Lessons from the World of Strategy and Military Leadership in the Face of the Pandemic

El Mostrador, April 9, 2021

It is clear that the Government made very sound decisions regarding logistics for obtaining vaccines and in the vaccination process, as a way to enhance the protection of the population. The logistical management in acquiring artificial respiration equipment is also commendable, with both being excellent examples of effectiveness over efficiency, yet they raise the question of why, in other areas, we lost our way and failed to reach our goals. Was it due to a lack of objectives, a lack of resources, inadequate use of resources, or was it because the complex dilemma between efficiency and effectiveness could not be properly resolved? If Churchill had fought World War II prioritizing efficiency over effectiveness, or if he had not had a strategy with clear objectives, today the United Kingdom and much of the world would be under Nazi domination.

It sometimes seems that the Government, in its strategy against COVID-19, prioritizes efficiency in resource use over the effectiveness of the actions it is taking. This is something that, except on occasions—as will be indicated later—often occurs in the civilian world, which is accustomed to being measured by the efficiency with which it performs actions, rather than by the effectiveness in achieving its objectives.

In the military world, strategy is the way in which resources are used to achieve a desired end, and since there are no second or third places and what matters is achieving the objective, effectiveness rather than efficiency is what prevails, as there is obviously no room for other considerations. Only the value of the objective at stake determines the magnitude of the effort to be made.

One must then ask: what is new about this, or why should a marked distinction be made between both concepts? Because part of the problem in managing the pandemic lies in not clearly defining what the final objectives of the Government’s campaign are, and there is also a lack of clarity regarding the metrics used to determine whether we are advancing or regressing. Much of this comes down to understanding that, in situations like these, what matters is effectiveness and not efficiency.

As an example, and using a well-known case that is the exception that proves the rule, during Sebastián Piñera’s first term, 33 miners were trapped underground in Atacama. In that instance, effectiveness was prioritized over efficiency, as had efficiency prevailed, those men would still be underground, and we would have many widows and fatherless children.

Thank you for watching

The question one asks is why, if what is indicated is obvious or should be, has a campaign against the pandemic not been planned with all the professional specialization of strategic planning processes? The answer, which is not so obvious, comes from the possibility that the Government’s campaign lacks clear, measurable objectives with defined time horizons, which would allow for determining the necessary resources and, above all, the best strategy to employ those resources in achieving the chosen objectives.

It is clear that the Government made very sound decisions regarding logistics for obtaining vaccines and in the vaccination process, as a way to enhance the protection of the population. The logistical management in acquiring artificial respiration equipment is also commendable, with both being excellent examples of effectiveness over efficiency, yet they raise the question of why, in other areas, we lost our way and failed to reach our goals. Was it due to a lack of objectives, a lack of resources, inadequate use of resources, or was it because the complex dilemma between efficiency and effectiveness could not be properly resolved?

If Churchill had fought World War II prioritizing efficiency over effectiveness, or if he had not had a strategy with clear objectives, today the United Kingdom and much of the world would be under Nazi domination.

To conclude this column, a recommendation that arises from the analysis of the previous paragraphs. If the objectives are indeed clearly defined, it is time to significantly improve communication and the attitude towards all Chileans. The time has come to communicate what is expected from each individual so that we can emerge victorious from this pandemic and successfully conclude this campaign. It is no longer sufficient to treat the population like children solely based on restrictions, punishments, and fines. It is time to be clear regarding objectives for municipalities and regions. It is time to be clear in measurements and their effect on decisions. To say that the only contribution expected from the population is to stay home, wash their hands, wear masks, and get vaccinated is insufficient.

People can and should contribute to solving the problem and to the success of the campaign to quickly end this virus that has exhausted us, as there are many good strategies that can be employed, provided there are clear objectives and measurement elements for the effects sought with each implemented measure.

If we do not have those elements, the population becomes lost, stops feeling that the solution depends on them, and does not feel part of the response. The first and foremost task of leadership in implementing a strategy that allows for success in a campaign is to instill in all involved personnel the importance of their personal commitment to success. This is perhaps the greatest shortcoming of the current campaign against the COVID-19 pandemic.

Richard Kouyoumdjian
Vice President of AthenaLab