowered to decide on key tasks to accomplish that mission as effectively and efficiently as possible.

Every tactical-level team leader must understand what to do and why they are doing it. If frontline leaders do not understand why, they must ask their boss to clarify the why. They must communicate with senior leaders to recommend decisions outside their authority and pass critical information up the chain so the senior leadership can make informed strategic decisions. To ensure this, senior leaders must constantly communicate and push information what we call in the military “situational awareness”- to their subordinate leaders. Likewise, junior leaders must push situational awareness up the chain to their senior leaders to inform them of crucial information affecting strategic decision-making.

Some senior leaders are so far removed from the troops executing on the frontline that they become ineffective. These leaders might give the appearance of control, but they have no idea what their troops are doing and cannot effectively direct their teams. We call this trait “battlefield aloofness.” This attitude creates a significant disconnect between leadership and the troops, and such a leader’s team will struggle to accomplish their mission effectively.

Sometimes, the officer gets so far forward that he gets sucked into every room clearance, continually entering rooms and engaging targets. When that happens, he gets focused on the minutia of what’s happening in the immediate room, loses situational awareness of what is happening with the rest of the team and can no longer provide effective command and control. Other times, the officer gets stuck in the back of the train on cleanup duty. When that happens, he is too far in the rear to know what is happening up front and can’t direct his assault force.

The right amount of involvement – the proper position for them was somewhere in the middle. Also, leaders should not be stuck in any particular position. Leaders must be free to move to where they are most needed, which changes throughout the course of an operation. Understanding proper positioning as a leader is key to effective Decentralized Command. Trust is not blindly given. It must be built over time. Situations sometimes require the boss to walk away from a problem and let junior leaders solve it, even if the boss knows he might solve it more efficiently. It is more important that the junior leaders are allowed to make decisions—and backed up even if they don’t make them correctly. Open conversations build trust. Overcoming stress and challenging environments builds trust. Working through emergencies and seeing how people react builds trust. Junior leaders must know that the boss will back them up even if they make a decision that may not result in the best outcome as long as it was made to achieve the strategic objective.

III- Sustaining Victory

Chapter 9 – Plan

Hostage Rescue – It was a hostage rescue mission, the ultimate high-stakes operation: not only bad guys to kill but an innocent victim to save. We had trained for missions like this, but they were rare. A young Iraqi teenager had been kidnapped. They demanded his family to pay 50k ransom and threatened to behead the young man otherwise. These terrorist kidnappers were evil people and could be counted on to carry out their gruesome threats.

We needed to put together a plan in a hurry, brief that plan to our troops, and launch as soon as possible. Our plan had to maximize the chance of mission success while minimizing the risk to our SEALs, EOD bomb technicians and our partner force of Iraqi soldiers.

With the clock ticking, we analyzed the mission and devised a solid plan. A small team of SEAL snipers would clandestinely move into position some distance away to maintain eyes on the target and cover our assault force as we approached the target building. Our assault force would then enter the house, clear all rooms, eliminate threats, and (with any luck) recover the hostage. Jocko would remain with the vehicles and coordinate supporting assets until the target building was clear. I briefed the team and gave my closing comments. The three most important things the team should remember and keep first and foremost in their minds.

1. Maintain the element of surprise; stealth is more important than speed as we approach this target. 2) After the breach, once we make entry, speed is most important. Let’s get this target cleared and secured in a hurry. 3) Good PID (positive identification) of any potential threats. Be wary not to injure the hostage. And be ready to render medical assistance.

Jacko gave his closing comments, “If you have to pull the trigger, make sure the people you kill are bad.”

The team, as planned, caught them completely by surprise, executed the plan with precision, and rescued the hostage. Our plan worked like a charm, a testament to the solid mission planning skills we had developed in Task Unit Bruiser. We also had the humility to lean on the expertise of the good U.S. Army major and his Soldiers who lived and fought in this area for an entire year.

We got intel that there were IEDs, but we didn’t have to replan our rescue because we had already planned for it. We had implemented specific steps to mitigate the risk of potential IEDs in and around the target building. You could never assume that such hazards weren’t waiting for you on a target. You had to assume they were, plan for them on every operation, and mitigate the risk of those threats as much as possible. To assume otherwise was a failure of leadership. That was what mission planning was all about never taking anything for granted, preparing for likely contingencies, and maximizing the chance of mission success while minimizing the risk to the troops executing the operation.

