[January 1, 2024] In Junior High School, my classmates and I were required to memorize the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, a worthy undertaking. Despite trying hard to memorize it through many frustrating hours, I was unsuccessful. This event symbolizes my entire education experience; rote knowledge came slowly and with torment. I felt like I was somehow retarded. Names, dates, places and linking them came hard, and I resented those who could remember things so quickly and retain those memories for a long time. Over many years, I created a method of learning that worked for me, instead of rote, because I could see things spatially, not sequentially, in a lockstep manner. How I think began to change, and my education experience slowly improved.
‘How I think’ is perhaps not different from those who have many years in their career field because we just don’t hear about it. I organize my thinking into what I call a “spiderweb structure.” I ask myself, what is it that needs to get done? To do so, as I gather information, I plug it into that structure where it does the most good, maybe one item in several places. Like a spiderweb, the structure has many branches and interconnections; this is where the information goes. Over time, it grows, and I know where to find the information when I need to think about resolving a problem, accomplishing a task, or making a decision.
I attempted to explain a less mature version of this spiderweb-structure approach in the Army’s War College. I took my time to lay it out in one of my research papers. I was careful and reviewed the details in my paper, double-checking everything. But when my professor-mentor read it, he wrote back that although I was on a professional football team [the War College] and although I stumbled, the other team recovered the football and ran it back for a touchdown, they weren’t yet kicking me off the team, at least not yet. In other words, I had failed. My explanation of the spiderweb-structure approach at the War College meant it wasn’t adequately developed. It was hard for me to explain it to them primarily because it is not based on the military’s formalized linear decision-making approach.
Here is a way to think about how I used this spiderweb technique. Under certain circumstances, for example, in combat, I used two spiderweb hand-drawn diagrams, which were always available and posted in my pocket notebook. The visualizations gave me a quick reference of who I needed to help me get the job done and how all these problems fit together to answer the questions I was trying to solve. Both diagrams were necessary for me to solve large, complex, evolving, and often unclear problems. And it was common for me to modify the spiderweb every day. The linear approach was not as adaptable.
The first diagram was the structure of those I worked with often. Closest to the diagram center were those I spoke with daily and who were most important. The further out on the spider diagram, the less interaction and less critical. Usually, I had 50 entities (military units, staff sections, civilian contractors, mil-civ research efforts, and critical individuals on my staff). I used the formal job title and organization with individual names next to their title. This was like a quick reference and easy to read.
The second diagram contained mission-critical tasks and priorities. Problems to solve were typically given to me personally by a senior Flag Officer or through my own hasty or formal analysis. Usually, this had 50 to 75 directed and implied tasks arranged spatially so I could understand what I needed to keep my attention focused on. In this way, it was easier to see the relationship between tasks. Again, the tasks nearest the center were the most important, time-sensitive, and highest on my priority list.
One thing the military never tells its officers is how to think. Yes, they give us decision-making tools and a few linear techniques that are excellent, time-proven, and widely used for solving a small number of simple problems. But nothing is ever taught about how to solve many simultaneous issues, often being in conflict with one another or enhancing each other, that can quickly change and often have immediate strategic consequences.
What these diagrams helped me to do was to think about when and how one project affected others. Most of my peers struggled with that interaction because they were still using linear tools. The spiderweb technique, if used correctly, is adaptable and comprehensive. A significant disadvantage is our brains are generally not wired that way. Getting the hang of it takes practice, patience, perseverance, and hard detailed work.
And by no means are the linear models rejected, far from it. Those formal linear tools are now just part of my spiderweb and enhance it, making my system robust. My friends were critical of me ‘rejecting’ the military’s linear methods and dismissed my spiderweb as more of a “shotgun” approach, implying an element of randomness and unpredictability. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Using the spiderweb allowed me to get the priority issues solved on time, with minimal disruption, and to get inside the decision loop of others. The spiderweb technique was the most powerful way to think. It also functions well in the business, political, and academic worlds. This technique facilitated my thinking, and it worked.
That is a glance into how I think.
—————
Please read my books:
Very interesting.
What’s good about his approach and what is the real test is that it WORKS. The best way to measure success.
Weird structure but if it works, then go for it. The hard part would be teaching or explaining how this method works. I would think that it requires a tremendous ability to “connect the dots” and not forget what you’ve done in the past to put info into the structure. Just my thnking.
