 Well, good afternoon. It's a pleasure to have you here for the benefit of anyone in the audience who didn't hear from me two weeks ago. I'm John Jackson. I'm the coordinator for the Issues in National Security Lecture series. I'm particularly pleased that Admiral Chatfield has been able to join us today and her husband David. This is the second of 10 lectures that we're offering this year. Before I introduce our guest speaker, I'd like to share a few administrative remarks. Our primary focus is on the scholarly lectures that we're going to offer in the series, but we're taking advantage of the opportunity that we've got a captive audience here and whatnot. To share some information, you may find helpful. First, we want to welcome back our friends from the Navy Fleet and Family Support Center, Ms. Laura Davis and Ann Chempney, who are in the back of the auditorium to offer their services and answer any questions you may have. Thank you very much, ladies. On my right is Mr. Jose Laura, the branch manager of the Navy Federal Credit Union here on base. He has some handouts and will be prepared to answer any of the questions you might have and also to accept any donations into my account. I will give you that number. And on my left we have Dean Whiteman, who is here from Morale Welfare and Recreation Department, who can talk about fitness options and other offers that are made by our terrific MWR program. So after the presentation, feel free to come by and ask any questions of any of them. I'd now like to ask David Scovel to come forward and tell you about another exciting opportunity we're planning to offer to you. So, David. So it's good to see so many new and some returning faces. I just wanted to say, for those of you that are on your second one, a real pleasant thought is you only have to make five out of the next eight to get that certificate. So you're well on the way. So congratulations in advance for those of you that we'll see at the end of the year. I did want us, we've talked about who's here, but jumping forward a week, we know that Dean's team has the Rec people here as well, and Teresa will be with Dean in two weeks. So we're looking at March 11th. I keep saying next week. February 11th. I'll get it right. So that will be February 11th is the next one. The only other thing that I wanted to mention, we're working on this. We think we're going to get a go ahead, but this is kind of exciting. About an hour before this starts, an hour and 15 minutes, we're going to ask for a boarding time of about three o'clock. We're going to have a 14 person comfort van to take spouses only. We won't invite guests at this point. We're going to work on the sign up sheets and what have you. But over at the O Club at about three o'clock, we'll depart for about an hour historical tour of Newport. So we want spouses to sign up for that. Please sign up for only one week because we'll probably have to run it to accommodate the need for probably six weeks, six of the eight weeks or so. But we want to make sure that everybody gets a chance to be on that. And that'll be just an hour and a half before the lecture series that day. So and then we'll drop everybody right off at Pringle Hall in time for the 430 lecture. And there you go. So we're working on that. And the only other note is, escape me for now and I didn't have it here on my nose. Anyway, so thank you very much for being here. We want to encourage you to bring others as well and keep coming back. And we'll look forward to seeing you at certificate time at the end of the year. So thank you so much. Our speaker this evening is Dr. Olinda Johnson, a professor of strategic leadership and leader development in the College of Leadership and Ethics. She joined the Navy War College faculty in 2010 after a successful career in civilian academia. In her primary role, she develops and facilitates leader development for flag and general officers and senior executive service civilians. A passionate teacher and educator, Dr. Johnson also works with other Navy units and military organizations, including the Army Special Forces, to support their leader development efforts. Dr. Johnson previously served as visiting professor and distinguished visiting professor at the U.S. Army War College and at the U.S. Air Force Academy. So she is purple through and through, so that's good to know. She currently holds an adjunct appointment at the Wellington School of Business and Government at Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. She received her doctorate and organizational behavior from the University of Pittsburgh, the Katz Graduate School of Business, and her BS and MBA from Florida A&M University. She will share with you this evening some thoughts about how leaders and how each of us can think about the many challenges we face. Dr. Johnson. Thank you. Good afternoon. So I have to show you this and this is a really sad story, but I had this beautiful necklace that was really working with my outfit. An AV person who I adore says it's interfering with the microphone, so I have to take it off, but I wanted you to see it first. So good afternoon. I am really, really, really excited to be able to engage with you today. I am a big, big fan of this lecture series. I think it is phenomenal that the Naval War College provides an opportunity for our students, partners, all of you and many more, to participate in this year of learning. So with that, are you ready to have class? We are having class. I have a cheering section over here too. I just need to point that out. Love it. So here's my first question for you. When you see the word leadership, what immediately comes to mind? What is the image or the thought that immediately comes to mind when you hear the word or see the word leadership? Now think about it for a moment. Maybe close your eyes if you need to. And then I want you to shout it out to me. I know we don't have microphones around