Canada Opts-Out of Buying the F-35, Upgrades to F/A-18s For Now…


Picture Credit: An F/A-18F Super Hornet deployed as part of Operation Inherent Resolve taxis across the flight deck the aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower

Following up on a pledge during his election campaign, Prime Minister Trudeau is now confirming steps by Canada to undertake a major shift in defense policy with the election in October of a new Liberal Party government.

DefenseOne reports that “after an initial buy of F/A-18s, Justin Trudeau’s government will hold a competition to replace the rest of its CF-18 Hornets,” such that, after involvement in the $1.3 Trillion Joint Strike Fighter program since 2002, Canada is opting for a continuity-oriented “defensive” option rather than the F-35. Canada intends to begin replacing its aging CF-18 Hornet fighter jets with a batch of Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornets — while Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, once slated to replace the entire CF-18 fleet, will have to win a new competition to get any contracts at all.

Air Force Magazine elaborated, citing Canada’s overdue upgrade of its fighter fleet due to mission requirements. The ministry will “immediately explore” buying the Super Hornets while simultaneously launching a competition for a fleetwide replacement for its CF-18s, which have been service-extended already and are more than a decade past their planned retirement. The competition could take five years to conclude. Defense Minister Harjit Sajjan said Canada will remain part of the JSF program as a partner, but won’t necessarily buy the jets. He also said it would be “imprudent” to delay action in starting to replace Canada’s CF-18s any longer, because of Canada’s NATO and NORAD responsibilities.


Picture Credit: schematic of the Boeing X-32B

But, one asks, will Boeing revive the X-32 Program as a competitor again to the Lockheed-Martin X-35 Program? Studies supporting JAST/JSF started in 1993 and led to STOVL submissions to the DOD by McDonnell Douglas, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin and Boeing. Wikipedia recalls the history here: Boeing decided against thrust augmentation. They proposed an aircraft powered by a reheated turbofan that could be reconfigured (in the STOVL mode) into a direct lift engine with a pair of thrust-vectoring nozzles located near the aircraft centre-of-gravity. This led to the F119-PW-614S which powered the X-32B JSF demonstrator. Two contracts to develop prototypes were awarded on November 16, 1996, one each to Lockheed Martin and Boeing. Each firm would produce two aircraft to demonstrate conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL), carrier takeoff and landing (CV version), and short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL).

Boeing’s strategy for a competitive advantage was to offer substantially lower manufacturing and life-cycle costs by minimizing variations between the different JSF versions. The X-32 therefore was designed around a large one piece carbon fiber composite delta wing. The wing had a span of 9.15 meters, with a 55-degree leading edge sweep and could hold up to 20,000 pounds of fuel. The purpose of the high sweep angle was to allow for a thick wing section to be used while still providing limited transonic aerodynamic drag, and to provide a good angle for wing-installed conformal antenna equipment. The compete-on-cost strategy also led Boeing to pick a direct-lift thrust vectoring system. Michael Porter’s advocacy of cost leadership (see Slideshare overview here) is vindicated once again !

Based on Canada’s 2.1% share of the JSF Program, its cost of withdrawal will amount to $300M, according to industry sources. In earlier Capital Hill hearings, JSF’s Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, JPO chief, said the remaining international partners would face an increased cost per plane but this was before the recent GAO report suggesting that the development program will not conclude in 2017 (see IAI’s 18 November post here) and an earlier post about “Old Platforms” as ‘technology in use’ (see IAIA’s 2 November post here). Remember, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted to disband the F-35 JPO this past June as its size was “disturbing”- now what? And, clearly, Turkey’s future in the JSF Program is at risk and, more broadly, its future as part of NATO is in question (as Newsbud flagged in August here, with links) also now as Turkey’s NATO staff has been targeted by the Erdogan purge.

DARPA – Replacement Satellites on Demand, XS-1, Cybersecurity and EMP


Picture Credit: DARPA (artist rendition)

DARPA is building “a completely new architecture for space.” In order to protect these vital military space systems, this research agency spawned by the launch of Sputnik in 1958 is now focused on developing a “whole portfolio” of capabilities. Before the release of British Interplanetary Society member and Futurist Arthur C. Clarke‘s seminal 1945 paper describing the launch of satellites, he first referenced geostationary satellites in his February 1945 letter to the editor of  Wireless World (page 58) titled Peacetime Uses for V2 for Ionosphere Research.

