Management Case B: Scaling Operations

Previous Chapter

Short Answer

“Gentlemen, the officer who doesn’t know his communications and supply as well as his tactics is totally useless.”

• Gen. George S. Patton, USA
  • Notice: Finding an exact source for this quotation is surprisingly difficult, so assume it is quoted in good faith.

---

Just like in the Scaling Growth chapter, similar answers apply. If Scaling Growth focused on your interactions and managing staff, this chapter will align more closely with managing people and communications.

As a reminder for those coming from Case A, scaling up typically involves things like:

• New layers of management
• Specialization of roles
• Generalization of procedures to follow
• Formalization of communication and meetings
• Difficulty in cross-team communications and organizational communication

In general, you want to ensure standard procedures and rules are covered and understood first before diving into content.

After procedures are established and everyone knows what should be done in their given position, you focus on optimizing communications to ensure operations proceed effectively, efficiently, and without issues. The difficulty of communicating exponentially skyrockets as more networks to communicate on and the number of people to communicate with increase.

As for emergencies, you can “wind the clock” back for all but the most serious emergencies. In layman terms, that means take a few seconds to emotional regulate, calmly assess the situation, consider available actions, then act. Applies to many cases and not just aviation.

• Delaying a reaction is a skill, afterall.

The closer leadership is to consequences of actions, the faster their response to address it.

• If they suffer consequences, they resolve it quickly.
• If they do not suffer consequences, they resolve it slowly or ignore it.

Long Answer

Notice: As I’m not active military or ever been part of the military, I cannot accurately describe their organizations from first-hand experiences nor will I pretend to do so.

This is the second parallel that may seem unusual at first: military organization and communications in a milsim (military simulation) group context.

This chapter covers operational management and provides some context for what level of preparation is needed to ensure operations and events are run as smooth as possible.

According to the U.S. Department of Defense on Army organization, there are similar breakpoints/upper limits like the previous chapter. A squad goes up to about 16 soldiers, a platoon about 44 soldiers, a company about 120-200 soldiers, and a battalion about 400-1000 soldiers (U.S. Department of Defense, n.d.).

If there’s any one lesson you should take away from here: emotional regulation is essential. There are times you get punished and things go completely in flames because one person did one tiny thing due to an emotional outburst. It affects decision making, communication, your abilities, and so much more.

As for another reason why emotional regulation is important: it further establishes your presence and authority as a leader and person. If you’re calm and chill while everyone else is panicking, people are appreciative and show more respect towards you; the person who handles themselves and knows what they’re doing.

How does this relate to Teaching/Instruction?

The material in this chapter is likely foreign to many people, so there’s more provided context than usual. Here are some examples between classroom management and milsim management to consider as you’re reading along.

Communications

• Soldiers use spoken voice and radio nets, whereas a class may use hand signals and structured discussion formats.

Scaling Challenges

• A teacher can manage smaller classrooms and groups of students, while a squad leader can manage everyone in their squad.
• As you scale up in both cases, up to large classrooms and platoons, a teacher/squad leader cannot do this as well and needs to delegate responsibility to other leaders or redefine structures.

Trainings/Procedures

• Soldiers conduct drills and trainings to learn and make procedures automatic; almost to the point of muscle memory.
• Teachers go over and practice procedures with students to ensure they’re understood and done without asking what to do each time.

Responding to Failure

• If communication fails, then the effectiveness of the squad, platoon, etc. dramatically decreases and fragments.
• In classrooms, if projects are not defined and norms are not enforced, chaos ensues and one disruptive group or student can derail the class session.

Culture & Buy-in

• Milsims operate well when everyone in the groups agrees to and follows the same, base set of rules
• Classrooms function well when everyone understands the classroom procedures, sees the procedures as a fair ruleset, and are consistent with following them.

Milsim Overview

Milsims, or “military simulations,” are available through video games such as Squad, ARMA 3, and ARMA Reforger. There are also real-life groups that organize operations, like LAN events and field exercises, lasting for days instead of hours. Many people involved in milsims come from military backgrounds and build communities modeled on military organizations, procedures, and rules. For civilians, this is one of the few accessible and legal substitutes for experiencing aspects of military structure and operations.

Setup, Trainings, and Procedures

There are multiple types of trainings milsim organizations host, such as Basic, MOS, Specialty/Detachment, and Officer/Leadership. No applicant may proceed into operations, or permitted specific roles and equipment, without first passing these trainings.

