by Jessica Bruckert, Duke University

He recently debuted on GQ’s venerable list of the 50 Most Powerful People in D.C. She works with multinational, Fortune 500 PepsiCo, Inc. He founded an acclaimed international nongovernmental organization while in college. All served in the U.S. Marine Corps. Nathaniel Fick, Maura Sullivan, and Rye Barcott field questions on business, the military, and that critical intersection where crisis meets opportunity—on the battlefield, in the boardroom, and in life.

Rye Barcott served as a Marine captain in Bosnia, Africa, and Iraq. He founded Carolina for Kibera, an international nongovernmental organization based in Nairobi, Kenya, and is a graduate of Harvard’s Business and Kennedy Schools. He attended college at The University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill.

Business Today: In a recent article featured on Harvard Business’ Frontline Leadership site, Listen Well and Ask Better Questions, you wrote that you believe MBA (Master of Business Administration) graduates in today’s economic climate “must be much more effective in leading responsible companies and creating value for all stakeholders.” In regards to responsibilities and service, what do you think are some ways of serving one’s country through either through the military or through other means—like business?

Rye Barcott: That’s a great topic, and a really important one today. A number of students joined together right before graduating from Harvard Business School (HBS) and put together an MBA Oath, which about half the class signed in the last three weeks, just before graduation. The intent of the oath was to set a common standard of values to which all business leaders should, and can, aspire to. Principally among those—the ones that are really central to military service as well—integrity, and putting the mission and the organization above your own narrow and selfish ambitions. That’s a movement that’s now underway—this idea of professionalizing the MBA program, that plays into a broader discussion of the role of service in business leadership.

BT: Increasingly, private sector companies are working effectively with other social institutions to promote positive change. You’ve raised the questions regarding the ways business principles can be implemented to improve government agencies and non-profits and how the intersection of business and non-business organizations can be leveraged “for the most good.” What are your thoughts about the potential for these relationships, and exercising leadership in that capacity?

RB: At a more theoretical level, the intersections do exist, but are not clearly defined. In order to lead a career that blends these different sectors, the onus is on the individual--because it’s not particularly easy [to bridge different sectors], and there are not career trajectories that are well designed. MBA graduates are facing careers that will, more likely than not, take us into six, seven, eight, jobs- some of which are in vastly different sectors. I thought the MBA program, particularly the first year, was a good basis for developing a standard set of knowledge about how to approach organizational problems—be that in for-profit or not-for-profit companies. There’s a certain overlap. For a more concrete example, my particular focus has been on clean technology and companies that are creating new innovations out of the traditional venture capital model for Silicon Valley. Our work in the Kibera slum of Nairobi, Kenya connects these companies that work for profits with technologies that can directly be used for some of the poorest citizens in the world. Doing that in a way that comes at no loss to the company is a potentially challenging endeavor. A high-tech fiber optic cable now connects East Africa with much of the world, and that’s creating opportunities for companies that were otherwise based solely in the US market. From a business standpoint, you can potentially reach a larger market of customers. It’s something I’m still personally aspiring to do, finding these intersections—this is really where a lot of the most exciting innovations are happening.

Nathaniel Fick served as a Marine officer in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq. He is the author of New York Times best-seller One Bullet Away, the CEO of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), and a graduate of Harvard’s Business and Kennedy Schools. He attended college at Dartmouth College.

Business Today: Recently, we have seen examples of success being closely linked to creativity in tough times. One Bullet Away offers many analogous situations. Can you elaborate on the value of innovation and creativity both in the military and business world?

NF: Two things come to mind. One: The current White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, has a saying to the effect of, “never miss the opportunity presented by a good crisis,” that crises are opportunities; they are opportunities to make changes that are hard to do when things are going well. I’m at the helm of an organization now that is undergoing pretty serious leadership transition and sure, it’s a challenge—but it also provides us with the opportunities to do a whole host of things that are very difficult to do when everyone perceives that things are on an even keel and moving smoothly. In the military, you learn as you are rehearsing for and conducting missions, that the points of real danger—and of real opportunity—are in the transitions. So, for instance, if you’re doing a raid, and you’re on a helicopter, as you’re flying along, going to your mission objective, it’s a static part of the mission. There’s a remote chance that something crazy could happen—the helicopter could fall out of the sky or whatever—but it’s pretty unlikely. But when the helicopter lands in the landing zone, and you’re getting off and you’re getting ready to move into your assault, at that transition, it’s a time of dynamism—a time of risk, and of opportunity. By the same token, when you’re sitting in a static position on the ground, not a lot of risk—not a lot of opportunity. But when you’re kicking in the door of a building and going through into the room, that’s your moment of great risk and great opportunity. I think it’s true in a business career: that at those organizational transitions, it’s when you face the greatest risk—but, just like in investing, risk and reward are correlated, and when you have the opportunity to have a great reward with very little risk, you should take it, because those are rare. It’s more often that you go through a period of great risk—and it also provides the opportunity for great reward for your institution. I think about it that way. I also think about it that way looking at a career. We’re in college for four years—and it’s a time, frankly, of not necessarily great risk. You’re kind of moving through the pipeline. And then you graduate, and you face a transition. And at that inflection point—that transition, when you’re deciding what to do next—it’s analogous to moving through the door of that building- it’s a period of risk and also of opportunity. It’s a time that you need to seize. There’s something about a crisis, there’s something about a transition—in our lives, in business, in the military, wherever—that makes it a moment of risk, and of opportunity, and we need to be good at recognizing them and seizing them.