The U.S. Military must instead have been paying attention to D.A. Bell’s adjacent letter regarding ” FM Protection Against High Amplitude Interference Pulse” which was a precursor of signal disruption in FM broadcasting and now a core broadcasting consideration. (D)ARPA established the IPTO in 1962 with a mandate to build a survivable computer network to interconnect the DoD’s main computers at the Pentagon, Cheyenne Mountain, and SAC HQ. As described in the following pages, this initiative led to the development of the ARPANET seven years later, and then to the NSFNET and the Internet.

In 2010, Oak Ridge National Labs (FERC – META- R-320 here) warned of U.S. power grid vulnerability from the threat of “early-time (E1) high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) produced by nuclear detonations above an altitude of ~30 km.” Not only are HEMP (EMP) and cybersecurity prominent national security risks today, but so is the militarization of space. Two authors writing in the SAIS Journal of International Affairs last winter claimed the need for electric grid modernization was prompted by the threat from “Mother Nature” (SAIS, Vol 35, No.1) – sorry, unlike Slate, neither Oak Ridge National Labs (see EIS report here) and DARPA (to name two experts among many) do not see climate change as the real risk to critical infrastructure.

The DOD reported this week that “national security critically depends on space, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA’s Project List is detailed here) is focused today on creating the capabilities needed to help make that environment a real-time operational domain, DARPA Director Dr. Arati Prabhakar said recently at the 2016 DefenseOne Summit as reported in Air Force Magazine:

Because there “is more and more a real possibility” of conflict in space, “there is nothing that we need either from an intelligence perspective or a military perspective that we can do effectively without space.”

DARPA Director Arati Prabhakar

 Its Airborne Launch Assist Space Access program (ALASA) plans to create a low cost alternative for small satellite launches and has the DARPA simulation here. They explain: “ALASA seeks to propel 100-pound satellites into low Earth orbit (LEO) within 24 hours of call-up, all for less than $1 million per launch.” The $10K/pound payload cost does not reflect total program cost but is a third of the current cost DARPA estimates but it is certainly not an all-in programmatic cost estimate. Right now, ramp times for unexpected launch operations number in the months.


A critical  part of the portfolio will be DARPA reliance on its experimental spaceplane, XS-1 which entered phase 2 of its development this past spring. The Experimental Spaceplane (XS-1) program  aims to help overcome cost, deployment and positioning challenges and create a “new paradigm” for more routine, responsive and affordable space operations. Jess Sponable, DARPA program manager. “We intend to leverage those advances along with our Phase 1 progress to break the cycle of escalating DoD space system launch costs, catalyze lower-cost satellite architectures, and prove that routine and responsive access to space can be achieved at costs an order of magnitude lower than with today’s systems.” DARPA has a history of being responsive to challenges:

DARPA’s ability to adapt rapidly to changing environments and to seek and embrace opportunities in both technology and in processes, while maintaining the historically proven principles of the Agency, makes DARPA the crown jewel in Defense R&D and a unique R&D organization in the world.

DARPA Over the Years, August 1997.

So, how does DARPA frame the goal of making space a real-time operating domain (RTOD)? DARPA’s OpenCatalog actually labels these mixed-criticality real-time threats. Their Iron Curtain Active Protection System has an amazing video here of how it operates. Partnering with non-profit strategic venture investor In-Q-Tel, DARPA is going to have to rely on trusted national partners and allies. IQT Labs are exploring new ideas, technology, and approaches in select sectors that are anticipated to significantly impact national security.  Under the Space 3.0 Program, a number of initiatives are underway.


Picture Credit: IQT Labs

Unlike Government exquisite systems (Space 1.0) or commercial exquisite systems (Space 2.0), Space 3.0 is being driven by venture-backed startups that are leveraging a variety of converging factors to produce a new wave of affordable products and services. From reliable space access to new analytics for remote sensory data, startups are disrupting current processes and establishing a new space ecosystem.

One particularly relevant IQT Labs effort is centered at CosmiQ Works which brings together the U.S. Intelligence Community, industry, and academia “to explore the art of the possible in the new space ecosystem.”

Inside the Next Startup Garage

Space is hard. Luckily, there are several converging advances that are helping startups launch, sometimes literally, entirely new product lines.

rocket-blueAccess to Space

Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) to be specific. New launch vehicles and rideshare options are increasing access and decreasing costs.