PRINCIPLE – What’s the mission? Planning begins with mission analysis. Leaders must identify clear directives for the team. Once they understand the mission, they can impart this knowledge to their key leaders and frontline troops tasked with executing it. The mission must be carefully refined and simplified to be explicitly clear and specifically focused to achieve the greater strategic vision of which that mission is a part. Different courses of action must be explored on how best to accomplish the mission—with the manpower, resources, and supporting assets available. Leaders must delegate the planning process down the chain as much as possible to key subordinate leaders. Team leaders within the greater team and frontline tactical-level leaders must have ownership of their tasks within the overall plan and mission.

While the senior leader supervises the entire planning process by team members, he or she must be careful not to get bogged down in the details. Senior leaders should stand back and be the tactical genius—to identify weaknesses or holes in the plan that those immersed in the details might have missed. This enables leaders to fill in those gaps before execution.

The test for a successful brief is simple: Do the team and the supporting elements understand it?Some risks cannot be mitigated, and leaders must instead focus on those risks that can be controlled.

Post Operational Debrief. One must make time for this. The best teams constantly analyze their tactics and measure their effectiveness to adapt their methods and implement lessons learned for future missions. After each combat operation, the best SEAL units conduct a post-operational debrief. No matter how exhausted from an operation or how busy you are planning for the next mission, time is made for this debrief because lives and future mission success depend on it. A post-operational debrief examines all phases of an operation, from planning through execution, in a concise format. It addresses the following for the completed combat mission: What went right? What went wrong? How can we adapt our tactics to make us more effective and increase our advantage over the enemy? Such self-examination allows SEAL units to reevaluate, enhance, and refine what worked and what didn’t so that they can constantly improve.

A leader’s checklist for planning should include the following: • Analyze the mission. —Understand higher headquarters’ mission, Commander’s Intent, and end state (the goal). —Identify and state your Commander’s Intent and end state for the specific mission. • Identify personnel, assets, resources, and time available. • Decentralize the planning process. —Empower key leaders within the team to analyze possible courses of action. • Determine a specific course of action. —Lean toward selecting the simplest course of action. —Focus efforts on the best course of action. • Empower key leaders to develop the chosen course of action plan. • Plan for likely contingencies through each phase of the operation. • Mitigate risks that can be controlled as much as possible. • Delegate portions of the plan and brief to key junior leaders. —Stand back and be the tactical genius. Continually check and question the plan against emerging information to ensure it still fits the situation. • Brief the plan to all participants and supporting assets. —Emphasize the Commander’s Intent. —Ask questions and discuss and interact with the team to ensure they understand. • Conduct post-operational debrief after execution. —Analyze lessons learned and implement them in future planning.

Chapter 10 – Leading Up and Down the Chain of Command

Leading Down the Chain of Command As our time to leave approached one evening, we reminisced about the hundreds of combat operations our task unit had participated in and all that had happened. We had helped to eliminate many of their safe havens and deeply disrupted their freedom of movement. We had lost Marc Lee, Ryan Job, had lost his eyesight due to the damage he received as he was hit in the face by an enemy sniper. Mike Monsoor, on his last combat operation, dove on top of a grenade shielding his teammates around him from the bulk of the blast and sacrificed himself for them. Each of these fallen SEALs was a beloved teammate, friend, and brother. We will forever mourn their loss. As a leader, nothing had prepared me for that monumental burden I must forever carry for not bringing all my guys home to their families. As we reminisced, I realized that the enemy was still there and was capable, deadly and determined to fight back for control of the city. What lasting impact did we truly have here? I wondered.

When we got home, Jocko took a map of Ramadi and built an overlay that depicted the geographic areas that had been completely under enemy control—al Qaeda battlespace—when we first arrived. These were areas that, when I arrived in Ramadi, the SEAL platoon commander who had spent the previous six months there pointed to and said to me: “Don’t go in there. You will all get killed, and no one [U.S. forces] will even be able to reach you to get you out.” From this map of Ramadi, Jocko built a PowerPoint slide that depicted how the Ready First Combat Team’s Seize, Clear, Hold, Build strategy systematically, through months of effort, established a permanent presence in the enemy-held neighbourhoods and pushed out the enemy fighters.