Keep in mind members of a group may more or less freely associate with each other regardless of rank or position in a milsim group, but may be restricted on what channels they can access depending on their position within the group.

Basic Training

Basic is vital to milsim organizations as it’s the entry point and orientation for new recruits. It ensures they understand the environment they’re getting into and what they must do to work alongside everyone else. If they cannot abide by these rules, they are subject to disciplinary actions.

Some examples of what may be covered in Basic training:

• Basic infantry formations (e.g. where to stand, how to move around, etc.)
• Proper communication and communication channels
• Basic competency in standard equipment and tools
• How to inform others you need to leave for a bit, use the bathroom, etc.
• What you can and cannot do
• What happens when you break the rules, the consequences, and the severity of certain rule-breaking actions

Procedures are taught by designated trainers, checked for competency and understanding, over each procedure until all are covered. Depending on how casual or serious the milsim group is, this training can take 30min to 3+ hours and may have a written manual you can follow along with.

These processes are similar to how most classroom management is taught to students; through direct instruction and practice of procedures to ensure they’re well understood. If the applicant cannot show competency with these procedures, they are denied access to the milsim group offers until they pass.

To parallel classrooms, Basic is like the guidelines you print out and hand copies to each student, go over with the students, and confirm everyone understands before moving forward.

MOS Training

An MOS (military occupational specialty) is a field or role a soldier may pursue. Compared to its real-life counterpart, many nuances are omitted, so each training session typically takes 30 minutes to a few hours depending on its complexity.

In a milsim, think of getting a MOS as permission to use fancier tools. Put another way: “You are licensed to do this, so we will trust you to do this.”

These trainings are available only after Basic is passed, and there may be additional restrictions such as time-in-service or rank. Each MOS training comes with a specific set of rules, procedures, and methodology for correct use of all MOS-related equipment. Training typically does instruction, practice, then a test of competency before trainees may use the MOS. If MOS rules are broken, MOS permissions may be revoked for a limited time or indefinitely.

For a classroom parallel, MOS training is like reviewing rules and requirements of a specific activity, like gym class and basketball, before allowing students to participate. Unlike Basic, MOS training is specific rules for specific activities and needed equipment for those activities.

Specialty/Detachment Training/Creation

Specialty training is typically reserved for detachments with stricter requirements and performance standards. Detachments are personnel assigned to specific tasks and roles within the milsim organization as a whole.

Setting a detachment up and its training requires different clearances, permissions, and oversights approved first compared to Basic/MOS training.

Let’s pretend I’m creating a Force Reconnaissance detachment and I’m doing this for a Company Leader. There’s several things to establish and approve outside of training, with the Company Leader, including but not limited to:

• What extra equipment is the detachment permitted and what rules do they have
• How will this detachment operate alongside other elements in the milsim group
• What tasks they can and cannot do
• What additional requirements for applications and membership

After approval is designing the training further. Let’s say I want the detachment to scout objectives and do reconnaissance. This may mean training over things like:

• Any additions or modifications to general procedures, if applicable
• How to use detachment assets and equipment
• New procedures and methods for specialized tasking
• How to develop the proper mindset to operate in this detachment
• How to gather and report intelligence effectively
• How to complete multiple tasks thousands of meters away from objectives

Training is similar to Basic/MOS, but typically with higher standards due to specialized responsibilities. After passing the training and tests, the applicant may go into an official role or a trial period to see how they act in a live environment.

In a typical education system, this is like bringing on teaching assistants from students who passed the relevant classes before and were vetted by staff. These roles may require administrative approval, like principal sign-off, to ensure it won’t cause issues with a student’s education on top of their existing responsibilities.

Officer/Leadership Training

Leadership in milsim groups typically requires a long time-in-service, training, and testing before billeting. This is first done by assuming an “acting” role within the milsim group, doubling as a trial period to see their performance acting as the role in live operations.

Many milsim groups draw upon formal military training (without the classified stuff, of course) to assist people. These programs intentionally weed out people unfit for leadership responsibilities and the consequence for failure is time lost and requiring you to undergo the entire training/testing once again.

• Said training is also infrequently hosted in comparison to MOS, Basic, etc.