here, so I will repeat it back so that everybody can hear your wonderful contributions. Leadership. What do you think about when you hear the word leadership? People, okay? Authority, someone in responsibility, trusted by followers, very good. Leading by example, knowledge, role model, right? Empathy, empowered. Oh, this is all good stuff. The technical solution proposed did not work. That's leadership. Well, you know, so leadership is one of those concepts that it really can mean different things to different people. It's also sometimes one of those concepts where you just kind of know it when you see it, but it's hard to define. So let's add another layer to this conversation. What do you think of when you think of leadership then in the context of senior Navy leaders or senior leaders in general? And what we're referring to here specifically are admirals or for our sister services, generals, or for our international friends, whatever is the highest rank in your particular service. Now how does your conception of leadership evolve? Decision maker, more experience, specialties, anything else? Power. For people who may not necessarily need power. So as we're thinking at the higher levels, there certainly is that power element. So yes, yes, yes in everything that you have said. So this poses an interesting challenge. Not only do we have these broad definitions of leadership, it also means something very different when you are thinking about the higher levels of leadership. And certainly with senior Navy leaders or again senior leaders within your organizations, we are talking about folks who are clearly accomplished. They succeeded in their own organizations. They clearly have quite a bit of experience as someone has said. And they likely have led at a variety of levels within their institution, maybe led a variety of units or other organizations. So this poses an interesting challenge for our team in the College of Leadership and Ethics. So that's another unit here in the Naval War College because our team has been given the responsibility by the Chief of Naval Operations, so the number one dude in the Navy, to develop and execute and teach senior Navy leaders, admirals. One of those things that makes you go, how's that going to work, right? So it reminds me of something a three-star Admiral said to me several years ago. And we sort of land on this question, can you really teach this stuff? And certainly can you teach this stuff to people who have an awful lot of knowledge and experience and power? It's an interesting question, not only in that context, but it's also an interesting question for all of you. The question is also interesting when you consider the background of our team that has this responsibility for developing the course design, the curriculum, and teaching. Bear with me here, I'm telling you a story. So in my mind, on our team, there are really only two people who I would argue you are proven and established senior leaders who have all of those characteristics that you describe. The first is our Dean, Dean Pei Klein, who herself is a retired two-star Admiral. The second is our Deputy Dean, who is a retired Navy Commodore with significant leadership experience and has been focused on leader development for the Navy for quite some time. The rest of us, we are a rag tag team of folks with a diversity of backgrounds. We have on our team a retired helicopter pilot who is an expert in psychometric testing. So that's things like self-awareness and self-evaluations and coaching. We also have a military philosopher who studies military ethics and writes monographs on Aristotle's Socrates and the like. We also have a former colleague now retired but who contributed to our efforts, who is a cognitive psychologist who early in her career studied the neurology of children's brains. Go figure. And then we have our junior colleague, junior and tenure only, who has a doctorate in a field of study that I didn't even know existed and still have a hard time pronouncing. You ready for this? Udomonia. Try that for word for friends. Udomonia. It is the study of happiness and well-being. Who knew? Apparently it's a thing. And then you have me. I'm a behavioral scientist. I study people and organizations. I come from a business school background and I have a passion for teaching and learning. So I study the science of teaching and learning. So here's my question. How does all of that help us teach leadership to senior Navy leaders? What do you think? It doesn't. Let me help. So part of that conversation and this might be note-taking time that might be helpful for you is in the College of Leadership and Ethics we make the distinction between leadership versus leader. Anybody want to take a shot at what that difference might be? Leadership versus leader. And I have a titsy roll for the person who gives it a shot. I see somebody wants candy. All right, go ahead. Okay, close. Very close. Now I'm not very good at throwing these things. So if somebody else catches it, beat them up so they make sure they give it back to you. There you go. Generally speaking, we think of leadership as the process of leading. So that might be getting engaging in specific acts in order to fulfill your responsibilities in your leadership role. When it comes to leader, the focus is on the person as a leader. Who are we as persons and how does that influence our ability to lead effectively? We focus squarely on leader as a person, which allows us to leverage all of the diversity of our backgrounds that relate to the person side of leadership. Makes sense? All right. So with that in mind, let's think about leader through the lens of behavioral science. Behavioral science says that there are three different domains that can help us better understand ourselves as leaders. Following me? The first is the behavioral domain. That is what leaders do. So for example, that might be what are the actions a leader can