When Jocko showed me the slide he had built, it all came together for me for the first time. Though I had been directly involved in the planning of almost all of these missions, had been on the ground leading a team of operators, coordinated with the other elements on the battlefield, and had written detailed reports of what had happened after each mission, I still had not linked them all together nor considered the strategic impact they had had. But now, Jocko’s brief captured in simple terms all that had been accomplished in the Battle of Ramadi. “Damn,” I said to Jocko. “I never really put it all together like that before.” This one slide made it immediately clear why we had done what we had done.

For a young SEAL shooter with a minimal role in the planning process who was out working on his weapons and gear, conducting maintenance on our vehicles, or building demolition charges for the breacher, he walked into our mission briefs wondering: What are we doing next? He had no context for why we were doing the operation or how the next tactical mission fit into the bigger picture of stabilizing and securing Ramadi. I realized now that, as their leader, I had failed to explain it to them. There was some level of strategic perspective and comprehension that would only come with time and reflection. However, I could have done a far better job as a leader to understand the strategic impact of our operations and passed this insight to my troops.

Looking back on Task Unit Bruiser’s deployment to Ramadi, I realized that the SEALs in Charlie Platoon who suffered the worst combat fatigue, whose attitudes grew progressively more negative as the months of heavy combat wore on, who most questioned the level of risk we were taking on operations—they all had the least ownership of the planning for each operation. Conversely, the SEAL operators who remained focused and positive, believed in what we were doing, and were eager to continue and would have stayed on beyond our six-month deployment if they could—had some ownership of the planning process in each operation. Even if they only controlled a small piece of the plan. The SEALs with little or no ownership were somewhat in the dark. As a result, they had a harder time understanding

Looking back, one of the greatest lessons I learned was that I could have done a far better job leading down the chain of command. I should have given greater ownership of plans to the troops—especially those who were negative and weren’t fully committed to the mission. I should have taken the time to understand better how what we were doing contributed to the strategic mission. I should have asked those questions to Jocko and up my chain of command.

PRINCIPLE – Leading Down the Chain Junior members of the team—the tactical level operators—are rightly focused on their specific jobs. They must be to accomplish the tactical mission. They do not need the full knowledge and insight of their senior leaders, nor do the senior leaders need the intricate understanding of the tactical level operators’ jobs. Senior leaders explain to their junior leaders and troops executing the mission how their role contributes to big-picture success. Frontline leaders and troops can then connect the dots between what they do daily—the day-to-day operations—and how that impacts the company’s strategic goals.

Leading Up the Chain of Command I received an email from the CO asking, “Did you coordinate an appropriate QRF?” I found this question almost an insult.  I immediately thought: We are busting our butts, risking our lives and kicking some serious ass on the toughest battlefield in Iraq. And I must answer idiotic questions like whether we have a QRF lined up?” The QRF, or quick reaction force, consisted of U.S. Soldiers or Marines who would respond with armoured vehicles, a couple of dozen troops, and heavy firepower when our SEALs got into a serious bind and were pinned down by enemy forces. Many of us in Task Unit Bruiser had been to Iraq previously, and a few had seen some decent combat. On those previous deployments, activating the QRF was virtually unheard of. But here in Ramadi, it was a common occurrence. “Do they really think we would do any type of operation here without a significant QRF package fully coordinated and on standby?” I asked. “We even set up QRFs for our administrative convoys. This is Ramadi. Going out there without a QRF would be suicide.” The amount of information we had to gather, and the required paperwork we were forced to submit just to get approval for each combat mission was staggering.

The CO and his staff weren’t bad guys out to make our lives harder and stifle our mission. They were good people trying to do their jobs the best they could and give us what we needed to accomplish our mission. But they weren’t on the battlefield with us. They didn’t fully understand the threats we dealt with daily and how hard we were working to mitigate every risk we possibly could.  Jacko explained that the CO has to approve every mission. If we want to operate, we need to put him in his comfort zone so that he approves them and we can execute them. We need his support to get additional approvals from higher up the chain. So, we can complain about this all day and do nothing or push the necessary information up the chain so that the CO is comfortable and approves our proposal.

