The Continuum of Control

In another life, I used to be something called a "Weapons Director" (WD, for short) for the Air Force.

For those unfamiliar with military aviation, just think of it being something like air traffic control, but during dog fights.

There was a philosophical concept that WD instructors used to teach, called the Continuum of Control. I actually really value it, to this day, as a leadership philosophy.

When controlling fighter jets, to say that "time is of the essence" is probably obscene understatement. When two jets are flying at each other, half-second differences in reaction time can be the difference between life or death.

As a controller, one of the major cues that you have, aside from the radar scope, is something called the "timeline." It's essentially a group of expected behaviors, at certain deadlines, during various fight scenarios.

If the pilot you are controlling is hitting all of those deadlines...or even better, ahead of them and preemptively taking actions...the pilot is said to have "good S-A" (short for "situational awareness"). When you observe your pilot demonstrating good SA, then you tend to back off, and only give prompts when requested, or when necessary. If you jump in and give a bunch of radio commands when a pilot already has good SA, it can actually hinder the mission, since you are now becoming a distraction. Good controllers know when their pilot has good SA, and they shut up until needed.

On the other hand, if your pilot is behind the timeline...or in fighter pilot jargon, "behind the jet", then they are said to have "lost SA." When you notice your pilot not hitting the expected rhythm...not making the right calls, and not saying the expected phrases to show that they see what's happening, then your job is to become more directive until the situation is rectified. Now, your job is to jump in, and begin making radio calls, early and often. You continue making those calls until you see evidence that your pilot has regained SA. Good controllers know to not let up until they see hard evidence that their flight has a good understanding of what's happening.

What's interesting is that SA is fluid. Losing SA isn't a permanent status. Neither is having good SA. So it requires controllers to be astute observers of what's happening, and contextual clues to give insight into whether or not to jump in and be directive.

As a controller, the contextual clues were clearly defined. We had a timeline. We had a rhythm. We know what we're supposed to be hearing and seeing.

But in leadership, contextual clues are inherently more ambiguous. No two people are alike, and everyone brings their strengths and weaknesses to the table. And people aren't static. Needs change over time, both in yourself and in others.

Even still, I think that using the continuum of control has value. Instead of a timeline, we may have different types of tools: communication, empathy, project management tools, metrics, etc.

But the core principle is there.

Using the continuum of control as a leader requires an awareness of self, your motivations, your expectations, and a willingness to observe and learn from those that you lead. If you only ever focus on what you need done, then you lose SA on what people may actually require to be successful.

Mastery of the continuum of control as a leader, is knowing when you are actually needed, and when you aren't. It is paying attention to your organization's pulse, and responding in context.