Student Leadership in Action: Emotional Intelligence at THE CURE

 On Saturday, March 14th, I had the opportunity to lead an Emotional Intelligence workshop for the
Student Leadership Alliance at THE CURE in Iron Mountain.

I was invited by the program director, Katie Cherney, to work with the Student Leadership Alliance.

---

The Environment Matters

Before we ever talked about emotions, intelligence, or leadership, Katie had prepared snacks! It's a lot easier to get teens out of bed on a Saturday morning if food is involved.

The Cure is a very low-stress, high-trust environment complete with comfortable couches and chairs. It is known for, and during my time there, it remained a psychologically safe environment.

That matters more than people think. Because people, regardless of age, won't engage deeply unless they feel safe enough to think, share, and reflect honestly.

---

Breaking Down Emotional Intelligence

We started with two key components of emotional intelligence:

1. Personal Competence

This is about understanding yourself.

We focused on:

• Identifying emotions

• Expanding emotional vocabulary using an emotion wheel

• Recognizing what we’re actually feeling—not just saying “I’m mad” or “I’m fine.”

• Learning how to manage those emotions once identified

---

2. Social Competence

This is about understanding others.

We worked on:

• Recognizing emotions in other people
• Reading situations more accurately
• Adjusting how we respond based on relationships

Leadership is interaction with people and meeting them where they are.

---

From Theory to Practice

After the classroom portion, we shifted gears into a practical exercise. Students were divided into three groups and given a fictional case study:

A young family had been hit by a drunk driver. The father had been seriously injured, the mother and children less so, but still with emotional trauma.

Each group approached the situation from a different professional lens:

Group 1: Law Enforcement

How do police officers use emotional intelligence when responding to a traumatic scene?
How will they handle the family and the drunk driver with dignity, respect, and fairness?

---

Group 2: Educators

How do teachers support the two children impacted by the crash when they return to school?
What emotional gaps can they help to fill? Which ones should they avoid?

---

Group 3: Social Workers

How do you support a family dealing with:

• Injury

• Emotional trauma

• Financial stress

• Disruption to daily life

---

What Happened Next

Each group applied social competencies to their role:

• Empathy

• Awareness

• Communication

• Relationship management

They weren’t just talking about emotional intelligence. They were using it in a realistic scenario that wasn't "real" but had enough realistic elements that they could all empathize with one or more of the people involved.

When each group was able to share their thoughts, you were able to see that they were thinking deeper, considering people, not just problems, and were using the tools that had just been placed in their toolbox earlier that morning.

From a teacher's point of view: It was awesome to see these young leaders engage with the material, each other, and the complex ideas that came from small and large group discussions.

---

Why This Matters

We talk a lot about leadership. But leadership without emotional intelligence is incomplete.

You can have great ideas, well-thought-out plans, clear direction, focus, mission, vision, etc. But if you can’t identify your own emotions, manage those emotions, understand people, and build trust, you and your team will never reach your full potential.

---

The Takeaway

The biggest win wasn’t the content; it was their engagement with each other in leader-to-leader conversations and how they spoke about using what they learned in their next leadership interaction.

Multiple students came up afterward and said:

• They enjoyed it

• They learned something

• It made them think differently

That’s the goal. Not just information- Transformation.

---

Final Thought

Leadership starts with self-awareness and grows through how we treat others.
These students took a real-world situation and applied emotional intelligence in meaningful ways.
That’s leadership...and that’s the future.

Teach. Coach. Lead.
JVD

---

Ready to Bring This to Your Organization?

If you’re looking to build stronger leaders, better communication, higher emotional intelligence, and more connected teams: Schedule your leadership event at www.johnvandusen.com

---

Credits

This post was drafted with the assistance of AI (ChatGPT) and edited by Mr. VanDusen.

Problem Solving for Leaders: The Complete Framework

Photo by Campaign Creators on Unsplash

Leaders solve problems every day.

Some are small and routine. Others are complex and high stakes. But one thing is consistent across

every profession—education, coaching, business, or the military:

Leaders are paid to solve problems.

