Many Preppers plan on being what is referred to as “lone wolves”. That is, they plan on tackling the apocalypse all by themselves without the help of others. Other Preppers have formed some type of group. These groups can be made up of extended family, friends, neighbors or any combination thereof. History has shown us that humans are social beings in that we bond together to work together and form communities. Based on that history, one can surmise that when society ends as we know it, new organizations will be formed. What once was a group made up of your immediate family, your brothers’ family and a few cousins and their families will morph into a larger group as people with knowledge, skills and abilities (KSAs) that are needed or wanted by your group are added.
Prepper fiction is full of characters that manage/leader every aspect of their community’s post-SHTF life. If this was possible and feasible, we would not have the rank structure we do in the military, we would just have a general who would lead everyone. Span of Control should be considered in our planning. Sure, you can still be “in charge” but research shows that the average person can only manage 5-7 people in stressful environments. My community was having a large chemical spill drill and the local fire department asked me to provide some advice to the deputy chief who was going to be in charge of the incident since I was an Incident Command System (ICS) instructor. I stressed the need to quickly delegate tasks to others. Something that is hard to do if you are not used to doing it. During the drill a photograph was taken of him surrounded by at least 30 people, all with questions or wanting information, and he has the “deer in the head lights” look because he was overwhelmed since he did not delegate functions/operations/tasks to other people. We need to ensure we have a good expandable organizational structure and management system in place before SHTF.
Many of us may believe that after the collapse we would not take on any “new” people, except that Emergency Room Physician, or maybe a chemists, or veterinarian, or herbalist, or . . . and the list will go on and on, especially after the fall when holes in our preps start to become extremely evident and as we start to rebuild society. Logical thinking would not only consider the ramifications of taking on new people but also consider the ramifications of not taking on new people.
Think about the 1930s and the migration of scientists from Germany, many of whom took part in the development of the atomic bomb. Back up history for a minute and consider the ramifications of the Untied State not taking in those scientists, and instead they migrate to China and the Soviet Union. What do you think about that comrade? If we are to believe that post-TEOTWAWKI will be akin to Mad Max then we need to think about what happens if groups that are aggressive take in people whose knowledge and skills can latter impact you in negative ways. This is not to say only take in those with military skills but rather we should be looking at those who can help with restoring the means of production. History shows that those with the means of production enjoy more safety and security.
It is probably a safe bet to assume that the people showing up with the skills and knowledge you want will also come with their family as well. Let’s just make the assumption that you take on two people that have the KSAs you need. Let’s further assume that each one of those people have a spouse and two kids. That would be a total of an additional 8 people into your group. What are you going to do with the additional people? Most of us would ask ourselves if we could house and feed these extra bodies but more importantly, we should be asking ourselves how we can incorporate their KSAs and labor into our group to help improve our overall situation. As your ad hoc group grows, and it will based on history, how is the group going to organize and manage itself? Like everything we do as preppers to get ready for TEOTWAWKI, having a flexible organizational structure and plan to manage that organization should be thought out and developed before we are surrounded by a bunch of strangers looking for direction.
In this article we will explore incorporating the principles of Management by Objective (MBO) to help manage our post-TEOTWAWKI community. Since both the Army and first responder organizations use parts of the MBO theory within their organizational and management structures, it is a system that will be familiar by many in a post-SHTF world and also has a proven track record.
Organizational Structure Basics
First let’s look at a very basic organizational structure that the military and first responders use in their operations. In the Army they use four basic “sections”. They are the S1 which is the personnel and finance section, the S2 or the intelligence/planning apparatus, the S3 or the Operations section and the S4 or logistics section. Besides these sections you have the commander and one person assigned to be in charge of each section. This is a very simplistic outline but one that preppers may want to duplicate in both their pre and post SHTF activities. More about these sections will be mentioned later. Just like the military, first responders, through the use of ICS, have a commander, an operations section, planning section, logistics section and a finance/administration section.
Before we contemplate objectives, we should consider our goals. Goals can be very broad. Pre-SHTF goals might include “establish a food supply”, “develop a communications capability” or “develop a security system”. Goals for post-SHTF could be “establish 24-hour security”, “monitor communications”, or “establish and maintain situational awareness”. Once we have our goals, we can then move onto establishing our objectives.
Drucker’s SMART Legacy
In the 1950s Peter Drucker developed a management theory known as “Management by Objective”. The main points of management by objectives are that objectives are developed and shared with workers. Both workers and management then work cooperatively to develop ways to meet the company’s objectives. Drucker’s theory states that objectives need to be specific, measurable, action oriented, realistic and time sensitive or “SMART”. The SMART acronym is used by both the military and the Incident Command System that is used by first responders. How can preppers use SMART both pre and post TEOTWAWKI?