Training is conducted by senior officers and leaders, covering multiple topics, but usually these at a minimum:

• Leadership basics and conduct as an authority figure
• Considerations for personnel under your command
• Effective decision-making and communication in high-risk and limited time scenarios

Instruction goes beyond other trainings by including observations, guided practice, quizzing, and more beyond simply direct instruction, practice, and a test.

Tests are small-scale simulations appropriate for team/squads. A batch of aspiring leaders rotate roles in a group as infantry and primary leader. Evaluation typically includes communication, decision-making, navigation, casualty counts (efficiency), objection completion, and time-to-complete. Standards for leadership training are higher compared to other trainings; if, for example, passing a class only required a D (60%), leadership requires a B (80%) due to its newfound responsibilities and authority granted after completion.

The closest milsim-to-classroom parallel this training may mimic is a primary teacher overseeing a student teacher. The student teacher first observes and listens to the primary teacher. After this, the student teacher designs their own lessons and teaches independently to prove competency.

Both student teachers and leadership applicants are expected to quickly take a bold plunge into the working environment under pressure and high expectations.

Field Training Exercises (FTX)

The closest comparison for these is “continuing education” or “professional development.”

Typically this is hosted at the squad or platoon level in a milsim group due to constraints in finding a location/space, scheduling, and getting personnel to attend.

People inside these organizations may or may not have to go through multiple FTX to remain in a billet or maintain a particular “rank.” It depends on the rules and culture of said organization.

The purpose of a FTX is to train cohesion within a group, address deficiencies observed in operations, and develop skills to prepare for future operations. A FTX is run with the implication people in a given role are certified and know how to operate that particular role to an acceptable level. This implication permits the instructor to focus less on micromanagement on any one person and permits macromanagement to improve the entire group at once.

Some examples of FTXes may include the following:

• Crossing Open Terrain
• Bounding and Moving Cover-to-Cover
• Unit/Weakpoint Identification
• Shooting Range Drills
• CQB/CQC Training
• Simulations of Operations

In milsim, they typically range from 30 minutes to 1.5 hours in length.

Leaders Eat Last

This section header is intentionally a paraphrased title of Leaders Eat Last: Why Some Teams Pull Together and Others Don’t (Sinek, 2014).

While there isn’t really food involved in virtual milsims (but may be involved in real-life milsims), the concept still stands. When I was in milsim groups, this was emphasized far more heavily than initially expected. Leadership was expected to arrive before other members and were the first on the ground and the last off the ground for operations.

If you cannot properly supply (“feed”) people under your command, their ability to perform tasks suffers significantly. This also includes morale, conduct, safety, and general health. How this is handled determines if people in organizations will go out of their way for each other or suffer from fragmentation, failure, and collapse.

• An “ACE Check” (Ammo, Casualty; Equipment) is one common way to check supply levels.
• The dynamics, stress levels, and behaviors between a well supplied group (“green x3” or “all green”) and an undersupplied group (“red” or “black” meaning low to almost out) in operations are significant.

In an operational setting, there doesn’t exist time for self-interests or behaviors undermining a team. Individuals acting on their own and selfishly, or a “lone wolf,” are quickly spotted with severe and fast consequences. One lone wolf can threaten the livelihood of an entire team, squad, platoon, or larger group of personnel.

The “leaders eat last” concept is emphasized further through how officers and NCOs conduct themselves and whether or not they understand the motivations and desires of those below them in rank. If they cannot meet the needs and wants of those below them, and provide stability in their roles, they lose the foundation to support the organization internally. If the organization cannot manage internal issues, it struggles with external issues and meeting its goals.

“Hungry” employees don’t perform well, lack trust in the organization, and work out of obligation instead of desire if their well-being isn’t taken care of.

To stay concise, readers may look into the Whitehall (I and II) Studies, status syndrome, and similar research for more related information (1978 & 1991).

Precision and the Cost of One Mistake

In environments like these, simulated or not, the margin of error is extremely low.

Mistakes are costly and many situations are matters of life and death. Leadership doesn’t correct mistakes from animosity; they correct mistakes because oversights endanger missions and people under their command, which includes you. Even a single gamble or gut instinct gone wrong can lead to all-out conflict, like if “The Man Who Saved The World” Stanislav Petrov made the wrong decision in 1983 (Lebedev, 2004). The same principle also applies to smaller scale situations, like a misread radio call on a fireteam mission.