Over the past several posts, we walked through the Army’s structured problem-solving process from FM 6-0 (Commander and Staff Organization and Operations). While developed for military planning, the framework works remarkably well in civilian leadership environments.

The reason is simple.

Good problem-solving is disciplined thinking.

Here is the full framework.

---

Step 1: Understand the Type of Problem

Not all problems are the same. Army doctrine describes three types:

Well-Structured Problems

• Easy to identify

• Information is available

• Solutions are straightforward

Examples include scheduling issues, logistics problems, or budget math.

---

Medium-Structured Problems

• Multiple variables

• Several possible solutions

• Judgment required

Examples include improving student engagement, adjusting team strategy, or entering a new market.

---

Ill-Structured Problems

• Complex and dynamic

• Unclear causes

• Disagreement about solutions or even goals

Examples include organizational culture issues, declining morale, or market disruption.

---

Step 2: Gather Information and Knowledge

Before solving anything, leaders gather information.

They separate:

• Facts — verifiable information

• Assumptions — accepted as true without proof but necessary to continue planning

• Opinions — personal judgments that must be evaluated carefully

Strong decisions require accurate information.

Weak information produces weak solutions.

---

Step 3: Identify the Real Problem

Photo by Karla Hernandez on Unsplash

One of the biggest leadership traps is solving symptoms instead of root causes.

Leaders identify problems by comparing:

Current State vs Desired End State

They ask:

• Who does the problem affect?

• What is affected?

• When did it start?

• Where is it occurring?

• Why did it occur?

Only after identifying the root cause should leaders define a clear problem statement.

---

Step 4: Develop Criteria

Before choosing a solution, leaders define how solutions will be judged.

Two types of criteria guide the process.

Screening Criteria

Baseline standards that determine whether a solution should even be considered.

Solutions must be:

• Suitable

• Feasible

• Acceptable

• Distinguishable

• Complete

---

Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation criteria determine which solution is best.

Each criterion includes:

• Title

• Definition

• Unit of measure

• Benchmark

• Formula for evaluation

Criteria may also be weighted based on importance.

---

Step 5: Generate Possible Solutions

Leaders should consider at least two solutions.

Developing only one option limits creativity and increases risk.

One effective method is brainstorming, where leaders:

• Clearly state the problem

• Encourage participation

• Record all ideas

• Withhold judgment during idea generation

• Build on each other’s ideas

After generating options, leaders summarize solutions clearly in writing, sketches, or diagrams.

---

Step 6: Analyze Possible Solutions

Each solution is evaluated independently against screening criteria and benchmarks.

Leaders identify:

Photo by Kaleidico on Unsplash

• Strengths

• Weaknesses

• Risks

• Expected outcomes

Importantly, leaders do not compare solutions yet. Each option must stand on its own merits during
analysis.

---

Step 7: Compare Possible Solutions

Once analysis is complete, leaders compare options to determine the optimum solution.

One of the most effective tools is a decision matrix, which:

• Lists evaluation criteria

• Assigns weights

• Scores each solution

• Provides a structured comparison

This step removes emotion and bias from the decision.

---

Step 8: Make and Implement the Decision

After comparison, leaders identify the preferred solution and present their recommendation.

But a good solution can still fail if it is communicated poorly.

Strong leaders:

• Clearly explain the problem

• Present their reasoning

• Coordinate with stakeholders

• Issue clear implementation instructions

Then they monitor results and adjust if necessary.

Problem solving does not end with a decision—it ends with successful implementation.

---

Why This Process Matters

This framework:

• Prevents emotional decision-making

• Reduces bias

• Improves transparency

• Builds trust

• Encourages collaboration

• Produces better long-term outcomes

It slows leaders down just enough to think clearly before acting.

---

Final Thought

Leadership is not about always having the right answer immediately.

It is about asking the right questions in the right order.

Understand the problem.
Gather the facts.
Define the root cause.
Set your criteria.
Generate options.
Analyze objectively.
Compare logically.
Decide and execute.

Disciplined thinking produces disciplined leadership.

And disciplined leadership solves problems that others cannot.