Let’s use the “SMART” acronym for helping us develop a robust food storage stockpile. First, we have to be specific in what we are wanting to accomplish with our food storage. Instead of saying “We want to store food” we could say “We want to store three years worth of food”. But even more specific than that might be “We want three years worth of food for four people to include enough normal groceries (can goods, freezer foods, et cetera) to last ine year, enough dry staples like rice, beans and pasta to span three years, and freeze-dried foods to span two years.” (The dry staples would be used in conjunction with the “normal” groceries and the freeze-dried foods).
Second, our objective has to be something that can be measurable. We can ascertain by serving sizes, calories and by the number of people we are planning for, if we have enough food for three years. Obscure statements like “we want enough food to survive SHTF” are not specific enough to determine whether we have accomplished our objective.
The “A” in SMART is action oriented or actionable. Words that end in “ing” are often used to show action. For our objective those words might include storing, buying, freeze drying, canning, planting, et cetera.
A Realistic Objective?
Is your objective “realistic”? If you are living paycheck to paycheck obtaining three years of food that includes two years of freeze-dried food in a short period of time may be un-realistic. Realistic means that you have an extremely high probability of accomplishing the task even with some unexpected challenges. All parts of the objective have to be realistic not just the time element we used in this example.
(To be concluded tomorrow, in Part 2.)
Thank you for bringing these organizational concepts to this forum. Re-establishing the “means of production” is crucial to the long-term survival of any people. The current standard of living (or anything remotely resembling it) requires a vast array of assets and skills. You can have the greatest nuclear engineer or neurosurgeon in your group, and by themselves that will accomplish almost nothing, toward having a working fission power producing plant, or the ability to treat a head injury with an epidural hematoma.
Wow. This is an awesome article filled with practical wisdom. I have learned a lot already. Thank you. Am looking forward to more.
I agree with what is said here,BUT, for some individuals like myself, there have always been, and always will be, Lone Wolves.
It’s in our DNA.
My experience with groups over the years, have always disappointed me.
I can, and will, trade with Groups, but not be part of one.
LoneSurvivor-
Let’s be frank- it isn’t in our DNA it is learned behavior, in our personality, and is our preference. I used to think being the alone wolf was the way to go. But when you go from being a novice and even intermediate prepper and you start focusing in on TEOTWAWKI you start to look at things differently. May I point out the “Army of One” slogan isn’t used anymore. When you call 9-1-1 for a fire they send you a team not just one fire fighter. The movie “Book of Eli”was a great story but let’s keep in mind it was a work of fiction. Compare that to the age old tale of the ant and the grass hopper. What we forget in that tale is it was not a single ant but a colony (community) that worked together towards being prepared for winter.
Again I totally understand your propensity to be a lone wolf, been there, done that, but that choice can be changed. Good luck.
From long sad experience I have to say I agree with you. Fellow preppers have either stolen from me, or committed adultery with my wife, or otherwise greatly betrayed me. I have almost reached the conclusion that these “new world order” people are right about the majority of mankind.
Excellent article, can’t wait for part 2.
I like your second paragraph. Not only is it important to delegate, but also important realize that some of those under our command will have higher IQ’s, and stronger talents in some areas. Good leaders accept that, embrace it, and make good use of it, they don’t get jealous and make stupid mistakes. I took a survival class in college 40 years ago and after 20 minutes of painfully watching the instructor and his assistant trying to get a fire going without matches, I stepped off to one side and took out my little flint and steel kit my Wyoming cowboy grandpa gave me when I was eight years old. He used to make little 2″ x 2″ pouches out of old boot leather, with a flap, and a piece of steel riveted across the bottom. Inside was a piece of flint rock, and some charred cloth. On that cold night I quickly got some kindling together and with three hits of the flint on the steel, I had the tinder glowing and blown into a fire in short order. The instructor never did get his fire going. We also camped in the river bottom which was 20 degrees cooler than the surrounding area where rock cliffs would be radiating warmth most of the night. This was pointed out to him, but he rejected it. The instructor was ex-Army and had some survival skills, but no leadership skills or the ability to accept good ideas when others thought of them first. Before I fell asleep that first night, I decided that had this been a real survival situation, I would have slipped away in the middle of the night and gone for help on my own.
St. Funogas,
Good leaders recognize the skills and knowledge of their team members and let them apply it for benefit of all. When you work as a team you all sink together or swim together. Also if that survival course instructor was a lone wolf he could have died from exposure or other wise suffered a cold weather injury that could have then made his survival even harder to accomplish. Harry Truman once said something like “it is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit”
In the planning for long missions NASA did a study to determine the optimum size for long term effective working team. That number is two. Every other combination (except 1) devolved into two or more cliques which tended to oppose each other and even try to sabotage each other. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if you could bring together a team of 8-30 or so people with complimenting skills to survive for the long term. But the reality is that the more people you have the more likely you are to have internal conflicts and open fighting. Not that you should not try to create a team of like minded people but you and everyone else should have a plan B where you leave the team or expel certain member(s) when the inevitable conflict rises and it cannot be settled peacefully. Having said that I note the irony in that basically you are creating a plan to dissolve your plan.