Cheap(er) Hardwaresatellite-blue

Adoption of commodity hardware coupled with the use of agile development methods.

Rapid Innovationcycle-blue

Lower costs and fast development allow startups to accept greater risks.

New Consumersastronaut-blue

Affordability and tailored services are opening the space market to new customers.

Investment in a Commercial Ecosysteminvestment-blue

Venture firms are investing in the new ecosystem ranging from launch systems to data analytics.


“Great Surge” Theory and Techno-Economic Paradigm Shifts (hint, we’re in one…)


Picture Credit: Getty Images

Futurist Carlota Perez’s “Beyond the Technological Revolution” research offers wise guidance to policymakers as Wiki describes it as “a further development of Joseph Schumpeter‘s work on Kondratieff waves earning her the 2012 the Silver Kondratieff Medal by the International N. D. Kondratieff Foundation. In Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (1942), the “Prophet of Innovation” Professor Schumpeter characterized “industrial mutation” as a process that “incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one. This process of Creative Destruction is the essential fact about capitalism. (p. 83)” MIT elaborates that over half of productivity gains come this way:

“The process of Schumpeterian creative destruction (restructuring) permeates major aspects of macroeconomic performance, not only long-run growth but also economic fluctuations, structural adjustment and the functioning of factor markets.”

Austrian School scion Schumpeter presciently warned that the collapse of capitalism would lead to global socialism as entrepreneurship is undermined and the ownership of the means of production becomes divorced from the producers themselves (essentially what we have now as Sutirtha Bagchi extracted in his Amazon review in 2008). Neo-Schumpeterian Carlota Perez who wrote Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital, was mentored by Christopher Freeman, and both elucidated the relationship between basic innovations, technical and institutional change, and economic development. Right to work states are defended by Mark Thornton, Senior Fellow at the Mises Institute, here in a recent preview of the Trump Administration’s economic policy outlook. What he prescribes is akin to the Hippocratic Oath, typically presented to physicians as “First, Do No Harm.” But Medicine.Net explains it is much deeper and more complex:

One of the oldest binding documents in history, the Oath written by Hippocrates is still held sacred by physicians: to treat the ill to the best of one’s ability, to preserve a patient’s privacy, and to teach the secrets of medicine to the next generation.

IAI believes that a successful long-term policy framework to promote economic growth should operate with some basic widely-agreed, fact-based principles. Neo-Schumpeterian political economists explain that policy needs to help entrepreneurs to success: fewer taxes, less regulation and minimal interference with the market’s price signaling mechanism. Perez laid out a history of five technological revolutions that follow a similar pattern of bang, bust and renewal. In The Other Canon Foundation, Perez and a dozen other economic historians celebrate “man the producer” (and not “man the consumer”) and highlight the critical  the link between innovation and financial dynamics. In short, they are champions of the Learning Economy and DRUID’s Bengt-Åke Lundvall and colleagues developed the idea of innovation as an interactive process and celebrated the concept of National System of Innovation. The key here is being shown in how the technology surge has been creating knowledge worker jobs.


Picture Credit: CBRE Research

Just as in natural science, errors of commission or omission can be catastrophic, disastrous economic policy failures result when they:

  1. are made in secret;
  2. fail to account for industry operating conditions; and
  3. ignore history (the sine qua non)

Policymaking in Secret: The Council of Economic Advisors issued a report detailing the costs of withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) right before President Obama announced the withdrawal from the TPP ! One year earlier, President Obama had hailed the proposed TPP (which no one had read) as “the most progressive trade deal in history.”

Failure to Make Any Policy: For example, product and liability insurance policy reforms are needed for Commercial Spaceports in new Trump administration as a recent GAO report pointed out and NASA somehow got stuck with a $5M bill for the 2014 Antares explosion which contractor insurance should cover, not taxpayers ! The GAO decried, ““FAA has not issued guidance to spaceport operators to clarify when it considers them third parties and when it considers them involved parties,” adding that agency officials told them that such guidance “has not been a high priority” for them.