Gen. Satterfield, I’m not sure what to think or write about this article but maybe it explains why your blog posts are so deep and entertaining. Sometimes the things you write are wild and maybe scary. I know you are influenced by Jordan Peterson and Carl Jung, and perhaps that explains much of what you write. Thank you sir, and have a happy new year.
Good point lydia. I also would like for Gen. Satterfield to elaborate more on this spiderweb approach that he uses.
Sir you are miracle.
Gen. Satterfield wrote the following. Sir, if possible, please elaborate at some point in the future. Thank you in advance. Cheers!
“‘How I think’ is perhaps not different from those who have many years in their career field because we just don’t hear about it. I organize my thinking into what I call a “spiderweb structure.” I ask myself, what is it that needs to get done? To do so, as I gather information, I plug it into that structure where it does the most good, maybe one item in several places. Like a spiderweb, the structure has many branches and interconnections; this is where the information goes. Over time, it grows, and I know where to find the information when I need to think about resolving a problem, accomplishing a task, or making a decision.”
Excellent point Joe. And Happy New Year to you folks in Aussie Land. 😊
Many have suggested that Gen. S. “elaborate” more on this and thanks Joe and Emmanual for mentioning it. We all would like more one all his articles but I know that Gen. Satterfield is always going forward pretty darn fast. Let’s let him go to do what he does.
I don’t know whether to write that this is impressive or crazy. I’ll pick impressive because you say it works. Hey, if any system of thinking works, then it has to have something good about it.
What!? Now I’m have to read this again a couple of times. Wow! So much info.
Weird, but if it works, then it works. 🪖
God Bless, General Doug Satterfield for him being a thinking man.
Wow, just wow. I’m not so sure I understand this. But what I will propose as a thought idea, is that women will be less inclined to use this. Men are more spatially oriented. Men naturally can visualize things in three dimensions and I believe Gen. Satterfield’s spiderweb structure approach is easier for him than, say, a female senior leader. If I’m wrong, that would be great but I doubt it.
anita, good point. I think the proof is in the application. I didn’t see where Gen. Satterfield wrote that anyone was using it, except for unnamed senior executives. “‘How I think’ is perhaps not different from those who have many years in their career field because we just don’t hear about it.”
I agree Janna. The issue is that it is too late to demonstrate it.
Yep, I would like, too, for Gen. Satterfield to write more about this approach. I’d like to start learning it.
Sounds hard to do. 🤷♂️
Gen. Satterfield, once again, really knows how to force me to rethink how I think with his first article of the year. This is just one of the reasons I read his blog. But his words are often uncomfortable because I cannot think like he thinks, despite wanting to do so. I will give his spiderweb approach a try. I’m not really sure how it works, and he says this is only a short version of it described here. I know it takes practice but I like the idea. Great job Gen. Satterfield and I’ll be reading your older book soon, “Our Longest Year in Iraq.” Now that will be another check-off item on my bucket list.
I read the book when it came out and will start re-reading it today because it was a pleasure to read. A story on every page. You can’t beat that.
Happy New Year
🕛💥🕛💥🕛💥
HAPPY NEW YEAR to Gen. Satterfield, his family, our veterans, and also to all who read his articles, esp. to those who write comments and are thus willing to learn more than just the average person who drifts thru the day. 🕛
I gotta read this a fourth time.
Me too. In the meantime, I’ll be reading Gen. Satterfield’s “55 Rules for a Good Life” and enjoying each and every chapter. Get your copy. I’m hyping his book because it is great.
https://www.amazon.com/55-Rules-Good-Life-Responsibility/dp/1737915529/
You and me both. Complex article to begin the new year. Happy New Year 2024 for all my compatriots here at https://www.theleadermaker.com
Nailed it, Otto. Great to see you on at this new year 1/1/2024. 😊
All, this is the very best leadership blog out there. Gen. Satterfield is not trying to sucker us into buying a “membership” or anything like that. Yeah, he has two books that he is asking us to buy. Yep, go get your copies, but fundamentally he is operating his blog different. And, I thank him for it. Happy New Year to Gen. Doug Satterfield and his family. We salute you, sir.
Army Captain
I agree with you. All Gen Douglas is saying people process information differently which makes us stand out or stand down. Stand down is the information does challenge them by our way of processing information. I like the Spiderman process. I am a Spiderman now that Gen draw a conclusion. Reading his blogs I often told him we have never meet in person but share alot in common.
We have to do so much in the military with sometimes little notice to get tasks done. Having a great plan of action is critical to your successful career. I know that firsthand.