A new way to train leaders: interview with Lt. Gen. Claude Christianson
Rewarding officers for toeing the line throughout their early careers is no way to develop the creative thinkers needed to fill the military's most senior positions. Lt. Gen. Claude Christianson aims to change that.
Steve Geary is adjunct faculty at the University of Tennessee's Haaslam College of Business and is a lecturer at The Gordon Institute at Tufts University. He is the President of the Supply Chain Visions family of companies, consultancies that work across the government sector. Steve is a contributing editor at DC Velocity, and editor-at-large for CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly.
Lt. Gen. Christianson's last position before retiring from the Army in 2008 was director of logistics for the Joint Staff in Washington, D.C. In that role, he coordinated efforts across the defense logistics community, including the office of the secretary of defense, the services, the combatant commands, the industrial base, and our multinational and interagency partners. Prior to that, he had major responsibility during the combat phase of Operation Iraqi Freedom, where he directed in-theater logistics support for all land forces.
Lt. Gen Christianson has been described by some as perhaps the finest logistics operator ever produced by the U.S. military. He spoke recently with DC Velocity Contributing Editor Steve Geary.
Q: Can you fill us in on what you've been doing since you arrived at the center? A: Since joining the center in October 2009, I've had the opportunity to work with experts across defense logistics, including senior leaders in DOD, leading academicians in logistics and supply chain management, and senior executives in many commercial firms. We've been looking at best practices and listening to ideas on how to develop logisticians capable of successfully managing in the future. We're working to develop both innovative approaches to education and improvements to tools, processes, and systems that will provide our community with the ability to effectively and efficiently support future operations and meet any challenges we might face. We need leaders—both now and in the future—who are able to understand logistics and supply chain theory and conceptual approaches, and translate them into useful principles and practical applications.
Q: What sort of opportunities have you found? A: We have looked at military education along career paths, from pre-commissioning to high-level executive management programs. Our efforts so far have focused on the mid-career and senior manager levels; we refer to them as intermediate and senior service college levels of education.
At the senior service college level, there are three areas where we see great opportunities to enhance the educational experience for our leaders. The first is an understanding of supply chain management: the defense supply chain, how it operates, and how it might operate to be more successful in the future. Second, there is hardly any instruction at all about life-cycle systems management as a culture, a philosophy, and a way of doing business. Finally, we believe we should help develop a stronger understanding around the nexus of resourcing, readiness, and national security outcomes to help answer the question "How can you best resource national security strategy under conditions of uncertainty and constrained resources?"
Q: What about the intermediate-level officers with 10 to 12 years of experience? A: We're convinced that our major focus area at this level of education should be on joint logistics planning. We aren't doing a good enough job with our mid-career professionals in helping them understand how to effectively plan joint logistics operations. Keep in mind that we don't deploy as the Army, the Air Force, the Navy, or the Marines. We blend together as a joint force under a joint command structure.
That opinion—that we need to do a better job teaching joint logistics—was formed by what we found in observing and training units headed into Iraq and Afghanistan. This skill is very challenging to develop in the classroom environment because it requires extensive practice and interaction with experienced planners who are comfortable discussing planning, coaching, and assessing students in an interactive learning environment. It is my belief that you can't teach planning effectively using a stack of PowerPoint charts.
Q: If you had to pick one skill that all future leaders need, what would it be? A: I believe the most important skill for future leaders to possess is the ability to influence people they don't control. That will require developing skills in negotiation, mediation, and facilitation—skills that today are underserved in our educational system. An uncertain environment also requires leaders who see things as they are and can find unique ways of applying the capabilities they have at their disposal.
It is also important to note that in order for us to be successful in uncertainty, we will often need to have different relationships between organizations and people than we have today. In some cases, we may need completely new relationships with people and organizations that may not even exist today. We want to develop the kind of leaders who can make these relationships grow and actually bear fruit.
Q: How do you foster a collaborative mindset in military leaders who grow up in a command and control environment? A: I think we have to focus on unity of effort as our guiding principle. In the military, we have talked about unity of effort without unity of command for a long time, and I think today's students, students who are coming out of multiple assignments in Iraq and Afghanistan, get it. We need to reinforce that in our classrooms and help the military institutions adapt to what the students have already learned.
Unity of effort is really driven by a few, very key components, one of the most important of which is finding common ground. Is it possible that we can all agree on what we are trying to accomplish? Can we all see the same picture? Are we sharing information that allows us to see the same thing? Having agreement on the common outcomes becomes the key to getting unity of effort.
You don't have to have a military command and control structure to do that. In fact, a rigid hierarchical structure may in some ways impede mission accomplishment by limiting collaboration and creative thought.
Q: How did you end up here? What insights can we gain as logisticians from your experience? A: I've been blessed throughout my career with the opportunity to work with exceptional people from all walks of life and professional disciplines. Personally, I was also very lucky to have done things that Army officers were, at one time, told not to do. One of those "no-nos" was to teach ROTC. The second was to serve a tour with the reserve components, where I spent three years. At the time, those two assignments were pretty much considered a death knell for one's career. But as I got older, those two assignments helped me understand important things that, had I not had those assignments, probably would have made my jobs a lot more difficult as I got to more senior positions.