Picture credit:

Ignoring History: Bertrand, Schoar and Thesmar (2004-7) drive home the point that problems in the banking sector can have grave consequences for the health of the restructuring process.  Economic historian Thornton at Mises Institute warned in 2005 (just after the FBI and Professor William Black!) that a housing bubble was building in 2005.  Deloitte has a great study here pointing out that Hong Kong benefits from a low tax structure, a “fair trade” approach distinct from mainland China, and a free movement of capital and skilled labor.  Maybe, before the policy gets codified, the tax holiday repatriation of (at least) $2.1 TRILLION should get favorable tax treatment if it is invested in productive capital and infrastructure rather than used for share buybacks which are just another distortion of equity markets and a signal that corporations have no higher return alternatives. Let’s advocate for an infrastructure stimulus from these repatriations NOW !


Tech Trends for 2017 from Gartner – Distributed Computing, VR and AI


Picture Credit: Gartner Group

Top Strategic Predictions for 2017 and Beyond

Surviving the Storm-Winds of Digital Disruption – Gartner Group

Digital Business Innovation creates disruptive effects that have wide-ranging impact on people and technology. However, the secondary effects will often prove to be more disruptive than the original disruption. Digital Strategists in end user organizations must recognize, prioritize, and respond at the speed of digital change.

1. Artificial Intelligence & Advanced Machine Learning: This includes technologies such as deep learning, neural networks and natural-language processing, as well as more advanced systems that understand, learn, predict, adapt and potentially operate autonomously. The one who has data and information is the King. With Gartner’s research arming the public with data and information, it is time to make some informed and astute investment decisions heading into 2017.

2. Intelligent Apps: Intelligent apps include technologies like virtual personal assistants (VPAs), which have the potential to transform the workplace by making everyday tasks easier and its users more effective. Additionally, every existing software category from security tooling to enterprise applications such as marketing or ERP will be infused with AI-enabled capabilities. By 2018, Gartner expects most of the world’s largest 200 companies to exploit intelligent apps.

3. Intelligent Things: New intelligent things currently belong in the three categories: robots, drones and autonomous vehicles. Companies working on these include:

  • Amazon.
  • Ambarella Inc (NASDAQ: AMBA).
  • Google.
  • GoPro Inc (NASDAQ: GPRO).
  • InvenSense Inc (NYSE: INVN).
  • IXYS Corporation (NASDAQ: IXYS).
  • Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE: LMT).
  • Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE: NOC).
  • Elon Musk’s SpaceX.
  • And others …

4. Virtual & Augmented Reality:  VR&AR as they are called in short are set to transform the way individuals interact with each other and with software systems by immersing the user. VR helps to create a virtual world that users can interact with, with users finding it difficult to differentiate what is real and what is virtual. This is achieved by wearing Facebook Inc (NASDAQ: FB)’s Oculus Rift or similar devices. AR is blending VR and real life as developers create images within applications that blend in with contents in the real world.

5. Digital Twins: Digital Twins is a dynamic software model of a physical thing or system. It can be used to analyze and simulate real world conditions, respond to changes, improve operations and add value using data on how the components of a thing operate and respond to the environment and data provided by sensors. It can be used as a proxy for skilled individuals and traditional monitoring devices.

6. Blockchain: Blockchain is a distributed ledger in which value exchange transactions in bitcoin, etc. are sequentially grouped into blocks. It holds promise in industries like music distribution, identity verification and title registry. Blockchain adds trust to untrusted environments and reduce business frictions by giving transparent access to information in the chain.

7. Conversational Systems: Conversational systems that allow computers to hear and adopt to a person’s desired outcome use text, voice, sight, sound, tactile, etc. to communicate across the digital device mesh such as sensors, appliances, IoT systems, etc.

8. Mesh App and Service Architecture, or MASA: Mesh is a new way of organizing, planning and communicating with peers for any kind of group activity, big or small, with the mesh providing for combining the functionality of several apps into one concise app. The MASA is a multi-channel solution architecture that leverages cloud and server-less computing, containers and microservices as well as APIs and events to deliver modular, flexible and dynamic solutions.

9. Digital Technology Platforms: Digital Technology Platforms is a term for multimedia platforms that performs various business functions.  To stay competitive, companies are required to identify how industry platforms will evolve and plan ways to evolve their platforms to meet the challenges of digital business. Usually businesses have a mixed of five digital technology platforms, including: Information Systems, customer experience, analytics & intelligence, the IoT and business ecosystems.

10. Adaptive Security Architecture: Given the challenges the IoT (Internet of Things) environment offers to security, security teams need to work with application, solution and enterprise architects early in the design of applications or IoT solutions.

