1. Team Leader Training The G3 Briefing
Normal slide navigation has been disabled in order to ensure this training works properly. Macros must be enabled to complete training.

2. The G3 Briefing
You have a researcher on your team who has done well on a project. Your unit chief calls you and asks you to be prepared to brief the results of the project to the G3 of an operational division. You decide that the researcher should brief the project and you and the unit chief will attend. During the ongoing briefing, the G3 asks a question, your researcher doesn't pick up on it, and the unit chief begins to set the stage to answer the question to save the day. Oddly enough, the G3's question hits at an aspect of the research over which you and the researcher have had some disagreements during the course of the past year. As the unit chief is mid-way through her answer, which apparently agrees with what had been your side of the argument back during the previous year, the researcher jumps in, cuts her off at the knees, and begins to counter the chief’s comments.

3. Question & Answer Session
Q1. What do you do: * Immediately? * When the three of you are walking away? * When you have the researcher in a one-on-one in your office after the briefing? What do you think your chief will do?

4. Question & Answer Session
Q2. What does this incident do to the trust factor between your chief and the researcher? Between you and the researcher? And maybe most importantly for you, between you and your chief?

5. Question & Answer Session
Q3. How could you have mentored your researcher before it came to this?

6. Lessons Learned, Slide 1 of 2
Whether his opinion was right or wrong, your team member has likely embarrassed your chief and potentially hurt ARI’s reputation with a senior military officer. You need to defuse the situation as best you can at the moment and take responsibility to clearly counsel the employee afterward, letting him know what was wrong with his actions.
Scientists can disagree on the interpretation of findings, the best approach, etc. but to do so strongly in front of the military is not professional. The Army looks to ARI as experts who are called upon to provide professional opinions and recommendations on matters in behavioral and social science. We can - and at times should - present caveats, limitations on our findings, and offer alternative explanations, but it is best to avoid too much of this during military briefings. Army officers are looking for help and guidance they can use; they do not generally view the research process in the same way nor with the same keen interest that we do. It is up to us as the professionals to assess what evidence we have and present a coherent picture and clear recommendation.

7. Lessons Learned, Slide 2 of 2
Try not to go into any high level briefing with unresolved conflicts among the ARI players. Host a meeting beforehand, resolve the issue, and mutually agree that the issue is settled.
Never embarrass or allow one of your team members to believe it is appropriate behavior to embarrass or attack another ARI employee, regardless of grade or position, in a public forum.
Rehearse high level briefings beforehand with the unit chief if possible. A ‘red team’ approach to discover weaknesses in the briefing and anticipate audience reactions will produce briefers who are much more prepared.
Themes
Accepting Responsibility; Conflict Management; Planning and Organizing; Setting Expectations