take to motivate and inspire others. So behavioral is what leaders do. The second domain is affective. How leaders relate. That can be anything from emotional intelligence. It can evolve self-awareness. How we build trust. Effective. So think about it this way from the self-awareness standpoint. The better I understand myself as well as understand how I might be perceived by others, the better able I am to build and leverage working relationships. Makes sense? Effective. And then the third domain is the cognitive domain. How leaders think. It's interesting because in the field of leadership studies as well as among our very senior leaders in the Department of Defense, we're at large, there is a lot more focus and attention on this cognitive domain. This is where we're going to play today. But let's do a quick review. What are the three domains? What's the first one? Behavioral. And that is what leaders do. The second one is. And that is how leaders relate. And then the third one, hint, it's on the screen, is cognitive, which is how leaders think. So this is really interesting because more often than not, we don't really pay attention to how we think. We just do. It just is. It's like walking. You just do it. Well, it turns out that we all have different ways of gathering and processing information, which reveals our own thinking preferences. So the way that I might gather information and process information may be very different from the way you gather information and process information. So we have our preferences, but many times we're not really fully aware of them until we encounter someone who does not think like us. And then we have problems. So what I would like to do right now is to give us an opportunity to sort of assess our thinking preferences. We're going to do a little demonstration. Are you game? Are you game? Okay. Thank you. All right. What's that? I chart, right? So when you go to the eye doctor and you got to sit behind that machine and this is at the end of the room and they flip the glass back and forth and the doctor says, which one is clear? This one or this one? All right. Then they flip it back. This one or this one? All right. So I'm going to do the same thing. We're going to run that same drill. I'm going to show you a series of diagrams. And I want you to think about these diagrams in terms of which is most comfortable for you when it comes to how you might solve a problem or approach a problem or how you might think through a situation. And I want you to keep track of which represents you best. Follow. What makes you more comfortable? I'd like to define it as our cognitive comfort zones, right? We have a way of thinking that just works for us. So which is more comfortable? One or two? One or two? Three or four? Three or four? Five, so am I standing in your way? Or six? Five or six? Seven or eight? Seven or eight? Who lives here? Look around. Keep your hands up. Look around. There's a whole lot of people who live here, right? That's okay. There's nothing wrong with that, right? You would be the folks that we would describe as being very comfortable thinking in linear ways, right? There's a beginning point. There's an end point. There are steps or processes in between to get you from point A to point B, right? Linear. Who lives here? Oh, there's a few hands. You are my people. I am so happy. I'm going to put up two hands because my squiggly's usually look even worse than that, right? So I have a few people here. We might be described as having a thinking preference for more fluid thinking. We're the folks who are very comfortable starting a story in the middle and we have no problem bouncing back this way and then bringing in another story from four weeks ago in order to get us to the point that we are trying to make. We are all over the place. We also happen to be the people who can wear stripes and flowers and rocket. That's all I'm saying, right? Very fluid in our thinking. One is not more right than the other, but they certainly have different ways of approaching a problem or an analysis, for example. So who are my people who live primarily here and happen to be live with or work with someone who is primarily here? What's that like? What's that like? And for those who are primarily linear and you work with someone who is fluid, what's that like? Frustrating. I was waiting for somebody to say, Frustrating. What did you say? The best. Hurting cats. Yeah. Because remember, in our room, we have the majority of folks who are on the linear side and so folks on the linear side are like all you people on the fluid side, why can't you just get it together? Why can't you just put a thought together because you were just driving me crazy? Well, for my fellow fluid people, here is my statement for you. You are not broken. Contrary to what they might say, you are not broken. And vice versa. There's certainly those of you who I would imagine who are have a preference for linear thinking have found yourself on a team or in a volunteer organization or working where everybody else was thinking in much more fluid ways and you're just saying, can't we just stay on the plan? Because here's the plan. Mixed. Well, that means that you got it going on. Because, and I mean that in all seriousness, not everybody can do that, right? And in fact, as leaders, and we'll get to this, that's part of what we want to strive towards because one is not better than the other. If you already possess the capacity to think in linear ways as well as in fluid ways, then you are certainly much more evolved than some of us who are very comfortable in our particular preference. And that is, in fact, it's a great segue because that is part of our challenge as leaders. If we have a preference for linear thinking, then we have, I would almost say a responsibility, but I'm biased, part of our charge is to further develop the capacity for fluid thinking. If I am naturally a fluid thinker, then