Yes, 5 years in the Infantry (Canada). Both sides of the spectrum from a team perspective. I think one thing the military does really well is critique. Nothing

Yes, 5 years in the Infantry (Canada). Both sides of the spectrum from a team perspective. I think one thing the military does really well is critique. Nothing you ever do is perfect. There's always something someone will find for you to do better next time,even if it's the best piece of tactics anyone has ever seen. This is particularly for team leaders. People see the yelling and screaming of bootcamp and figure that's just the way life in the army is. It isn't. These are shock courses specifically designed for stress purposes. Real learning takes place calmly and with a more cooperative technique, particularly when training leaders, but also when learning more advanced weapon systems and/or techniques, and almost always when discussing tactics. Thinking back now, there are many periods for peer-review (never lower than peer), but in these instances are almost always done in collaborative training sessions, where it is recognized that people are going to make mistakes and that everyone will receive both positive and negative feedback. One thing I realize is that while they are teaching a future leader on receiving critique, they are also teaching future leaders on how to critique. In the army it's very similar to a post game report of a sports team. I've not seen too much of that in a boardroom... everyone looks to deflect blame instead of improve the team performance. Your personal performance reviews - where it counts - are always done privately, usually over a set discussion between you and your direct superiors. Publicly shaming a leader in front of junior troops is pretty much forbidden. Regardless of how much of a fuck-up a person may be, you can't have his troops thinking that he's not worth listening too.