Considering we teach scenario-dependent leadership styles,and sometimes it is necessary to go in with a plan…
We also break it into SMEACEAC, which accounts for that consultation.
1 Like
I would argue it depends but it comes down to the original principle of knowing your team & knowing yourself.
What I was taught on my ATF officer’s course was SMEACEAC which included a quick (5 second) where you as leader go round the team asking for their immediate thoughts.
At the early stages of leadership development it’s good to force people to take charge & deliver. If they need a plan they call in their 2ic.
Too often things are failing because the team is too involved & change things around too much.
Things don’t need to be run by committee comrade 
This is why we have an AC after planning and delegation, to ensure everyone (including the leader) understands the plan and their respective roles.
This is still fundamentally flawed as execution is too early in the process not be flawed by the leader’s biases.
Yep, & more times than not, it’s still a b*gger’s muddle! 
What’s biased about giving information on resources and limitations? That’s the first execution.
Second is planning.
That’s where my thinking is at currently.
Blue to be more about teamwork and then an initial introduction to leadership concepts. The leaderless ex is a good vehicle for that.
Then next level introduces more specific leadership concepts, such as mission command, styles and methods (smeac or whatever the latest thing is).
1 Like
Im till waiting on an answer for what SMRLACPDACE /LAPDANCE /SARLACPIT means?
So, it sounds like SMEACEAC is simply SMRLACPDACE, only with RL mislabelled as E and PD also mislabelled as E.
Situation
Mission
Resources
Limitations
Any questions
Check understanding
Plan
Delegate
Any questions
Check understanding
Execute
1 Like
Yes. Exactly right, but an easier acronym for a 12/13 year old to wrap their head around.