Uh Oh- $400B F35 Fighter Program at Considerable Risk

70 ARS Refuels F-35As

Picture Credit: Marines

  • Fifth-generation fighter has been plagued with issues 
  • $400bn development schedule has stretched to 15 years
  • Weeks ago military bosses claimed it was finally ‘combat ready’

IAI wrote recently about the stretch out of multiple combat role platforms to 2025 or even 2040 given their history of reliability and cost effectiveness (like the A-10 Warthog) and the application of additive manufacturing to achieve parts re engineering performance improvement. Now we learn what many expected was going on behind the scenes: the program has failed in critical systems design elements spanning the heads-up displays for pilots and the stability of the flight control systems, according to SOFREP:

  • During its initial test flight, recently declassified reports reveal that the test pilot reported heavy vibrations in the controls, due to tail flutter. Installation of new fairings or “fillets” in the wing roots to improve airflow, as well as counterweights and horizontal stabilizer angle of incidence seemed to mend the control issues.
  • On one of the early test missions, there is a report of an engine failure during approach to landing. This caused some instability and caused the aircraft to bank steeply and drop altitude at more than a rate the pilot could compensate for.
  • The crash of the only flyable version of this new fighter is reported to have set the secret program back two years. When later versions of this fighter emerged and began flight test, they too saw significant airspeed and flutter problems.
  • The issue was so bad that engineers completely redesigned the tail surfaces. One of the new-tailed designs was launched on a test flight to see how it would work. That pilot, also revealed, was Mr. Ralph Virden. He entered a dive with the new aircraft to test its speed limits and upgraded tail…and never recovered. He was killed instantly when the aircraft impacted the ground.

The jets were first to deploy as part of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron VMFA-121 in early 2017. “We will learn from that, and see what capabilities we need to further develop. A lot of it’s going to be the school of hard knocks,” said Marine Lieutenant General Robert Walsh, the commanding general of the Marines’ Combat Development Command, according to Defense One.


Picture Credit: Lockheed Martin F-35

But the Pentagon’s director of testing recently warned it is “not on a path toward success but instead on a path toward failing to deliver’ the plane’s full combat capabilities on time.” The F-35 program has derailed to the point where it “is actually not on a path toward success, but instead on a path toward failing to deliver the full Block 3F capabilities for which the Department is paying almost $400 billion.” The 16-page memo, first reported by Tony Capaccio at Bloomberg and then by others, details just how troubled this program is: years behind schedule and failing to deliver even the most basic capabilities taxpayers, and the men and women who will entrust their lives to it, have been told to expect. In a memo obtained by the Project On Government Oversight, Michael Gilmore, Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, warned that the Joint Strike Fighter Program Office is simply cut short the plane’s development phase in order to pretend that schedule and cost goals are being met, reported the Daily Mail (UK).  Gilmore charged that “the primary concerns were that the program appeared to be prematurely ending System Development and Demonstration (SDD) and was not taking the necessary steps to be ready for which will be conducted using realistic combat missions fully consistent with our war plans and threat assessments.”

Anti-innovation: Lessons from the Lone Ranger


Picture Credit:

Hat Tip to Forbes as IAI started writing this blog and realized that the coin can be flipped. But, really, anti-innovation is retrograde !

As companies experience success, their emphasis tends to shift to protecting and maintaining the status quo versus considering new opportunities and products. Unfortunately, clinging to what has worked in the past puts the brakes on innovation. It also puts you out of touch with your customers’ changing needs — a dangerous circumstance in today’s highly volatile markets. If you’re trying to innovate but not having success, see if any of these apply to your organization.

1. Stuck thinking. This occurs when individuals and teams get so locked into old ideas, attitudes, and assumptions that they don’t take the time to update them. If you haven’t asked yourself within the last three to six months, “What has changed about our customers, our markets, and our industry?” you’ve just taken your first step toward anti-innovation.

2. We’ve always done it that way. When the organizational focus shifts to protecting the status quo, people stop looking for new processes or solutions. When problems arise, people tend to default to the solution that looks most like what has worked in the past rather than exploring new ideas or different ways of doing things.

3. Playing not to lose. As leaders spend more time protecting current assets rather than defining and executing edge-centric strategy, the organizational mindset changes from “play to win” to “play not to lose.” This subtle shift in attitude has a profound impact on how decisions get made and how people behave at all levels of the organization.