as a leader, it is important for me to stretch to also learn and develop the capacity for more linear thinking because the reality is you need both. It's not one or the other. In fact, what we're getting at is this need for the diversity of thinking, right? And lots of times when we hear diversity of thinking, we are referencing diversity of perspectives, diversity of opinions, yes, yes, and yes, and all of that. Here we're taking it to a higher level because we're talking about it in a cognitive domain is the diversity of how we think and process information. Does that make sense? Does that address your question? An observation? Okay. Yeah, you absolutely do. You absolutely do. And so to have developed the capacity to do that is an absolute strength. Not all of us have that strength. I'll be the first one to admit that is certainly not one of my strengths, but I have had to learn to really stretch over the years and develop some tendencies that allows me to think in ways that are not my predominant preference, right? The diversity of thinking. What that also suggests again is then building our capacity to think beyond what our preference happens to be, right? So how does all of this get us back to teaching senior Navy leaders? What do you think? Absolutely. All right, that's titsy roll worthy, but I know I'm not going to make it back there. So I'm going to take your titsy roll and I'm going to put it right here and then when we have time, I will hand deliver it to you. There you go. As leaders, we not only need to recognize our thinking preference. It is also important to recognize that the people that we lead have different thinking preferences. One is not more right than the other, but there may be circumstances under which one thinking preference is more valuable or enables one to thrive than in others. With respect to senior leaders in our context, admirals and SESs, we have this conversation in the context, as it relates to the context of the decisions that they will make. One of the things that we have learned from our research and the work that we do in the College of Leadership and Ethics is that the context for the decisions that a leader makes evolves as the leader becomes more senior. And here's what I mean by the context. I mean the environment in which the decision is being made. And this applies whether we are talking military, whether we are talking about different, whatever your professional role might be in another organization or even in volunteer organizations as your roles progress in those organizations. The context for the decision changes. In our particular instance, we make a distinction between contexts that are complicated and those that are complex. And here's the distinction. With the complicated context, there's generally a known starting point and a known endpoint. And predominantly, it's a context where the decision and the decision process is predictable. So in other words, even though there may be a lot of factors and a lot of things going on, I know as a leader what it is that I'm trying to achieve. And I know that there may be some policies, some processes or some procedures that will help me get there. Follow? With a complex context, the environment is what we describe in the military as bukkah, volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous. In other words, it is an unpredictable environment. You don't really know what the end state is. Things are changing all of the time. It's very ambiguous. Things are not necessarily clear for you. And so the leader is challenged in the way that the decisions are made. So which thinking preference is likely to thrive best in a complicated context? Well, I use the same diagram. Made it kind of easy. It's all I'm saying. Which one is likely to thrive in a complex? No, I said complex. There you go. Fluid. All right. What happens if I limit my decision approaches with a linear thinking process in a complex environment? People might disagree. What did you do? You might be taking might not be taking in things. Yeah, clearly it's not necessarily a good fit, right? Doesn't mean it's wrong. And I will be the first one to tell you that even in complex environments, you absolutely need some linear thinking. The challenge is when as leaders, we limit ourselves in a complex environment to only a linear thinking approach. In fact, what that usually yields is what we would describe as suboptimized decisions. Your decisions aren't as good as they could be. Yes, I've got questions. Yes. Although, Peg, would you agree, in some cases we're starting to see some changes in that. But that traditionally has been the case. We had an interesting cohort last year where we had many more fluid thinkers than we traditionally have had in the past. What do you mean? That's exactly right. I think what we are starting to see, however, as I mentioned earlier, this idea of even being aware of this cognitive domain and how that works is starting to expand that a little bit. Because the phrase we like to use is ducks pick ducks, right? So, as you describe, what's your first name? Joy. Okay, Joy, don't hesitate. I just wanted to address you. That's all because you made a good observation. Ducks pick ducks. And so, if I'm a linear thinker, I'm going to think that my fellow linear thinkers are good. And I'm going to think that the fluid thinkers can't get on board, or there's something wrong, or I'm over-generalizing here. But what we are starting to see is there is an increased, I think it's probably the better word to use, an increased appreciation for the value of different thinkers. And the best leaders recognize that and reward that. Okay. So, when we are talking about, I'm going to just go back to this one, when we are talking about this overlap and sub-optimizing decisions, in order to move away from our limitations, we need to work towards further developing our mental agility. Again, we're still playing in