Teach. Coach. Lead.
JVD

 

---

Sources & Credits

Concepts in this article are derived from FM 6-0, Commander and Staff Organization and Operations, Chapter 4, which outlines the Army’s systematic approach to problem solving.

This post was drafted with the assistance of AI (ChatGPT) and edited by Mr. VanDusen.

Problem Solving (Part 8): Decide, Communicate, Implement, Monitor

You’ve done the work.

Photo by AbsolutVision on Unsplash

You:

• Gathered information

• Identified the real problem

• Developed criteria

• Generated options

• Analyzed them

• Compared them

Now comes the part that separates thinkers from leaders:

Make and implement the decision.

Because disciplined analysis without action is just theory.

---

Step 1: Identify the Preferred Solution

After comparison, leaders determine the optimum solution.

Not the easiest.
Not the loudest.
Not the most popular.

The best fit based on:

• Screening criteria

• Benchmarks

• Weighted evaluation criteria

• Alignment with mission

Clarity at this stage builds confidence in the decision.

---

Step 2: Coordinate Before You Present

If someone else owns final approval, leaders prepare to present their recommendation.

But before presenting:

Coordinate with those affected.

In civilian life, this might mean:

• Talking to department heads

• Checking with HR or finance

• Aligning with assistant coaches

• Informing school administration

• Consulting stakeholders

Uncoordinated recommendations create friction.

Strong leaders prevent surprises.

---

Photo by Brett Jordan on Unsplash

Step 3: Present Clearly and Persuasively

A great solution can fail if it is poorly communicated.

Doctrine makes an important point:

Problem solving requires both a solution and the ability to communicate it.

Whether verbal or written, leaders must:

• State the problem clearly

• Explain the criteria used

• Summarize the analysis

• Justify the recommendation

• Articulate expected outcomes

In business, this may be a decision brief.
In schools, a staff presentation.
In coaching, a team meeting.

Communication skill can be as important as analytical skill.

---

Step 4: Refine Based on Guidance

Once the decisionmaker provides final guidance, leaders refine the solution.

This may include:

• Adjusting timelines

• Modifying scope

• Clarifying expectations

• Updating responsibilities

Strong leaders treat feedback as refinement—not rejection.

---

Step 5: Issue Clear Implementation Instructions

Execution requires clarity.

Formal settings may require:

• Policy letters

• Written directives

• Memorandums

In civilian settings, this might mean:

• A written implementation plan

• A clear email outlining steps

• A rollout meeting

• Assigned responsibilities and deadlines

Ambiguity kills good solutions.

Specificity drives success.

---

Step 6: Monitor Implementation

Problem solving does not end at decision.

Leaders:

• Monitor progress

• Compare outcomes to benchmarks

• Measure against the desired end state

• 

  Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash

  Identify unintended consequences

If adjustments are necessary, they make them.

---

Build Feedback Into the Plan

Every implementation plan must include:

• Timely feedback

• Periodic review

• Flexibility to adjust

Without feedback, leaders cannot:

• Confirm success

• Detect failure

• Improve execution

The goal is not blind execution.
The goal is adaptive execution.

---

Avoid Creating New Problems

One of the final cautions in doctrine:

Leaders must avoid creating new problems through uncoordinated implementation.

In business, that may mean:

• Rolling out a policy without informing affected departments

• Changing compensation structures without consultation

In schools:

• Adjusting schedules without considering transportation

In coaching:

• Changing strategy without aligning assistant coaches

Good implementation is synchronized implementation.

---

Why This Step Matters Most

Many leaders enjoy analysis.

Fewer enjoy accountability.

But leadership requires both.

Decision and implementation:

• Demonstrate ownership

• Build credibility

• Establish momentum

• Reinforce trust

The discipline of the earlier steps protects this final one.

---

Final Thought

Problem solving does not end when the “best” solution is identified.

It ends when:

• The decision is made

• The plan is communicated

• The solution is implemented

• The results are measured

• Adjustments are made

Leadership is not just thinking well.

It is executing well.

And that is where trust is earned.

Teach it. Coach it. Lead.

JVD 

---

Sources & Credits

Concepts in this article are derived from FM 6-0, Commander and Staff Organization and Operations, Chapter 4, regarding making and implementing decisions within the Army problem-solving process.