“We can’t expect them to be mind readers,” Jocko said. “The only way they will get this information is from what we pass to them, the reports we write and the phone calls we make. And we aren’t doing a good enough job if they still have major questions.”

“Well, they should come out here then,” I responded. “They should,” Jocko answered. “But have we told them they should or scheduled a convoy to pick them up? I know I haven’t,” Jocko admitted. “We are here. We are on the ground. We need to push situational awareness up the chain,” Jocko said. “If they have questions, it is our fault for not properly communicating the necessary information. We have to lead them.” “They are in charge of us.”

We invited the CO, our command master chief, and other staff to visit us in Ramadi and offered to take them along on combat operations. Our command master chief accompanied us on several missions. The more information we passed, the more our CO and staff understood what we were trying to accomplish. He better appreciated our detailed planning efforts, how we coordinated our quick reaction forces and the substantial lengths to which we went to mitigate the risks. The CO grew more comfortable with our combat operations. He and his staff developed trust in us. As a result, all the submitted combat missions received approval, which allowed Charlie Platoon and Task Unit Bruiser to greatly impact the battlefield.

PRINCIPLE – Leading UP the Chain If your boss isn’t making a decision in a timely manner or providing necessary support for you and your team, don’t blame the boss. First, blame yourself. Examine what you can do to better convey the critical information for decisions to be made and support allocated. Leading up the chain of command requires tactful engagement with the immediate boss to obtain the decisions and support necessary to enable your team to accomplish its mission and ultimately win. To do this, a leader must push situational awareness up the chain of command.

Reexamine what you can do to better clarify, educate, influence, or convince that person to give you what you need to win. The major factors to be aware of when leading up and down the chain of command are these:

• Take responsibility for leading everyone in your world, subordinates and superiors.
• If someone isn’t doing what you want or need them to do, look in the mirror first and determine what you can do to improve this. Don’t ask your leader what you should do; tell them what you are going to do.

Chapter 11 – Decisiveness Amid Uncertainty

Sniper Overwatch – Take the Shot “I’ve got a guy with a scoped weapon in the second-story window of building 127,” said Chris. Chris Kyle was a lead sniper, the most experienced sniper in the platoon and one of the best in the SEAL Teams. Chris Kyle was a great sniper because he practiced Extreme Ownership of his craft. Intimately involved in planning and scouting potential sniper overwatch positions, he put himself in the right place at the right time to maximize his effectiveness. While others might get bored and lose focus after an hour or two of staring through the reticle of their sniper scope, Chris maintained discipline and stayed vigilant. He was lucky, but more often than not, he made his luck. Chris or any SEAL were cleared to engage if they could positively identify a bad guy with a weapon committing a hostile act. The fact that Chris asked meant the certainty of hostile intent was questioned. Can you PID? I asked. Just saw the dark silhouette of a man with a scoped weapon for a split second replied Chris.

Killing an enemy sniper, who had likely killed our own, would exact some measure of vengeance and protect American lives. But there were friendlies—U.S. Soldiers—throughout this area, so we had to be sure.

I got on the radio and requested Team Warrior’s company commander. He was a respected leader and an outstanding soldier.  “Warrior, this is Red Bull,2 I said when he came up on the net. “We saw a man with a scoped weapon in the second story of building 127. Can you confirm you don’t have any personnel in that building?” “Negative,” the commander replied. We don’t have anyone in that building. My soldiers had cleared through that area an hour or so before. “Request you engage,” said the company commander.

Chris spots the guy again.  I called the Team Warrior’s company commander again and told him that. “Take that guy out,” he responded. We certainly did not want any of Warrior’s Soldiers to get killed or wounded. We were here to prevent such attacks, and I felt pressured to comply. Was it a bad guy, or wasn’t it? I couldn’t say with any certainty. But I had to make a decision. I thought, what if we don’t take that shot, and Warrior Soldiers get killed because we failed to act? That would be horrible. It would be a heavy burden to bear. On the other hand, I thought, what if we take this shot, and it turns out to be a good guy—a U.S. Soldier—in that window? That outcome would be the worst of all. I knew I could never live with myself if that happened. I remembered my boyhood days when my father taught me: know your target and what is beyond it. That made the decision all too clear. I decided not to take the risk. Too many friendlies in the area, and we can’t PID. I recommended to send some soldiers to reclear the building. Warrior company commander wasn’t too happy. I couldn’t blame him for his frustration.