How do you mitigate risks? Strict adherence to discipline. One oversight may lead to an immediate consequence, which may quickly snowball into casualties. This applies on a strategic, tactical, and procedural level. Discipline, through checklists, drills, scripts, rehearsals, and contingencies keep people alive when it’s seconds on the clock.

Precision and discipline also affects other situations, like the following examples:

1. Uniform guidelines
2. Communication on and off the radio
3. Difference between a column and a line
4. How much “space” is between people in formation
5. Communicating through chain-of-command
6. Squad succession
7. Operation and allocation of assets
8. How to breach and clear a building

Precision and discipline are universal concepts. Lacking these leads to consequences, such as learning loss, mismanaged risks, and improper responses to emergencies and routine situations. Just like in operations, careful planning, clear communication, and consistent routines ensure risks are managed.

Smart Communication

Communication of information is done through various methods, such as:

• Reconnaissance
• Meetings
• Face-to-face
• Over radio networks

Reconnaissance is pretty important. You’re gathering information that must be accurate, precise, and communicated properly, or you risk failure and unnecessary costs. The task required translating information into symbols and written words humans could quickly read and understand. To give a small overview of what to communicate:

• Personnel types, numbers, and locations in the AO
• Patrol routes
• HQ/HVTs/Intel positions
• Entries, barriers, and obstructions
• Points of Interest (POIs)
• Infil/Exfil (Infiltration/Exfiltration) route(s)

It’s common to use acronyms, abbreviations, markings, and symbols to communicate to other people.

• It was common to use terminology derived from sources like FM 1-02.1 Operational Terms as well as FM 1-02.2 Military Symbols (U.S. Army, 2024).

Whenever I participated in milsim scenarios, I usually did reconnaissance and spotting. Why was I assigned that? I was good at math and doing it quickly. Working at long ranges means dealing with drops, Coriolis effect, wind, and far more variables short range interactions get to ignore entirely.

I made three rules for all communications in these specialist groups:

1. Concise
2. Clear
3. Descriptive

2 and 3 may sound conflicting, but they aren’t. To give an example of all three in action, you could say: “I’m a first-chair violin in the Boston Orchestra.” From that alone, you get:

• Concise: a single sentence said in a few seconds.
• Clear: You know exactly what their function is and remove ambiguity (a violin player)
• Descriptive: You have appropriate context of their ability, status, etc. (top-class professional player based in Boston).

As for meetings, it’s subject to all the rules and caveats I discussed in other management chapters, just in a different context.

Where the biggest difference arrives is in face-to-face and radio network communications. Unless you are positively, absolutely sure nothing bad will happen (which is almost never), you don’t ever want to talk or ramble a lot.

You want to get straight to the point and not waste anyone’s time. Time spent listening to you is time spent they could focus on and do other equally, if not more, important tasks.

It’s why 5-10 seconds was set as the limit for each communication, order, etc. sent out. If it’s longer than that, minds drift and information complexity increases. The simpler it is, the easier it is.

Clarifying Radio Networks

Radios are a part of all kits and split into SR (short-range) and LR (long-range) communications. Every MOS uses SR radios, but not LR radios, and using a radio properly is one skill present at all organizational levels.

SR radios are for squad and team communications, in addition to limited cross-functional communications. Range and capability is limited, but it’s lightweight and compact.

LR radios are for platoon and higher communications when reaching out to other elements. Range and capabilities are higher, but LR radios are heavier and less compact–sometimes replacing a backpack.

Transmissions on all networks are kept under 4-6 seconds. Each net is limited, by doctrine and technical limitations, for how many personnel can transmit at a time. A SR radio can access a LR radio network in emergencies, like stepping up into leadership roles mid-operation. Both LR and SR radios can also set additional nets, enabling you to listen into 2 nets at the same time and reduce time spent manually switching through channels.

If I mention “nets” moving forward, that refers to a communication channel accessible to (SR) radio or long-range (LR) radio. Nets are divided into whole and decimals, where the decimal numbers are subdivided tactical nets or “TAC” (e.g. 244 TAC 1 = 244.1).