This post was drafted with the assistance of AI (ChatGPT) and edited by Mr. VanDusen.

Problem Solving (Part 7): Compare to Decide — Finding the Optimum Solution

Photo by Jason Dent on Unsplash

In Part 6, we talked about analyzing each solution independently.

Now we move to the step most people think they’re doing from the beginning:

Comparison.

This is where you place viable solutions side-by-side and determine which one is optimum—not just acceptable.

The distinction matters.

---

Analysis vs. Comparison

Analysis answers:

“Does this solution meet the standard?”

Comparison answers:

“Which solution best solves the problem?”

If you compare before analyzing, you risk bias.
If you analyze without comparing, you risk indecision.

Both are necessary—but in the right order.

---

What Comparison Actually Means

During comparison, leaders:

• Evaluate each solution against the others

• Use previously defined evaluation criteria

• Identify relative strengths

• Identify relative weaknesses

• Determine the best overall fit

The objective is not perfection.

The objective is optimization.

---

Use a Decision Matrix

Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

The most common comparison tool is a decision matrix.

A decision matrix:

• Lists evaluation criteria

• Assigns weights (if appropriate)

• Scores each solution

• Produces a structured comparison

It removes personality from the process.

---

Simple Civilian Example

Problem: Improve student engagement.

Evaluation Criteria:

• Cost

• Time to implement

• Impact on engagement

• Sustainability

Solutions:

• Adjust schedule

• Implement project-based learning

• Increase technology integration

Each solution is scored against each criterion.

If impact is weighted more heavily than cost, that weight influences the final result.

Suddenly, the decision becomes transparent.

---

Coaching Example

Problem: Defensive performance decline.

Criteria:

• Player fit

• Implementation speed

• Risk exposure

• Long-term growth

You score:

• Scheme change

• Personnel rotation

• Conditioning emphasis

The matrix reveals which option best balances effectiveness and sustainability.

---

Business Example

Problem: Market share decline.

Criteria:

• Revenue growth potential

• Cost

• Risk

• Brand alignment

• Speed to market

Options:

• New product launch

• Pricing strategy change

• Market repositioning

The decision matrix forces clarity.

---

Why This Step Builds Credibility

Comparison:

• Shows transparency

• Reduces favoritism

• Protects leaders from accusations of bias

• Strengthens stakeholder trust

• Documents the decision process

Photo by Austin Chan on Unsplash

When challenged, leaders can point to the framework.

Not emotion. Not preference. Not pressure.

Structure.

---

What “Optimum” Really Means

The optimum solution:

• Meets screening criteria

• Achieves benchmarks

• Scores highest against weighted evaluation criteria

• Aligns with mission and values

• Balances short-term and long-term impact

It may not be perfect.

But it is the best fit given available information and constraints.

---

Avoid These Pitfalls

During comparison:

• Do not introduce new criteria

• Do not shift weights to favor a preferred option

• Do not ignore the matrix because you “have a feeling”

• Do not rush because of external pressure

Discipline builds trust.

---

Why Leaders Struggle Here

Because comparison requires commitment.

Once you determine the optimum solution, you must be prepared to:

• Recommend it

• Defend it

• Implement it

Comparison forces ownership.

---

Final Thought

Good leaders generate options.
Great leaders compare them objectively.

Put the solutions side-by-side.
Use your criteria.
Apply your weights.
Make the choice that best achieves the mission.

In Part 8, we’ll cover making and implementing the decision—because analysis without action is just academic.

Leadership moves forward.

Teach it. Coach it. Lead.

JVD

---

Sources & Credits

Concepts in this article are derived from FM 6-0, Commander and Staff Organization and Operations, Chapter 4, regarding comparing possible solutions and the use of decision matrices.

This post was drafted with the assistance of AI (ChatGPT) and edited by Mr. VanDusen.

Problem Solving (Part 6): Analyze Before You Compare

Photo by Luke Chesser on Unsplash

This is where discipline separates strong leaders from reactive ones.