But part of being decisive was knowing and understanding that some decisions, while immediately impactful, can be quickly reversed or altered; other decisions, like shooting another human being, cannot be undone. I decided not to engage.

Suddenly, ten Soldiers from Warrior Company burst out of the door of a building and dashed across the street. Immediately, all became clear! “Halt the clearance team and return to COP,” I directed Warrior’s company commander over the net. Instantly, I recognized our error. Chris and I had been looking one block farther than we had realized. Instead of looking at the building, we thought was building 127 on our battle map, we were looking at one of the buildings where U.S. Soldiers from Warrior were gathered. Had we succumbed to the pressure, Chris would have put a large calibre round into an American soldier, almost certainly killing him. Regardless of who pulled the trigger, the responsibility would have been mine as the leader in charge. Living with such a thing on my conscience would have been hell. For me, the war would have been over. It would have undone all the great work we accomplished, the many U.S. Soldiers and Marines we had saved.

PRINCIPLE – Leaders cannot be paralyzed by fear. That results in inaction. Leaders must act decisively amid uncertainty; to make the best decisions based on only the immediate information available. There is no 100% right solution. The picture is never complete. Leaders must be comfortable with this and be able to make decisions promptly, then be ready to adjust those decisions quickly based on evolving situations and new information.

The incomplete picture principle applies to leadership. While business leaders may not generally face life-or-death situations, they are certainly under intense pressure. With capital at risk, markets in flux, and competitors actively working to outmaneuver opponents, professional careers and paychecks are at stake. Outcomes are never certain; success is never guaranteed. Even so, business leaders must be comfortable in the chaos and act decisively amid such uncertainty. To succeed, leaders must be comfortable under pressure and act on logic, not emotion. This is a critical component of victory.

Chapter 12 : Discipline Equals Freedom

We had trained extensively to patrol through cities, breach doors, clear buildings, and capture or kill bad guys. We had very little training on how to search buildings for intelligence and properly collect evidence. But how hard could it be? On our platoon’s first few operations, we did what any rowdy group of highly trained, armed young men would do: we ransacked the place. While the terrorists proved highly adept at hiding weapons and evidence, SEALs showed particular skill at breaking things to find what had been hidden. We flipped over furniture, emptied desks and dresser drawers onto the floor, and ripped down curtains and pictures from the walls. We smashed anything that looked like it might have some hiding space, like televisions, cabinets, and radios. We created such a mess that we had to go through everything again to double-check what had been searched. While we often found the evidence or intelligence we were looking for, on several occasions, critical intelligence and evidence were missed or left behind because no specific person had been designated responsible for its collection. The whole search process took substantial time, generally around forty-five minutes to complete.

After we had conducted several missions like this, a new Iraqi court system imposed stricter requirements for collected evidence, including a documented chain of custody, the required paperwork for each item and a written explanation of where exactly the evidence had come from—right down to which room in which building. I tasked my assistant commander with creating a more efficient search procedure for evidence to ensure compliance with the new court requirements. The young SEAL was fired up to lead and took the assignment seriously.

It was a simple plan and a systematic method to enhance our effectiveness at searching for evidence. The plan designated a search team with specific individuals responsible for specific tasks: one would sketch the house and room layout, another would label each room with a number, and another would video and photograph evidence where it was found. Each room would have a single SEAL operator who was designated the “room owner,” responsible for everything in the room. Searches would happen systematically in an organized manner, starting from the floor up so that we no longer had to search beneath what had been dumped on the floor. The room owner would collect any contraband or possible evidence found and place it into a plastic bag that he carried. He would label that bag so everyone would know who had found the evidence and in what room. When the search was completed for each room, the room owner put an “X” through the labelled room number so that everyone knew the room had been searched. Finally, the room owner would maintain possession of the bags he collected on target until we were back on base. He could personally hand them over to the intelligence exploitation team in an organized manner, following the chain of custody procedures.