the cognitive domain of leadership, right? Here's how we would define mental agility. Capacity to adjust our thinking or realign our thought processes as the circumstances dictate. And for some of us, that's a pretty natural thing. We can do that. So, it means that our charge then is to further refine and strengthen our ability to think in more fluid ways. Whereas for others, if our comfort zone, again, is a linear thinking, then we are challenged to further our capacity to be more agile in the way that we think and process information. At the most senior levels, I'd like to define it this way. The key here is thinking critically in the absence of predictability. When we are working in complicated environments, we can use our processes and we kind of know where we're heading and where we're going to get to. But in complex environments, when we lack predictability, then we are challenged to, in our approach, to critically think that way. So, we're back to this question. Can we teach this stuff? The answer is yes when approached through the lens of leader development, which is back to leadership versus leader, focusing on the leader as a person and furthering the person's strengths, capacities, abilities with respect to these particular capacities. So, we certainly, in the cause of leadership and ethics, approach teaching senior leaders through this lens or through this approach of leader development. So, what I would like to do now is to give you an example and give you an opportunity to participate in one of the learning experiences that we use with our admirals to further their capacity for mental agility. But let me set it up for you first. One of the drivers of this particular learning experience comes from neuroscience, big word, neuroscience combined with the science of teaching and learning. And what neuroscience says is that we can in fact help someone or facilitate the development of mental agility by doing a couple of things in the learning experience. So, the first one is to foster variation in the way the brain thinks. So, think about it this way. The brain is a muscle, right? And so, if we're asking the brain to do something different than it might normally do, then we've got to sort of train that muscle to do something differently. And in order to do that, you've got to kind of change things up. So, think about it as if, let's say you're a long-distance runner. I have long-distance runners here. Let's say you're a long-distance runner. And you are transitioning to become a sprinter. Ooh. I see a head like doing this. What does that mean? Right? Two totally different set of muscles that you're using. And the way that I train to be a long-distance runner is different from the way that I train to become a sprinter. Well, that's a type of agility that we're working towards. So, it's the same thing when we're dealing with the cognitive. I've got to change things up and help people use their brain muscles in a different way. Does that make sense? All right. Along those same lines, work against the familiar, we know what we like. And we become very accustomed to what we like. And so, in order to facilitate this agility, I've got to change up what it is that you are most familiar with. So, I used to teach a critical thinking course here. And I would always start the course in a completely unexpected way. And every day, the class or every time we would meet, they never knew what was coming. And it was really frustrating for folks, particularly for my linear folks who were like, well, you're supposed to do this, this, this and this. Like, yeah, I'm not doing that. All right. But that's because our brain wants to work with the familiar. But if I am trying to get your brain to become more agile, then we got to work against the familiar. Then I'll just run through a couple more of these. Orient the brain towards fluid conceptualization. So, do things in a much more fluid way. Produce anxiety. So, it turns out that creating discomfort is a really, really effective learning tool when you're working to help develop this thing called mental agility. And then finally, it's just like piano lessons. Practice, practice, practice. If I am naturally oriented towards fluid thinking, you can't just give me one lesson on how to think linearly or show me one step and think that I got it, right? I've really got to continue to work on it. So, that's sort of the background. I will tell you that when we do this particular exercise with the animals, it's great because it's on the very first day of the class and the very first morning. And generally, what happens, you know, any of you when you participate in a training course, usually the most senior person, the person in charge begins the class and starts and says, welcomes everybody and tells them what the course is going to be about and what the week is going to be about. And then you go around and you do introductions. Does that sound familiar? Instead, what we do is class starts, I walk in and I ask the first question and we just start this exercise that we are about to do. Which neuroscience indicator does that relate to? Yep, at least number two, right? At least number two, right? So, it's a great opportunity for us to actually put in practice the science that we have learned and we are seeing the effectiveness of that. So, with that, I have on, I'm going to call it the board, we have on the board four educational subjects, right? Literature, science, math and the arts. Let's imagine that we are back in our eighth grade biology class and we are studying the fish food chain. Now, if I had a white board because I am the white board queen, I know I am, I would draw this on a white board, but since I can't draw it on the white board, I spent all Saturday morning when we were snowed in doing this. I'm so proud of myself. All right, fish food chain, right? That is a fish food chain. So, let's imagine that each of those four subjects