You’ve:

• Identified the problem

• Developed criteria

• Generated multiple solutions

Now comes the step most people rush:

Analyze possible solutions.

And here’s the key principle from FM 6-0:

Analyze first. Compare later.

If you mix those two steps, you undermine the integrity of your decision.

---

What Analysis Actually Means

Analysis is not preference.
Analysis is not voting.
Analysis is not debate.

Analysis means examining each possible solution independently to determine:

• Its strengths

• Its weaknesses

• Whether it meets minimum requirements

• Whether it reaches the desired end state

Each solution stands alone during analysis.

---

Start with Screening Criteria

The first filter is your screening criteria.

Ask:

• Is it suitable?

• Is it feasible?

• Is it acceptable?

• Is it distinguishable?

• Is it complete?

If a solution fails even one critical screening criterion, it is removed from consideration.

No emotional attachment. No defending weak ideas.

This protects your process.

---

Use Benchmarks to Judge Quality

After screening, leaders judge solutions against benchmarks.

Benchmarks define what “good” looks like.

If the raw data meets or exceeds the benchmark, the solution achieves the desired state.

If it doesn’t, it doesn’t.

It’s that simple.

---

Civilian Examples

In Education:

Criterion: Student engagement increase
Benchmark: 10% improvement in participation

If the solution predicts only a 2% improvement, it may fail to meet the benchmark.

---

In Coaching:

Criterion: Defensive improvement
Benchmark: Reduce opponent yards by 20%

If analysis shows only marginal improvement, that solution may not achieve the desired end state.

---

In Business:

Criterion: Revenue growth
Benchmark: 8% quarterly growth

If projections show 3%, it may not meet the standard.

Benchmarks force objectivity.

---

Photo by BoliviaInteligente on Unsplash

Quantitative vs. Predictive Analysis

Some solutions involve measurable data.

You can:

• Compute

• Estimate

• Measure

• Project

Other solutions require forecasting.

In those cases, leaders use:

• War-gaming

• Modeling

• Simulations

• Scenario planning

Translated for civilian life:

• “If we implement this schedule change, what happens next?”

• “If we adjust pricing, how might competitors respond?”

• “If we change practice intensity, how does that affect injury risk?”

You visualize second- and third-order effects.

Strong leaders think beyond first-order outcomes.

---

Do Not Compare Yet

This is critical.

During analysis:

Do not compare solutions to each other.

Why?

Because comparison introduces bias.

You’ll start saying:

• “Well, this one is better than that one…”

• “At least it’s not as bad as…”

That temptation leads to shortcuts.

Instead, evaluate each solution on its own merits against your standards.

---

Photo by Kai Pilger on Unsplash

Do Not Introduce New Criteria

Another common leadership failure:

Changing the rules mid-process.

If a new criterion suddenly appears during analysis, it compromises integrity.

Criteria were developed earlier for a reason.

If they change, restart the process properly.

Strong leaders protect the structure.

---

What If No Solution Meets the Benchmark?

It happens.

If every solution fails to meet standards, leaders:

• Acknowledge it

• Inform the decisionmaker

• Generate better options

Lowering the benchmark to justify a weak solution is poor leadership.

---

Why This Step Matters

Analysis:

• Removes emotion

• Reduces favoritism

• Increases transparency

• Builds trust

• Protects credibility

• Prevents impulsive decisions

It slows leaders down just enough to avoid regret.

---

Final Thought

Most bad decisions don’t come from bad intentions.

They come from skipping disciplined analysis.

Examine each solution.
Apply your standards.
Use your benchmarks.
Identify strengths and weaknesses clearly.

Then—and only then—move to comparison.

In Part 7, we’ll look at comparing solutions and making the final decision.

Because leadership isn’t about guessing right.

It’s about thinking right.

Teach it. Coach it. Lead.

JVD

---

Sources & Credits

Concepts in this article are derived from FM 6-0, Commander and Staff Organization and Operations, Chapter 4, regarding analyzing possible solutions and the disciplined application of screening criteria and benchmarks.

This post was drafted with the assistance of AI (ChatGPT) and edited by Mr. VanDusen.