As an example of squad net and corresponding team net structure:

• 244: Squad Net
  • 244.1: Alpha Team
  • 244.2: Bravo Team
  • 244.3: Charlie Team

As milsim groups occasionally allow international people to join, communication also should accommodate ESL (English as a Second Language) speakers. The ICAO phonetic alphabet was implemented and is accessible for, at a minimum, English, French, and Spanish speakers (Geneva, 1959). For speakers of languages beyond those three, they still followed ICAO while in the milsim organization.

Milsim Breakpoint 1: Squad

Here is one example of a role organization in squads:

• Command/HQ
• Squad Leader
  • Team Leader (2-3 Teams)
    • Infantry
    • Medic
  • RTO

And here is the number of radio networks each role may be responsible for:

• Command/HQ: 1-2 nets
• Squad Leader: 2-3 nets
• Team Leader: 2-3 nets
• Infantry: 1-2 nets
• Medic: 1-3 nets
• RTO: 1-4 nets

How it works in milsims

Note: Command/HQ = Person/group providing information to leadership.

No single person is accessing more than 4 nets, LR and/or SR, at once due to technical and communication limits and each person may realistically track only a few nets at once. Beyond that, information slows, delays increase, and discipline crumbles. This is why efficiency and formalization in communication is necessary at every layer.

A squad has typically up to 16 soldiers and 2-3 teams. At the top is a squad leader, followed by 2-3 team leaders and 1 RTO, then the rest as infantry or medics. Extra personnel are embedded into existing teams as infantry to maintain structure.

Teams within the squad are divided up by designations, such as Alpha/Bravo, followed by a platoon-squad designation, like “1-4” (1st Platoon, 4th Squad). As an example, Alpha Team Leader in 4th squad would be “1-4-A” or “1-4-Alpha.” These designations provide clarity for who is doing communication, rather than leaving it to assumptions.

Most communication occurs three ways: squad net, team net, and voice. Squad net deals with orders and emergencies in formal communication, team net deals with tactics to complete orders in less formal communication, and voice handles most other cases informally. This setup permits squad leaders to split apart the teams to perform different tasks at each objective, such as Alpha as a fire/SBF (support-by-fire) element and Bravo as a maneuver element, and increase the overall effectiveness of the squad.

Each squad may have its own culture developed by the squad leader and the members of the squad. That culture can stay consistent over a long time, but is likely to change as people come and go and the experience of individuals grows. After-action reviews also occur after each operation for members to review what was good, bad, and/or needs improvement.

How to apply to instruction

This is the scale of one teacher to many students. That teacher may assign group leaders (team leaders), note “good” students (medics) to help in class. Teachers design lesson plans (tactics) for students to navigate the curriculum (strategy) defined by higher authorities (company+) and managed by principals (e.g. of a platoon leader).

Translating a squad into a classroom generally involves these things:

• Distributed Leadership, like group leads, tends to work well and has students try to figure things out amongst themselves first before asking the teacher.
• Communication management to take multiple voices at once and allocate responses through defined groups or a single channel like email.
• Scalability, where a group of 16 is manageable, but any larger and you’ll need to form subgroups to maintain structure.
• Reflections, similar to after-action reviews, allow students to identify what worked, what didn’t, and how to improve.

Milsim Breakpoint 2: Platoon

For this section, let’s assume you, the reader, are the platoon leader.

Your organization then might look like this:

• Command/HQ
• Platoon Leader
  • Detachment Leaders (1-2 detachments)
  • Squad Leaders (2-4 squads)
  • Platoon Staff
    • 2IC (second-in-command)
    • Platoon RTO
    • Platoon Medic
    • Designated Specialists

And these are number of radio networks each role may be responsible for:

• Command/HQ: 1-3 nets
• Platoon Leader: 3-4 nets
• Detachment Leaders: 2-4 nets
• Squad Leaders: 2-3 nets
• 2IC (second-in-command): 3-4 nets
• Platoon RTO: 3-4 nets
• Platoon Medic: 2-4 nets
• Designated Specialists: Variable

How it works in milsims

If you’re platoon staff (or platoon leader), or a higher ranking position in later unit sizes, you go from tactical operations to strategic operations. You’re developing soldiers, leading other leaders, maintaining organizational health, and improving organizational capabilities to take on bigger missions.

• This parallels with what director+ roles go through in a previous management chapter!

You typically have 2-4 squads and 1-2 detachments for operational use; around 40-50 people. The need to divide and conquer tasks and personnel allocation exponentially increases. Squads are under your direct supervision while detachments are (typically) under your indirect supervision, which means detachments temporarily fall under your command until higher authorities determine otherwise.