represents a fish. You follow me? Each of those four subjects represents a fish. Here's my question. If we consider the future success of our children, whether it's our own children or children in general, if we were to consider the future success of our children, which one of those subjects is the big fish? Now, here's what I want you to do. I want you to think about it for a minute yourself and then talk to whoever is around you and share your thoughts. Not necessarily looking for one right answer, but I want you to share your thoughts. I'm going to give you a few minutes to do this. Which one of those is the big fish when we're thinking about the future success of our children? Go. You're welcome so much. That manner. Excuse me. What do you think? I want to ask you, but I got the mic on. I always nice to see you. You guys already know. No, the secret, don't you? Did you already tell them the secret? No, no, this is entertaining watching them go through this. I don't think this chart is, you can't, you can't just can't pick one big fish. It's funny. So what'd you come up with? Which one is the big fish? Art? Okay, someone said art. Tell me why art. Yes. Yes. Well, you had your hand up. So I'll repeat it back because art actually embodies and can embody science and math and literature in many different ways, right? You might even think of the science of movement would be included in the arts. I got you. All right, somebody else. Which one is the big fish? Math, all right? You said math. Yes, ma'am. And tell me your name. Jewel. Beautiful name, Jewel. Jewel, why math? Jewel, you know what? I think I need to give you like a handful of tits and rolls. Everybody give Jewel a hand clap. And I'll tell you why. So it's really interesting because when we do this exercise with the admirals, no one ever gets that. And then at the end, I asked them, so what's the fifth fish? And they're like, what? You only asked us about four, right? Right? Good observational tools. Yes, sir. Okay, so you want tits and rolls? Is that what you're saying? Yeah, yeah, yeah. So it's really interesting because part of the way that we process and we give information, if we are not allowing for agility, our tendency is to focus only on what's there. And our tendency is only to focus on what we've been presented, right? But being able to recognize and even define what that fifth fish might be, even though it wasn't a question that was asked, it wasn't a part of the discussion, is in fact an important part of being able to think at a much higher level. Let me ask you this. Why are the other ones not the big fish? So if you said art was the big fish or you said science was the big fish, why are the other ones not the big fish? Yes. Okay. Okay. Okay. So if you think of it, if you think of the other three as the base in order to get you to what is the big fish, but it raises a really interesting question. How are you defining big? How are you defining big? Okay, so you said most necessary. Did everybody define it as most necessary? How did you define it? The biggest one on the screen, so you defined it by size? How did you define it? Here's one of our challenges as a leader. We often assume that we're starting from the same point of understanding. And it's particularly a challenge when we are presented with what we presume to be readily understood shared concepts is how I might define big. In this context, I could have defined big as, what did you say, readily necessary? I could define it as necessary, but I could also define it in terms of what I think success means or a whole host of other ways of defining it. So part of our challenge as leaders is to recognize or even ask the question, do we have the same understanding of this concept? Absolutely. Absolutely. Right? At the least understood. So that becomes the challenge. You have a definition. You have a definition. You have a definition. Now we're making a decision based on this assumption that we all have the same definition. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. I'm sorry. You said literature. Okay. And so for your literature was the big fish. Okay. Yes, absolutely. Yes. So everything is in the literature. So if it's any, if it is helpful for you, you have another person down here who said it was literature as well. Right. So there are others who said literature. Let me ask you this. I'll get you in just a second. Can the smallest fish be the big fish? You're not in your head. Why? Sir? Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Very good. Another way of thinking about that is we generally presume big mean size. So our assumption with the question is, I think this is a pointer here, maybe not, is that the most important will always be the most sizable. Well, if we're talking about a fish food chain, another way to think about it is if you don't have the small one, none of the others exist. Right. Which is what several of you have said. So the mental agility comes in that we are forcing ourselves to think about this in very different ways. Here's a question for you. You ready? What's wrong with the question I asked in the first place? What's wrong with asking you, which is the big fish? Oh, yeah. He has a mic. Thank you, David. I know, right? So that we can hear you. Now he gives a mic. What's wrong with that question? I think that everyone has a different level of cognitive comfort depending on the subject. So if my comfort is literature, I'm going to put it as the big fish. But you as the teacher or professor asking us which one are you most comfortable with? Everyone thinks we're going to have the same answer, but we're not because we're not all the same way. Right. So there's not necessarily one right answer, right? Absolutely. So you're about to get your exercise, David, because there is a hand all the way over there or you can yell. Go ahead and yell. Exactly. Exactly. It assumes that there is one fish, right? What else does