My advice to younger officers and leaders—which at this point is just about everyone—is to work hard at every job you have and learn as much as you can from each of them. Look around you, and pay special attention to what your subordinates, see, know, and do. Every job offers remarkable potential—except, of course, my current one. [Editor's note: Gen. Christianson smiles and chuckles.]
Q: Is there anything else in your career path that helped you be successful? A: I've had lots of foreign exposure, almost 20 years outside of the continental United States during my 37 years in uniform. That has helped me immensely to develop a deeper understanding of how to work with people who don't think like you do, don't do things like you do, and don't share the same sense of priorities.
My exposure to peoples and cultures that did not share the same perspective as I did helped to build a deeper understanding of alternative views. Spending lots of time in places like Thailand, Korea, Germany, Italy, and the Middle East gave me a much broader look at my profession. My combat experiences in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Iraq were also very important. I think all of those things—when blended together—have given me what might be considered an eclectic career path. However, from an intellectual perspective, those experiences have allowed me to see things differently, and hopefully more broadly and deeply.
Q: Are you saying that the fact that you like to color outside the lines actually helped make you a better leader? A: To the extent that coloring outside the lines has helped me find new paths, it has helped me. If we believe that the future is going to be uncertain, then we will send our leaders into places where they will be asked to accomplish something we haven't seen before.
In that regard, we want to be able to develop officers who are creative. If they try to apply standard templates—cookie cutters—to solve problems that are unknown, they are going to fail. We need leaders who can be creative, who will understand the problems they face in the context in which those problems are presented, and can recognize when a template solution will not fit.
Q: But most organizations—and certainly the U.S. Army—live within structures. How do you reconcile the need to be creative with the reality that we have to have structured processes? A: Organizations have structures for good reasons. We have to have the discipline—both organizational discipline and personal discipline—so that under extreme pressure, we can depend on the guy next to us and we can depend on the organization next to us.
However, at the senior leadership level, how one applies capabilities—these structures—should not be looked at as one size fits all. There is really an art to senior leadership that is challenging, especially under the pressure of military requirements and life-and-death decisions.
Q: That goes back to your earlier point about how a diverse set of experiences helped prepare you for senior leadership. You learned to see things from a variety of perspectives? A: The fact that I colored outside the lines at times has helped me. However, it is important to understand that coloring outside the lines as a lieutenant and a captain is not always good. Recognizing when you can step outside the lines and when to stay inside the lines is very important.
Interestingly, my perspective is that we tend to reward officers who toe the line throughout their early careers and then all of a sudden—when they advance to the most senior positions—we want them to be critical thinkers, strategic thinkers. In other words, we want our most senior leaders to be able to envision new ways of doing business. That's a lot easier said than done, and that is why the center is looking at how we teach our logistics leaders in the military. We believe that what we teach is important, but it's how we teach that is most important.
The Port of Oakland has been awarded $50 million from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration (MARAD) to modernize wharves and terminal infrastructure at its Outer Harbor facility, the port said today.
Those upgrades would enable the Outer Harbor to accommodate Ultra Large Container Vessels (ULCVs), which are now a regular part of the shipping fleet calling on West Coast ports. Each of these ships has a handling capacity of up to 24,000 TEUs (20-foot containers) but are currently restricted at portions of Oakland’s Outer Harbor by aging wharves which were originally designed for smaller ships.
According to the port, those changes will let it handle newer, larger vessels, which are more efficient, cost effective, and environmentally cleaner to operate than older ships. Specific investments for the project will include: wharf strengthening, structural repairs, replacing container crane rails, adding support piles, strengthening support beams, and replacing electrical bus bar system to accommodate larger ship-to-shore cranes.
Commercial fleet operators are steadily increasing their use of GPS fleet tracking, in-cab video solutions, and predictive analytics, driven by rising costs, evolving regulations, and competitive pressures, according to an industry report from Verizon Connect.
Those conclusions come from the company’s fifth annual “Fleet Technology Trends Report,” conducted in partnership with Bobit Business Media, and based on responses from 543 fleet management professionals.
The study showed that for five consecutive years, at least four out of five respondents have reported using at least one form of fleet technology, said Atlanta-based Verizon Connect, which provides fleet and mobile workforce management software platforms, embedded OEM hardware, and a connected vehicle device called Hum by Verizon.
The most commonly used of those technologies is GPS fleet tracking, with 69% of fleets across industries reporting its use, the survey showed. Of those users, 72% find it extremely or very beneficial, citing improved efficiency (62%) and a reduction in harsh driving/speeding events (49%).
Respondents also reported a focus on safety, with 57% of respondents citing improved driver safety as a key benefit of GPS fleet tracking. And 68% of users said in-cab video solutions are extremely or very beneficial. Together, those technologies help reduce distracted driving incidents, improve coaching sessions, and help reduce accident and insurance costs, Verizon Connect said.