• This is similar to product managers and instructors assigning tasks to people in a dynamic environment with shifting priorities.

LR nets have multiple uses at platoon level, but I’ll stay concise. Let’s say this is 1st Platoon, you’re the platoon leader, and you need to communicate to 4th Squad. A message like “Hey you, this is me, information, over” after proper designations and operational info is applied may look like:

• “1-4, 1-6, outpost 500m North, over.”
• For reference, “1-6” is the platoon leader and “1-4” is 1st platoon, 4th squad’s squad leader.

Platoon leaders may have support staff as well, like 2IC (second-in-command), platoon RTO, and a platoon medic. These roles all report to the platoon leader. One of their main tasks is to monitor various LR nets and relay key information onto the same SR net as the platoon leader for faster decision-making and operational updates in real-time.

For scope, platoons complete multiple objectives within a small to medium AO and coordinate multiple squads across multiple objectives and/or focus many squads on one objective. Strategy comes from company down to platoon level, but platoon leaders have some leeway to adapt strategy to their platoon’s capabilities and needs.

For scaling platoons, you first fill up existing squads before splitting people off from them to create a new squad. You’d go through meetings with people in current squads to assess leadership ability, squad fit, and competency before placing them in the new squad.

At platoon level, more time is spent managing expectations and needs of your squad leaders in addition to requests and issues going up and down the chain of command. You’ll still interact with non-leadership, but you focus mainly on leadership and coordination.

Culture, like with squads, is the lifeblood of a platoon. You’re checking squads mesh with the platoon as a whole. You’re also placing more trust in squad leaders to manage their squads and monitoring attendance, well-being, and platoon health.

Platoons also conduct after-action reviews. The personnel invited to platoon-level reviews are typically like platoon staff, squad leaders, and detachment leaders, but follow a similar format to squad after-action reviews.

How to apply to instruction

To tie this into teaching and instruction, there’s two examples as parallels:

1. A grade level team overseeing multiple classrooms
2. A department head overseeing multiple teachers in one department

Unlike squads, you’re getting more into managing managers instead of managing individuals.

Support staff, like janitors, secretaries, or aides, function like detachments and give leaders, like teachers and principals, more time to dedicate to their primary tasks.

Translating a platoon into a class setting generally involves these things:

• Distributed Leadership, where principals, department heads, or deans oversee teachers who manage students.
• Communication management to ensure leadership below understands what needs to be done with clarity.
• Scalability, where you’re managing managers and may hire staff to monitor subgroups and delegate tasks to.
• Reflections and meetings from leadership to review what teams need to operate effectively.

Explained another way: each teacher oversees certain subjects and teaching students under their care. The principal oversees teachers under them to ensure curriculums are followed and each class is proceeding as intended. The school may also have requirements from a district or oversight body (i.e. company+) providing strategy to follow and execute upon. Because of your size limitation, you’ll be able to do core tasks without much issue, but may lack resources to do anything larger scale.

Milsim Breakpoint 3: Company

We now go from roleplaying a platoon leader to a company leader.

In an operational setting, your organizational structure may be the following:

• Command/HQ
• Company Leader
  • Company Staff
    • Company 2IC
    • Company Medic
    • Company RTO
    • Designated Specialists
  • Platoon Leaders (3-5 platoons)
  • Detachment Leaders (1-4 detachments)
  • Auxiliary / Support Leaders (Variable)
  • External Organization Representatives
  • Other Individual Contributors

How it works in milsims

The communication structure is like platoons, but Company is a layer between platoon leader and Command/HQ. Company leaders, and company staff, may operate on 2-4 nets at any given time. At this breakpoint and beyond, additional layers are added between the previous highest leadership and a Command/HQ element.

The Command/HQ element may not always be the highest-ranking element, but they are the element responsible for bringing in information relevant to complete objectives and typically respond to only the two highest management layers present in a given operation.

When transitioning from a platoon to a company, you’ll undergo a similar process to how new squads form within a platoon. You may also establish dedicated company staff to assist you, like in platoons.

Companies will eventually need more dedicated detachments within the organization to assist the platoons under their command. These detachments may follow the same leadership structure or have variations.