it assume? It assumes that there are no other options that are on the board. Very good. What else does it assume? It assumes there's only one right answer, right? And that our understanding of big is all the same. So we've identified all these things that are wrong with the question that I asked. So why did you answer it? It's where our brain works. Our brain follows our normative expectations. Normative expectations in this setting is you have a teacher, teacher asks a question, you answer the question. Just the way that it works. We don't stop to think, is that the right question? We don't stop necessarily unless we're practicing it and saying, are we making assumptions in those questions? Is there another question that we should be asking rather than that one? That's what mental agility looks like. We are creatures of habit. And there's nothing wrong with that. It's just that when we are working in the cognitive domain as leaders, particularly as we advance, we are now challenged to recognize the limitations in our thinking and how we can go about expanding that. If it makes you feel any better, the animals will work. The first time we did it, we did this learning experience and I get to the point of, why did you answer the question? Yeah, because you told us to. Because you were the teacher. It was like, okay. So you're not alone. If you take something like what we just engage in, which essentially what we did, let me see if I can get us back to here, is we engage in some agile thinking. We did what was listed on that neuroscience list, right? We moved against the familiar. We changed things up. We did some fluid thinking. The question went from here to here to here. In our work focused on leader development for our flag and senior officers, we layer learning like this throughout our courses to provide the practice opportunities for developing these very important capacities for leaders. So here's my, I think, last question for you. What does this exercise mean for you? What do you gain from it? Or anything else that we have talked about thus far today? What does it mean for you? Yes, ma'am. I think he's going to give you. And tell me your name. Kimberly. All right, Kimberly. I think it applies right away. I start thinking about how it applies just in our relationships with ourselves or families or just everyone that you meet with and leadership doesn't necessarily have to be labeled. It just happens day to day. I could not agree with you more. I am a big proponent of saying we lead in our home in the same way that we lead. We may lead in organizations and a lot of the same principles apply. So very good. Thank you. Somebody else. What does this mean for you? Way back there, Dan. I have to be able to teach a variety of different people. And so now my brain is immediately thinking, oh, cool. How can I be more flexible in my thinking and how do I answer it? Very good. Very good. Absolutely. Somebody else. Where does this work for you? Where does this not work for you? Where are you challenged by it? Or give me another takeaway? Yes, ma'am. The fact that it's okay to switch back and forth from linear to fluid. Yes. I feel like throughout my, you know, childhood adolescence and into my teens, I was always a fluid thinker. But as adulthood came and career came, I became a linear thinker because that's what I was told to be. And so now in my household, husband being in the military, I feel like he is a linear thinker. And so I have driven myself that way. But I'm not broken, as you say. So it's okay to go back and forth, which, you know, I feel is necessary. Excellent. And the important thing about that, if I will extend that, if you don't mind me extend that a little bit, is recognizing how we benefit ourselves when we embrace both the diversity of thinking within ourselves as well as around us. There's a story I tell, and forgive me for those of you who may have heard this before. But here's my example, because I have always been in that fluid and never really understood why I couldn't grasp sometimes the, and it was very frustrating for me, or, you know, models don't come easy to me, steps don't come easy to me, and I'm always missing a step, or I'm always missing an instruction, because I just never live there. So when I join the Naval War College, I have a colleague who's very much a linear thinker off the charts, and I am a fluid thinker off the charts. So you can imagine that when we first started working together, it wasn't so much that we were in conflict, we just had a really hard time finding our rhythm, because I am always throwing out ideas. I have no idea how to make it happen, but I have a really good idea, or I'm making connections between things, or I'm thinking about possibilities, because my mind is always doing this. And he is very much oriented towards data and processes, and I define him as, and I mean this sincerely, an undiagnosed savant, because he can literally tell you what's on page 153 of a book that's out of print, Gene Anderson. That is where he lives, and so we had a hard time just finding our rhythm, and then one day I threw out some idea, and he said, well, that will work if you do A, B, and C. Oh, okay. And I said, well, how about if you do, if we were to do this and try this? And he said, well, if you do D, E, and F, then you will end up here. And for me, that was just like this huge moment of realization that where I am weak, he is strong. And we've also figured it out in the reverse, where he is weak, I am strong. So as a team, we become very dependent on each other. Sometimes I think too codependent, so if he has some process or some plan that he is working on, he'll actually bring it to me and say, okay, what am I missing? If I have something that I'm working on that's all over the place, I'll bring it to him and say, help me put some order to this, right? And so it's the same thing I would in our household sometimes, and I eat