Dont forget the S-6!!!! The ability to effectively communicate quickly and clearly are so important to any “cohesive” group. The combat rules of three are “Shoot, move,communicate” so its an important aspect to any ones survival.
Having dealt with the public in times of crisis the idea of forming a cohesive survival group seems pretty slim. While I find this “shelter in place ” and hysteria over 2 inches of snow completely ridiculous it’s obvious most people are just stupid sheep.
You’re more likely to be murdered by someone you know and that statistic grows when there’s a argument involved. Keeping you and yours alive after a major disaster in my opinion would involve laying low and trying to draw as less attention to yourself as possible.
Perhaps somewhere down the road people will get together and form these groups. Anyways enjoyed the article and look forward to the next installment.
1.Prepare/expect/train to be on your own, as foreboding as that may be.
2. As you create ‘value added’, the possibilities of joining with others improves.
As in the ‘Patriots’ gate interactions, most of like to fashion ourselves Todd:
fortified retreat location,’squared away’ interviewing prospective new members.
Really?? I’m not that delusional.
More likely to be Lon (?) approaching the gate, proving your worth to be be invited.
This is very important stuff, seldom discussed, and it is well presented. I’ve worked in high intensity situation in my former job with 12-14 hour days, for as long as 4 months non stop… It will grind you down if you are the only one in charge, unfortunately I had no help there, and you will probably not either. Learn how to delegate, ask for help, find the talent for specific tasks or missions, empower and support. Do not let yourself become so exhausted that you cannot operate. The result could be disastrous. Having everyone clearly understand the objective, and be invested and pulling in the same direction, it is amazing how a small ‘team’ of good people can find solutions, and get it done together. The best biography I’ve read on leadership was that done on Richard Winters.
https://davidmschroeder.com/2015/07/10/10-selfless-leadership-lessons-from-major-dick-winters-band-of-brothers/
Hey Tunnel Rabbit, sounds like we might have worked at the same place. 🙂 Like you said, learning to delegate is important. The best boss I ever had asked me in my hiring interview what my management philosophy was. I said it was real simple: Teach workers (whether they be lower managers or hourly workers) what their job is and then get the heck out of their way and let them do their job. It usually worked out great. After being there 5 years, we opened up a new section and I wanted to take a crew and run it myself to figure out the logistics first before handing it off to a lower manager. I put a new crew of mostly Mexicans to work, and then set out myself to fix a cement drain in the warehouse that had not been constructed properly and was not draining. I knew it was going to be nasty. Four hours later, by the time I finished shoveling stuff out of that ditch that was worse than outhouse manure, I had won the respect of every man and woman on that crew. They knew I’d never ask them to do anything I wasn’t be willing to do myself. They would have done pretty much anything for me after that and we had a great working relationship.
In most group settings more than one person wants to be in charge or has “better ideas”. It is normal for people to be envious. That is seen in workplace “round table” discussions where everyone “is encouraged to make suggestions”
The group will splinter and fight each other if necessary.
That goes for family members too. Most people have someone they do not agree with on subjects. When it comes to survival, those feelings grow exponential.
They say just two doesn’t work and in most cases perhaps not. But a person is well connected to the other that is there to save his butt and vice versa
Seems a common theme here that it is hard to find and have a group that really clicks; that has been my experience too. One comment above pointed out that envy is a problem- seen that too. Or maybe the twenty-something with all the “cool” gear who wants tell everybody what they are doing wrong. Yep, seen that one more than once. I’ve started treating meeting other preppers/groups like buying used cars- I stand back and keep my mouth shut and let them do the the talking (as much as possible). A ten second span of silence will make a lot of people uncomfortable to the point of “spilling the beans” and letting their true thoughts and attitudes shine through. All that to say I’m in a small family group that is likely too small for the long haul (see above), but with few options forging ahead.
In a situation where you have multiple families (maybe even three generations) living together in some sort of a survivalist stronghold you will have every conceivable age to deal with. I can see where problems could arise when the leader has to reprimand a younger member and then Mom or maybe Grandpa steps up to defend their family member. I believe that the law will need to be laid down at the beginning of the formation of the group and everyone will need to be fully aware that if they cause trouble repeatedly or if they’re going to be a “butt” about everything, that the road is waiting on them. There’s no reason to put up with an individual of any age if that person can’t get along with others and especially if that person won’t follow orders of the leader. The leader is likely to be the owner of the retreat property so he would have every right to kick out some individual or even an entire family if he chose to do so.