• Example 1: Air detachments may follow Air Force organizational guidelines/ranks and form sections/flights instead of teams/squads.
• Example 2: Special mission units may allocate resources and equipment meant for squads (and even platoons) to each team in the detachment to accomplish higher difficulty tasks and objectives compared to general infantry.
• Example 3: Warrant officers do specialized tasks outside of operations, like maintain and update the functionality of the milsim’s systems and equipment. This usually means backend personnel, such as developers, technicians, analysts, and more.

Detachments may give rise to “elitism” (i.e. a superiority complex) where people in a detachment may view themselves above non-detachment personnel regardless of rank. If your organization does not account for and curb this issue, it will deteriorate the organization’s culture and well-being, which leads to stagnation and decline.

Forming another platoon typically involves adding new squads in existing platoon(s) first (up to 5 squads). Once platoon at capacity, you split out squads and take in willing reservists to fill billets in the new platoon. This may involve multiple tiers of personnel to check on and meet with: infantry, team leaders, squad leaders, platoon leaders, and more.

The company leader is ultimately responsible for signing off on platoons actions, creating platoons, and more managerial duties compared to leaders from earlier stages. Even the actions of a lowest ranking member may go upstream to affect you. You also need to consider, especially if you’re the one shifting people around in existing platoons, that some of your actions may cause division and tension amongst members. This typically means a reinforcement of culture fit, ensuring the people transitioning into the new roles are adequately supported, and explicitly defining acceptable reasons why things are being done a certain way.

Designations become slightly more complex as well. If you were previously “1-6” as a platoon leader, you’re now “Lemur-6” as a company leader as companies and beyond use name identification more than numbers or Alpha/Bravo/etc. As for why “lemur” specifically, it sounded nice and is purely an example. Essentially, as you go higher in management layers, you just add the higher elements levels at the beginning of the designation.

How to apply to instruction

Let’s tie this section back to class settings and this is where complexity exponentially increases yet again.

Say you are a principal (company leader). You are more removed by design from students compared to teachers (squad leaders), department heads/deans (platoon headers) and other leadership and staff below you. You may interact with students occasionally, but you’re not on the frontlines teaching or handling lesson plans as often; your focus is on strategy, like curriculums, management of managers and leaders, and keeping the school running.

An analogy for companies, in terms of teaching, is closest to overseeing multiple departments within a single school. You have a principal (company leader), who may have assistant principals (company staff), and support staff like secretaries and security (detachments) assisting in running the school and aiding your other staff like teachers (squad leaders). Assistant principals could oversee teachers as pseudo-platoon leaders. They may also designate someone as a department lead, like a dean, to take over that role.

As there’s now multiple teachers, teachers divide into departments (platoons) grouped upon the primary subject they teach. If you had 4 science teachers, as an example, those science teachers would all be within one science department. Each teacher may specialize in different types of science for students under their care, such as Biology, Chemistry, or Physics, but are still in one department because the company leader (principal) wanted it set up that way.

Like in platoons, support staff like secretaries and security function similarly to detachments. As the organization scales, support staff should scale proportionally to maintain effectiveness and efficiency, but not so much to introduce excess redundancy and bureaucracy.

Milsim Breakpoint 4: Battalion

Transitioning from a company into a battalion is similar to when there’s a transition from a platoon into a company, but at a larger scale which takes significantly more time to complete as you go through the process of assessing replacements and determining who is fit to expand into the newly defined roles and who would rather remain in their current roles. There’s additional bureaucracy, coordination is more complex, and managing more projects or goals simultaneously across a wider scope.

Most ideas and principles from previous breakpoints apply here too. As the milsim organization scales up in size, there are additional layers of management involved. Layers are typically redefined when leadership across one or more existing layers has too many direct reports and it needs to be layered out further.

Be warned, however, that every additional layer increases the amount of time it takes for communications to transmit across layers and risks reducing the clarity of communications across layers. Organizations should keep managers and the leadership structure as lean as possible.

At the battalion level, it’s less about being on the frontlines and more determining the necessary delegation to complete tasks and information filtering. This is similar to how LR nets and SR nets are condensed, refined, and restricted to keep information clear, but on a larger and more complex scale.