both, and it's okay, right? So that we get the best of one another in our circumstances. All right. Yes, ma'am. I said you had a hand? No? For takeaway? I thought you had a hand. That's all right. Okay, there. Yes. Okay. You mean, right. Yes. Yes. We engage all of that, right? So back to leadership versus leaders, so focus on leaders as a person. That's a very significant part of what we do. So we, most of them by that stage have done Myers-Briggs, I don't know how many different times, and so we actually have higher level psychometrics that help us dig even deeper. And what's most important I think about that is it's the coaching that helps them understand that the way that they led at their lower levels may not work as well for them as a senior level. And so our personality preferences, our thinking preferences, all those kinds of preferences come into play, and it doesn't mean you ever lose your preference. You're just more open to stretching beyond that preference. That's a good question. All right. I saw one over here, and then I see Joy back there. I think we have time for just a couple more. Is that right, JJ? I was just curious how you get the buy-in, because it's a reward system getting to Admiral, so doing the way they've done it always, why wouldn't they defaultly think, well, this is, I've always, this is what got me where I am. Right. So how do you get them to buy into that? I understand what you just explained that you, theoretically, you've explained to them, well, this is a different level of leadership, so we need, but what are you, I'm just curious, how do you get the buy-in? It's a really good question. Sometimes we do, sometimes we don't. Let's just be honest. There are some folks who are just like, you know what, that was all fine and nice, but I got this, and I'm going to keep doing what I'm doing. It is others, sometimes, and this is true for any learning, particularly at you all's level and higher, sometimes stuff doesn't hit right away, right? Particularly the level at which we're having these types of conversations. So we have certainly had instances where there are folks during our courses who are like, okay, that was really interesting, but I got to get back to my real operational environment and do what I'm doing, and then something happens, a decision happens, or they find themselves face to face, and they realize, I forgot to ask what was the fifth fish. And they'll email us back and say, I just had a moment, I'm finally just getting it, right? There are others who sort of have their ahas while we're having the conversation. It just really depends on the people. There's nothing to say that everybody does, but lots of times the idea for development is if you expose people to where they can be better and expose them to an understanding of the environment that they may not have considered before, then there's at least the opportunity for them to evolve. So we've certainly had some who have said that they have found it very valuable. We just got a note from our most recent course. Well, I will tell you that this particular animal coming in the door told me on day one, I don't believe in this stuff. I'm not really looking forward to this. I mean, he was very direct in his feeling about being in that course, and just recently sent a letter saying, okay, I'm back, I get it. I get, thank you, I get it. You know, so sometimes it takes a marination time too. All right, I think we have time for one more. Yes, sir. In your judgment, how is the age of artificial intelligence going to affect all this thinking? Is it going to be linear, fluid, or see all of the above? Oh, man, I have no idea. I am, I can be honest enough to say I have no idea. We have team members who are well versed in AI, and they are looking into that and considering those types of things. I think AI is a big unknown for a lot of us. We'll see. We'll see. All right. Thank you so much for your time. I hope you found something, at least one nugget that was valuable for you. And now I get to my necklace back on. So I think some admirals have SC after their name, which means supply core. They have DC, which is dental core. I think maybe they all need to have like LT linear thinker or FT fluid thinker. So we know when we walk into a room who we're dealing with and whatnot. Any last minute questions that Olinda can handle or anything about the series or anything else you want to talk about? If not, we will conclude the event and look forward to see you on the 11th of February when I will be giving a presentation called Robots That Fly, Swim, and Crawl, all about what's going on in the world of unmanned systems. So I think you'll enjoy that. And in the past, we've had a few teenage children attend that event. And if you have a situation where you think there's a high school student or something that might find this of interest, bring them in. But no small children, please. Any other comments? I'll wait down front. If you have some other questions that you didn't get a chance to answer or you didn't want to ask in the bigger room. So I'll hang out down here for a little while. And make sure you talk to our folks from Navy Federal, from MWR, and from fleet and family support. David, one more comment. You do it right, you get a tootsie roll. Thank you. Don't need that. The one thing that I did mean to mention earlier is now on February 11th, we do have, we're looking forward to having military one source here. So I've been in touch with Melissa Fouimara, if I'm saying it correctly. And she's just a dean, I'll tell you. And I meant to give Dean a moment or two. I apologize. We'll make that up. But anyway, no, she's fantastic. And that's really a great place for you to get, excuse me, for all of your questions. Utilize that. So that's two weeks from now. February 11th, we'll have military one source here as one of our resources for you. So thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you.