We called in the platoon and ran through the plan. Since human beings tend to resist change, we met instant dissent. “This will take too long,” one SEAL complained. “Why are we changing the way we do this? If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!” another added. Virtually our entire SEAL platoon was vehemently against the new plan. So, I had to explain why. “Listen,” I started: “Who here has searched a room that had already been searched?” The platoon admitted just about everyone had. “Who here has looked into a messy bedroom on a target and wondered whether or not it has been searched?” Again, most everyone had done so. I continued, “Who searched the upstairs bathroom on our last target?” They looked at me with blank stares. I knew the answer and told them, “No one.” We missed it. The fact is we are not doing the best job. This method gives us a good standard operating procedure to utilize. With discipline and training, we will be much more effective in our search procedures than we have been.

We conducted a full-scale dress rehearsal. The first run took us half an hour. It was a lot, but it was still less than 45 minutes than it had taken before. We shifted to another building and ran through it again. Now people knew their jobs and better understood the flow. The 2nd run took 20 minutes. We moved to another building. This time 10 minutes. The guys were now believers. Implementing a disciplined search method drastically improved our effectiveness and efficiency. It meant we were less likely to miss key evidence and intelligence. It also improved our speed, which meant we could spend less time on target, which decreased the risk of enemy counterattack. Like clockwork, we cleared, secured, and searched the target building in less than 20 minutes. When we returned to our compound, all the evidence we gathered was placed into neat piles organized by room. Discipline equals freedom.

Discipline – Discipline starts every day when the first alarm clock goes off in the morning. The moment the alarm goes off is the first test; it sets the tone for the rest of the day. The test is not complex: when the alarm goes off, do you get out of bed, or do you lie there in comfort and fall back to sleep? If you have the discipline to get out of bed, you win—you pass the test. If you are mentally weak for that moment and let that weakness keep you in bed, you fail. Though it seems small, that weakness translates to more significant decisions. But if you exercise discipline, that, too, translates to more substantial elements of your life.

I learned in SEAL training that if I wanted any extra time to study the academic material we were given, prepare our room and my uniforms for an inspection or just stretch out aching muscles, I had to make that time because it did not exist on the written schedule. The only way you can make time is to get up early. That took discipline. Discipline was what made the difference between being good and being exceptional. I saw it with some of the older, experienced SEALs. Those who were at work before everyone else were the ones who were considered the best operators. That meant they had the best field craft, the most squared-away gear, they were the best shots, and they were the most respected. It is all tied into discipline. Intrinsic self-discipline—a matter of personal will. The best seals woke up early. They worked out every day. They studied tactics and technology. They practiced their craft.

The more disciplined standard operating procedures (SOPs) a team employs, the more freedom they have to practice Decentralized Command. Just as an individual excels when exercising self-discipline, a unit with tighter and more disciplined procedures and processes will excel and win.

We standardized the way we loaded vehicles. We standardized the way we mustered in a building on a target. We standardized the way we “broke out” (or exited) from buildings. We standardized the way we got head counts to ensure we had all of our troops. We even standardized our radio voice procedures so that the most critical information could be communicated quickly and clearly to the whole troop without confusion. There was a disciplined methodology to just about everything we did. Most importantly, when things went wrong and the fog of war set in, we fell back on our disciplined procedures to carry us through the toughest challenges on the battlefield.

PRINCIPLE – A good leader must be: • confident but not cocky; • courageous but not foolhardy; • competitive but a gracious loser; • attentive to details but not obsessed by them; • strong but have endurance; • a leader and follower; • humble not passive; • aggressive not overbearing; • quiet not silent; • calm but not robotic, logical but not devoid of emotions; • close with the troops but not so close that one becomes more important than another or more important than the good of the team; not so close that they forget who is in charge. • able to execute Extreme Ownership while exercising Decentralized Command. A good leader has nothing to prove but everything to prove.

As with many of the dichotomies of leadership, a person’s biggest strength can be his greatest weakness when he doesn’t know how to balance it. A leader’s best quality might be her aggressiveness, but she becomes reckless if she goes too far. A leader’s best quality might be his confidence, but when he becomes overconfident, he doesn’t listen to others.