Looking at the future, fleet management software is evolving to meet emerging challenges, including sustainability and electrification, the company said. "The findings from this year's Fleet Technology Trends Report highlight a strong commitment across industries to embracing fleet technology, with GPS tracking and in-cab video solutions consistently delivering measurable results,” Peter Mitchell, General Manager, Verizon Connect, said in a release. “As fleets face rising costs and increased regulatory pressures, these technologies are proving to be indispensable in helping organizations optimize their operations, reduce expenses, and navigate the path toward a more sustainable future.”
Businesses engaged in international trade face three major supply chain hurdles as they head into 2025: the disruptions caused by Chinese New Year (CNY), the looming threat of potential tariffs on foreign-made products that could be imposed by the incoming Trump Administration, and the unresolved contract negotiations between the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the U.S. Maritime Alliance (USMX), according to an analysis from trucking and logistics provider Averitt.
Each of those factors could lead to significant shipping delays, production slowdowns, and increased costs, Averitt said.
First, Chinese New Year 2025 begins on January 29, prompting factories across China and other regions to shut down for weeks, typically causing production to halt and freight demand to skyrocket. The ripple effects can range from increased shipping costs to extended lead times, disrupting even the most well-planned operations. To prepare for that event, shippers should place orders early, build inventory buffers, secure freight space in advance, diversify shipping modes, and communicate with logistics providers, Averitt said.
Second, new or increased tariffs on foreign-made goods could drive up the cost of imports, disrupt established supply chains, and create uncertainty in the marketplace. In turn, shippers may face freight rate volatility and capacity constraints as businesses rush to stockpile inventory ahead of tariff deadlines. To navigate these challenges, shippers should prepare advance shipments and inventory stockpiling, diversity sourcing, negotiate supplier agreements, explore domestic production, and leverage financial strategies.
Third, unresolved contract negotiations between the ILA and the USMX will come to a head by January 15, when the current contract expires. Labor action or strikes could cause severe disruptions at East and Gulf Coast ports, triggering widespread delays and bottlenecks across the supply chain. To prepare for the worst, shippers should adopt a similar strategy to the other potential January threats: collaborate early, secure freight, diversify supply chains, and monitor policy changes.
According to Averitt, companies can cushion the impact of all three challenges by deploying a seamless, end-to-end solution covering the entire path from customs clearance to final-mile delivery. That strategy can help businesses to store inventory closer to their customers, mitigate delays, and reduce costs associated with supply chain disruptions. And combined with proactive communication and real-time visibility tools, the approach allows companies to maintain control and keep their supply chains resilient in the face of global uncertainties, Averitt said.
Bloomington, Indiana-based FTR said its Trucking Conditions Index declined in September to -2.47 from -1.39 in August as weakness in the principal freight dynamics – freight rates, utilization, and volume – offset lower fuel costs and slightly less unfavorable financing costs.
Those negative numbers are nothing new—the TCI has been positive only twice – in May and June of this year – since April 2022, but the group’s current forecast still envisions consistently positive readings through at least a two-year forecast horizon.
“Aside from a near-term boost mostly related to falling diesel prices, we have not changed our Trucking Conditions Index forecast significantly in the wake of the election,” Avery Vise, FTR’s vice president of trucking, said in a release. “The outlook continues to be more favorable for carriers than what they have experienced for well over two years. Our analysis indicates gradual but steadily rising capacity utilization leading to stronger freight rates in 2025.”
But FTR said its forecast remains unchanged. “Just like everyone else, we’ll be watching closely to see exactly what trade and other economic policies are implemented and over what time frame. Some freight disruptions are likely due to tariffs and other factors, but it is not yet clear that those actions will do more than shift the timing of activity,” Vise said.
The TCI tracks the changes representing five major conditions in the U.S. truck market: freight volumes, freight rates, fleet capacity, fuel prices, and financing costs. Combined into a single index indicating the industry’s overall health, a positive score represents good, optimistic conditions while a negative score shows the inverse.
Specifically, the new global average robot density has reached a record 162 units per 10,000 employees in 2023, which is more than double the mark of 74 units measured seven years ago.
Broken into geographical regions, the European Union has a robot density of 219 units per 10,000 employees, an increase of 5.2%, with Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Slovenia in the global top ten. Next, North America’s robot density is 197 units per 10,000 employees – up 4.2%. And Asia has a robot density of 182 units per 10,000 persons employed in manufacturing - an increase of 7.6%. The economies of Korea, Singapore, mainland China and Japan are among the top ten most automated countries.
Broken into individual countries, the U.S. ranked in 10th place in 2023, with a robot density of 295 units. Higher up on the list, the top five are:
The Republic of Korea, with 1,012 robot units, showing a 5% increase on average each year since 2018 thanks to its strong electronics and automotive industries.
Singapore had 770 robot units, in part because it is a small country with a very low number of employees in the manufacturing industry, so it can reach a high robot density with a relatively small operational stock.
China took third place in 2023, surpassing Germany and Japan with a mark of 470 robot units as the nation has managed to double its robot density within four years.
Germany ranks fourth with 429 robot units for a 5% CAGR since 2018.
Japan is in fifth place with 419 robot units, showing growth of 7% on average each year from 2018 to 2023.