4. Customer disconnect. Who has time to talk to customers anymore? We’re running as fast as we can just to get the product out the door! Besides, we know what our customers need and we know the best way to give it to them, right? You won’t hear this attitude spoken out loud. But if you look closely, you can see it driving behavior on a daily basis. If you’re not talking with customers, it also means you’re not listening. And if you’re not listening, it’s just a matter of time before you’re no longer relevant to their world.

5. The lone ranger approach. In many companies, one team or small department gets tasked with innovation. That’s like asking a single NASA engineer to develop a new rocket ship to take us to Mars. Innovation requires a combination of skills and talents from all areas of the organization. It does not flourish in isolated silos or hidden corners of the organization.

6. Failure not an option. Most organizations don’t tolerate failure very well to begin with. And once the mindset shifts to protecting the golden goose, failure becomes anathema to the organization. But failure goes hand-in-hand with innovation. If you’re not failing to some degree, you’re not trying or pushing hard enough.

7. Follow the leader mentality. Too often, attempts to innovate occur as a response to a new entry into the market or an existing competitor’s innovation. However, true innovation leads the way rather than attempting to catch up. Don’t ignore what your competitors do in the marketplace. But don’t let it drive your innovation efforts either. Figure out where your customers will need you to be in six months to a year and get there first.

8. Weak hires. Companies looking to protect their success often make a subtle shift in hiring. Rather than new ideas and new energy, people get hired for their ability to “come in and hit the ground running.” Which is another way of saying they won’t rock the boat. As the overall talent level begins to decline, so do new ideas, new thinking, and successful innovation.

9. Lack of know-how. Employees need to have the appropriate skills and abilities to discover, evaluate, and execute on the best ideas. If you don’t invest the time and money to constantly develop those skills, don’t expect people to innovate on a consistent basis.

10. Unrealistic expectations. As success begins to slip away, management often begins looking for that one “killer” product or idea that will save the company or at least prolong the life of the cash cow. This tendency to put all the resources into one make-or-break innovation effort usually ends in disaster and disappointment.

Remember, innovation should always link directly to your strategy. And it works when it becomes a way of life rather than a one-time event. Stop clinging to past successes, update your thinking constantly, and you will find it much easier to innovate and thrive in today’s hyper-paced world.


Lessons from Military Leaders : Inspire, Recruit a Dedicated Team, then Lead !


Picture Credit: John Quincy Adams on Pinterest

Here are 10 tips for business owners gleaned from the lives of America’s greatest military leaders, posted in Entrepreneur Magazine on Veteran’s Day  11 November, 2011.

1. George Washington

1732-1799      Rank: General   Military branch: Continental Army

Lesson: Trust your core team.

The Continental Army never numbered more than 35,000 men, and Washington never had more than a third of it under his personal command, yet he and his men managed to subdue Great Britain’s professional army.

As an early-stage entrepreneur, your team will be small, but with trustworthy people in place and proper coaching, you can better compete with the big guys.

Quote: “Be courteous to all, but intimate with few; and let those few be well-tried before you give them your confidence.”

2.Winfield Scott

1786-1866      Rank: General-in-Chief    Military branch: U.S. Army

Lesson: Never compromise militarily.

Scott’s insistence on military appearance and discipline earned him the nickname “Old Fuss and Feathers.” During the Civil War, his Anaconda Plan for strangling the South by keeping it from its sources of supply was first sneered at by Union generals. But the plan was later adopted by Lincoln and turned out to be the overriding strategy that eventually won the war.

Even if some people don’t believe in your business vision, it’s important to keep your team focused on the long-term goal. If you’re confident, don’t be derailed by naysayers.

Quote: “Peace won by compromise is usually a short-lived achievement.”

3. Robert E. Lee

1807-1870     Rank: General   Military branch: U.S. Army

Lesson: Respect your team.

Lee was widely adored by his men. In victory and defeat, they witnessed his great strength of character, his high sense of duty, his humility and selflessness. Even Northerners accepted Lee as the greatest general of the Civil War.

When you respect your employees, they will respect you. A happy team is a productive team, and when people believe in their leader, they’ll go to war for him.

Quote: “The forbearing use of power does not only form a touchstone, but the manner in which an individual enjoys certain advantages over others is a test of a true gentleman.”

4. Ulysses S. Grant

1822-1885      Rank: General     Military branch: U.S. Army

Lesson: Don’t give up.