Problem Solving (Part 5): Generate More Than One Solution

Photo by Zac Gribble on Unsplash

Once you’ve defined the problem and developed clear criteria, the next step is deceptively simple:

Generate possible solutions.

And this is where many leaders quietly sabotage themselves.

They develop one idea.
They fall in love with it.
They defend it.
They execute it.

And when it fails, they blame execution—not imagination.

FM 6-0 makes something clear:

Leaders should consider at least two solutions.

Not twenty.
Not one.

At least two.

Because comparison is one of the most powerful decision-making tools you have.

---

Why One Solution Is a Risk

Developing only one option may feel efficient.

It is not disciplined.

One solution:

• Prevents comparison

• Hides assumptions

• Limits creativity

• Increases blind spots

• Raises the chance of unintended consequences

Yes, generating multiple options takes more time.

But fixing a poorly considered solution takes even more.

---

How Many Solutions Should You Generate?

Experience and available time determine the number.

Too many options:

• Waste time

• Create unnecessary analysis

• Confuse the team

Too few:

• Limit perspective

• Reduce creativity

• Increase risk

In most leadership environments—schools, coaching staffs, executive teams—two to four well-developed options are ideal.

---

Use Creativity Intentionally

Doctrine emphasizes creativity.

Often, groups generate better ideas than individuals—if the group understands the problem.

That’s important.

Creativity without understanding is chaos.
Creativity grounded in knowledge produces innovation.

---

Photo by Per Lööv on Unsplash

Brainstorming Done Correctly

Brainstorming is not random discussion. It’s structured.

When leaders use brainstorming, they:

• Clearly state the problem

• Ensure everyone understands it

• Appoint someone to record ideas

• Withhold judgment during idea generation

• Encourage independent thinking

• Aim for quantity, not immediate quality

• “Hitchhike” ideas—build on others’ thoughts

The key rule:

No criticism during idea generation.

Judgment comes later.

---

Civilian Applications

In Education:

Problem: Student engagement is declining.

Brainstormed options:

• Adjust instructional model

• Modify schedule

• Incorporate project-based learning

• Increase student voice

• Change assessment structure

Do not evaluate yet. Just generate.

---

In Coaching:

Problem: Defensive performance is weak.

Options:

• Scheme adjustment

• Personnel rotation

• Conditioning emphasis

• Film-study increase

• Communication restructure

Again—generate first. Evaluate later.

---

In Business:

Problem: Sales are declining.

Options:

• Pricing change

• Marketing pivot

• Customer experience redesign

• New target demographic

• Product modification

Quantity first. Quality later.

---

Screen After Generating

Once options are generated, leaders apply screening criteria.

Some ideas will immediately fail the basic tests of:

• Suitability

• Feasibility

• Acceptability

• Distinguishability

• 

  Photo by Florian Schmetz on Unsplash

  Completeness

Discard those.

But if screening leaves only one viable option, that’s a signal:

You didn’t generate enough creativity.

Go back and develop more.

---

Summarize Solutions Clearly

After generating viable options, leaders document them.

Each solution should be:

• Clear

• Concise

• Actionable

• Understandable

Sometimes a single sentence works.

Example:
“Restructure the master schedule to create intervention blocks for struggling students.”

Other times, more detail is needed:

• Diagrams

• Sketches

• Concept outlines

• Written narratives

Clarity prevents misunderstanding during analysis.

If you can’t clearly explain the solution, you can’t properly evaluate it.

---

Why This Step Matters

This step:

• Expands perspective

• Reduces bias

• Encourages innovation

• Prevents tunnel vision

• Strengthens ownership

Leaders who consistently generate multiple options become more adaptable, more resilient, and less reactive.

They don’t panic when the first plan fails.

They pivot.

---

Final Thought

Problem solving is not about having the fastest answer.

It’s about having the best-informed one.

Generate more than one path.
Document clearly.
Screen thoughtfully.
Prepare for comparison.

In Part 6, we’ll analyze and compare possible solutions—where disciplined thinking separates good leaders from reactive ones.

Because leadership is not about guessing right.

It’s about thinking clearly.

Teach it. Coach it. Lead.

JVD