Every PAO wants to know, what do I do about my IO (Information Operations Officer)?
First the dude says he is in charge or all information ops which includes public affairs. Next he wants to see what you’re going to say to the media. After that, he gets ran over in the parking lot by the information bus.
It’s ok though. He’s not in charge and everyone will know that because you will be great at your job. The key is to work closely with him. He provides some things that you and your staff may not. The IO may be your bridge into operations; the O in his title stands for ‘Operations’ what does yours stand for?
I had a few stories in mind for this post but they all went like this:
I report to a new job as the PAO. The IO tells me I work for him. I tell him that will never be the case. My teams does great work. We do more great work. The IO and everyone else steps aside and allows us to continue to do great work. Operationally, we work hand in hand with the IO. He does his stuff, we do ours, together like a big information family.
The Bad
In most every organization I’ve served in, I have had the IO try to exert his influence over public affairs. There are several reasons why this will never work:
The IO has no real mission stateside, the PAO is busy while deployed and in garrison. There is no reason for your organization to add another (idle) layer of bureaucracy between the decision maker and the action. If your Chief of Staff or whomever demands you need supervision, look in the mirror. Do you suck? If so, stop and get better.
The IO simply can’t keep up. You will be making real decisions in real time. Because he needs the background and context you already have to make his decisions, he will be too slow to get the mission done.
You work for the commander. In service and joint doctrine, you are on personal staff. The IO isn’t, I think he works for the Operations Officer or something? Doesn’t matter. A word of warning though, commanders will and should seek out people who produce results. If your IO has a tendency and reputation of producing results, why wouldn’t your commander lean on the IO for all his information needs? Look in the mirror, do you produce results?
The Good
The IO can bring value. The IO thinks about information too. He is schooled in influence. He may have some cool operational tools at his disposal. He might have interpreters, cultural advisors or technical tools. The PAO is always better to have a great relationship with the IO. Just like the PAO is better to have a great relationship with the S1, S2, S4 etc. Play to each other’s strengths always.
Some words of wisdom from a senior public affairs NCO, “To avoid an IO mission-creep the PAO needs not avoid the IO but continually work with the IO. A good IO will understand their role as a facilitator in the staff to ensure all information related capabilities are coordinated and synched. We [PA] have to demonstrate our value as message developers. We have to be the masters of the message. If for no other reason but because we are the ones who will be communicating that message to the public. If there is a void the IO will look to others, like the PSYOP officer or another IO in there staff to start generating those themes and messages. This is a territory we need to vigorously protect. It is not always good to get into pissing contests but this is an area that is worth the fight if we are to be of any use to our commander.”
Now, get to work. Do great work and no one will dare to get in the way of that. Not the chief of staff, not the operations officer and certainly not the IO. This doesn’t have to be confrontational, you shouldn’t be citing doctrine about your position– Just do great work, report to those who enable you to do great work and the rest will work itself out.
Photo by Maj. Ray McCulloch, 102nd Information Operations Battalion