Grant made mistakes and learned from them. His drive and resolution made him a first-class general. During the Civil War, President Lincoln rewarded Grant with a promotion to lieutenant general and made him general-in-chief of the armies. Instead of establishing an office in Washington, he took the field with the struggling Army of the Potomac.

As an entrepreneur, you will make mistakes, but it’s how you learn from them that will define your success as a leader.

Quote: “One of my superstitions has always been when I start to go anywhere or do anything, not to turn back, or stop until the thing intended was accomplished.”

5. George S. Patton

1885-1945      Rank: General      Military branch: U.S. Army

Lesson: Help your team achieve greatness.

Patton earned the reputation of having a uniquely gifted military mind, immense energy and a penchant for being blunt. During the Battle of the Bulge in World War II, when the German Ardennes Offensive threatened to swallow up a surrounded American division at Bastogne, Patton pushed his men through mud and snow and relieved Bastogne on Dec. 26, 1944.

Good leaders help their people achieve greatness, even during hardships. It’s important to push your employees to meet their goals and advance their career.

Quote: “Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity.”

6. Lewis B. ‘Chesty’ Puller

1898-1971      Rank: Lieutenant General   Military branch: U.S. Marine Corps

Lesson: Stay positive.

The most decorated marine in history, Puller’s service spanned four decades. He led marines in 19 campaigns and some of the most critical battles of the 20th century. Puller is most remembered by his fellow marines for his quick-witted encouragement in the midst of combat.

In the face of adversity, you have to stay calm and positive. If you lose it, your team will follow suit — tenfold.

Quote: “All right, they’re on our left, they’re on our right, they’re in front of us, they’re behind us…they can’t get away this time.”

7. Dwight D. Eisenhower

1890-1969    Rank: General    Military branch: U.S. Army

Lesson: Create a cooperative culture.

Eisenhower had a way of saying the right thing to gain people’s cooperation, and his strong personality and good nature inspired trust, according to the U.S. Army of Military History. He was regarded as a natural leader who looked for ways to smooth over disputes and organize his men’s efforts toward a common goal.

When your staff is all on the same page, working together, your business will reap the benefits.

Quote: “Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it.”

8. Dudley ‘Mush’ Morton

1907-1943   Rank: Lieutenant Commander  Military branch: U.S. Navy

Lesson: Keep everyone motivated.

Morton’s feisty and daring nature led him to command one the U.S. Navy’s most fierce war ships of all time, the USS Wahoo. Former Wahoo sailor, Chief Yeoman Forrest Sterling said, “When I first met Commander Morton it only took me one minute to realize that I would follow that man to the bottom of the ocean if necessary. Mush was a true leader of men and knew his business inside and out.”

If your employees don’t believe in you and your vision, you’ll have a tough road ahead. Make sure everyone knows what’s in it for him or her in the long run.

Quote: “Tenacity, Dick, stay with the bast*rd ‘til he’s on the bottom.” –Mush Morton to fellow sub commander Dick O’Kane

9. Eugene B. Fluckey

1913-2007     Rank: Rear Admiral   Military branch: U.S. Navy

Lesson: Recognize your hard workers.

Fluckey thought very highly of his men and was known as one of America’s most daring submarine commanders of World War II. As the skipper of the submarine Barb in the Pacific from April 1944 to August 1945, he was known for inventive tactics. He was awarded the Medal of Honor and the Navy Cross four times for his heroism.

Once you find a good team, be sure to dole out credit and tout their achievements. A little recognition goes a long way.

Quote: “What wordy praise can one give such men as these; men who…follow unhesitatingly when in the vicinity of minefields so long as there is the possibility of targets…Men who will fight to the last bullet and then start throwing the empty shell cases. These are submariners.”

10. Norman Schwarzkopf

1934-                Rank: General        Military branch: U.S. Army

Lesson: Get in the trenches.

Schwarzkopf had a reputation as an officer who would risk anything for the soldiers under his command. When he heard word that some of his men had encountered a minefield in Vietnam, Schwarzkopf rushed to the scene in his helicopter. After being wounded himself by an explosion, he eventually led his surviving soldiers to safety.

As an entrepreneur you have to dig in on the front lines, right alongside your team. You will get the best work from your people if you’re willing to stick out your neck for them.

Quote: “It doesn’t take a hero to order men into battle. It takes a hero to be one of those men who goes into battle.”