As a 14 yr veteran of the Navy you are seasoned and experienced. You will note that the first line of the blog refers to working with young, inexperienced TMs.

The point of the blog was that the job has to get done, the mission must be accomplished, the customer must be taken care of, the roof must be fixed etc

While I understand the point you’re making, I think the message lacks continuity when compared to the ‘Three Steps into the Fog’ post. On one hand it seems as if you’re saying it’s ok to not know where you’re going (the goal) so long as you make some movement forward (even if it’s only perceived) to some arbitrary point in time and space, and then adjust along the way and hope you end up where you want. With this post, the message I get is that goals and the paths one takes to achieve those goals can not be adjusted based on the surrounding environmentals (rocks, rough seas, etc).

Forgive me, but I don’t see the logical reasoning behind that kind of rationale. If a wall is in your way, don’t try to move the wall. That would be an exercise in futility. Instead, walk around it but understand that doing so may mean a departure from the expected outcome in terms of time and resources (gas, money, personnel, etc). You may be able to go over the wall depending on the size, but again, this will likely have an impact on the outcome, even if everything after goes as planned.

I don’t think of it in terms of moving the yard stick or the goal posts. I think of it in terms of what’s working and what’s not and adjust from there.

On several occassions as Officer of the Deck, I’ve had the “pleasure” of getting a ship underway from port in the fog with zero visability. This is not something to be done lightly nor with only a vague idea of where you want to end up. The course(s) we take are precicesly measured, and all along the way we continually compare our actual postion with what we want and then make any necessary adjustments. Maybe this is a little too rigid for doing things, but it’s hightly effective.