Even at the battalion scale, after-action reviews still occur. The biggest difference between company and below vs battalion is the shortlist of who attends these meetings. Meetings from this point onwards strictly determine how many management layers above and below are present and invited into meetings. As an instructional example, a principal meeting is like having company leaders (principals) meeting with a battalion leader (superintendent) with very few other people in attendance. The focus is still on high-level strategy for all present, but the company leaders are figuring out tactics to present and execute the strategy for down the chain of command.

Tying this back into a classroom setting, this is moving beyond one school to the district managing multiple schools. The district may have its own specialized staff and detachments to assist operations, with superintendents (battalion leaders) overseeing the principals (company leaders) across different schools. The complexity, staff involved, and more increase significantly over time.

If you were to scale it up further from battalion, staying with an instructional context, I’d probably say you’d get these comparisons mirroring scaling in other organizations:

• Brigade (Multiple districts in one city)
• Division (Multiple cities in one metropolis)
• Corps (Multiple metropolises and spread-out cities in one region)
• Field Army (All regions within one state (e.g. Colorado Department of Education))
• Army Group (Multiple states categorized into one geographical section, like Midwest, Southwest, etc. (Many state departments of education collaborating together))
• Army Region (All states in the United States (e.g. U.S. Department of Education))

Scaling Down & Reservists

When scaling down, there will be shrinking pains, much like there were growing pains.

Politics is one major challenge. For example, while the best solution may be to remove one small platoon from a company of four platoons, leaving one company and three more filled-up platoons, this risks those within the removed platoon harboring resentment, ire, or even actively disrupting operations.

A way to handle this is to propose a size reduction to the relevant parties in the affected layer. If you were a company leader, this means approaching every platoon leader in the company, opening discussions, and hosting meetings. You have to determine who is okay staying in leadership, who can move into lower leadership roles, and who can return to IC/infantry roles.

To put it bluntly, you’re seeing who is okay with a “demotion.” This doesn’t go well if not everyone agrees, and you should expect some personnel to depart because of the downsizing–even if downsizing is the best way to maintain slotted numbers and ratios.

In short, don’t downsize unless absolutely necessary. First evaluate whether current numbers and structures can support scaling without reducing roles.

Another way milsim groups maintain numbers and fulfill operational needs is by setting up a reservist core. These are people who choose not to slot into an active squad, platoon, or other role, or were previously part of a billeted position but are currently unassigned.

Keep in mind that reservists may not commit to a slotted role, or may be waiting for a particular MOS or position to open. With that in mind, reservists are more reliable for operational support than for staffing and filling billets in the milsim organization.

Bibliography

1. Military Units: Army. (n.d.). U.S. Department of Defense. https://www.defense.gov/Multimedia/Experience/Military-Units/Army/

2. Radio Regulations; Additional Radio Regulations; Additional Protocol; Resolutions and Recommendations (PDF). Geneva: International Telecommunication Union. 1959. pp. 430, 607. Archived (PDF) from the original on 7 November 2017.

3. Marmot, M. G.; Rose, G.; Shipley, M.; Hamilton, P. J. (1978). Employment grade and coronary heart disease in British civil servants. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 32 (4): 244–249. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.32.4.244. PMC 1060958. PMID 744814.

4. Marmot, M. G., Smith, G. D., Stansfeld, S., Patel, C., North, F., Head, J., White, I., Brunner, E., & Feeney, A. (1991). Health inequalities among British civil servants: the Whitehall II study. Lancet (London, England), 337(8754), 1387–1393. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-6736(91)93068-k
   • Alt Link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1674771/

5. Lebedev, Anastasiya (2004, May 21). Mattern, Douglas; Waldow, Rene; Ray, Tom (eds.). The Man Who Saved the World Finally Recognized. MosNews/Association of World Citizens (AWC). San Francisco, California, United States: The Association of World Citizens. Archived from the original on 21 July 2011. https://web.archive.org/web/20110721000030/http://www.worldcitizens.org/petrov2.html

6. Sinek, S. (2014). Leaders Eat Last: Why Some Teams Pull Together and Others Don’t. Portfolio/Penguin.

7. U.S. Army. (2024, February). FM 1-02.1 OPERATIONAL TERMS. HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY. https://irp.fas.org/doddir/army/fm1-02-1.pdf

8. U.S. Army. (2024, February). FM 1-02.2 MILITARY SYMBOLS. HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY. https://irp.fas.org/doddir/army/fm1-02-2.pdf

Next Chapter