BT: Another question to append to transition, opportunity and risk: balancing professional duties with personal beliefs. Marine Corps leadership traits and core values don’t just function solely as virtuous qualities, but, arguably, success in battle is dependent upon such principles. How do you retain these theoretical ideals when a mission or objective possibly calls on them to be compromised in some way, or in a situation when it becomes incredibly trying to maintain them?

NF: The Marine Corps has a whole list of leadership traits and leadership principles. You’re right; there are times when you may feel as if you need to compromise—or when in fact, you do have to compromise. In my training, I was taught about the dual obligations of mission accomplishment and troop welfare. As a junior officer, you have an obligation to win; to accomplish your mission. You also have an obligation to the mothers and fathers, and husbands and wives of America to bring their loved one home safe. Those are two conflicting goals, sometimes. One of the hard truths of military combat leadership is that there are times when you have to choose one above the other: by choosing the mission you’re sacrificing the men, and by choosing the men, you might be sacrificing the mission. It’s an incredibly difficult balancing act. But I think at a more fundamental level, you have the core values of the Marine Corps: honor, courage and commitment. And the core values of an organization are never compromised. Never in my experience in the Corps was I in a position where I felt I had to compromise my honor and the honor of my men; where I needed something other than my courage, or the courage of my men, or where I was expected to demonstrate something other than my commitment and the commitment of my men. There are some bedrock core values, when you cut right to the heart of it, that you don’t have to compromise. Then, the messy reality is, as you get a little further out to the periphery, you do recognize that these are competing sometimes, and you have to choose. You’re going to make mistakes. As a young leader especially, you are going to make mistakes. You better recognize it. Making a mistake is forgivable; making the same mistake twice is a lot harder to forgive.

BT: Do you think that looking back and reflecting on a mistake can also be used as a constructive opportunity for self-improvement?

NF: I think that’s true. We need to, in our careers and in our lives, build in that structured time to reflect. You need to build in that feed-back loop. In the military, we do it pretty well. You do a de-briefing after every mission, and I found that in civilian organizations, we don’t necessarily do that as well. It’s not a natural part of the process. Too often, your planning process ends with the execution of whatever it is you’re doing, and you don’t always follow through and incorporate that feedback, so that you learn—and so that you do it better next time. It’s one place where I think that military training can serve civilian organizations very well.

Maura Sullivan, a former Marine captain, spent seven months as a logistics officer in Fallujah. She is a part of PepsiCo’s leadership development program, and is a graduate of Harvard's Business and Kennedy Schools. She attended college at Northwestern University.

Business Today: The New York Times recently published a profile of women the military called GI Jane Breaks the Combat Barrier. It seems as a result of the successful experiences of military women in Iraq and Afghanistan, it’s becoming more culturally acceptable to have women in positions where they may be involved in ground fighting, whereas that wasn’t part of the protocol before. Dr. Nagl, president of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), is quoted in the article as saying, in reference to the Iraq conflict, “We literally could not have fought this war without women.” What are your thoughts on this?

MS: First of all, I was very happy to see that was the top story. I think it brings a lot of national attention to what women are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan, educating the public on the status of our fighting forces. Women do make a very significant contribution that sometimes can be overlooked, because it’s not inherent in the military’s nature to advertise what women or men are specifically doing and highlight their gender. I think it was very helpful in that it dispelled some preconceived notions that women who are in Iraq and Afghanistan are simply doing desk jobs. I should point out the desk jobs are absolutely every bit as important as the sergeant charging the firefight on the cover of The New York Times. Nothing happens without them. They’re serving their country just as much as someone who’s kicking down a door in Baghdad. That being said, it is important that the public—and young women who may be looking at the option of going into the military—realize the tremendous progress that women have made. We were located in and around the city of Fallujah, and, in order to adhere to Iraqi cultural sensitivities, we had women who were from our battalion, and other adjacent battalions, that were working alongside the infantry assisting at all checkpoints. You have women co-located with and accompanying the infantry. What’s really important to remember is that should anything happen to a convoy, should they get attacked—the vehicle patrol becomes a ground patrol. Those Marines are getting out of their vehicles and now they’re fighting on the ground. Women have been doing that for a long time. When we were in Iraq, if I recall correctly, we had five convey commanders, and three of them were women. I thought the article was very well done. Slowly but surely, preconceived notions that women are of second-tier status, or can’t hang with the guys, so to speak, are being dispelled.

BT: Rye Barcott mentioned that the HBS class of 2009 created an MBA Oath. What did that involve?

MS: There were about thirty students, of which Rye and I were two, who came together and thought there was a need to professionalize management, to have an oath of ethics very similar to the Hippocratic Oath. One of the students on the team was a joint degree student between Harvard Business School and Harvard Medical School. He was active as a knowledge source for us as we looked at the role the Hippocratic Oath had played in the profession of medicine. A statement of intent: first, do no harm. With the MBA Oath: first, do no harm to the corporation. It’s not an oath that says “don’t make profit,” because we live in a capitalist society. Profit is what makes the world go around—or what makes our world go around. It’s what brings about innovation, it’s what creates jobs, it’s how families exist. But it does promote doing business in an ethical manner, conducting yourself honestly when looking at the needs of the corporation and the various stakeholders that you represent when you’re on a management team. It’s really exciting. The Oath got a lot of traction in a New York Times article. The long-term intent is to change the profession of management, and have it be institutionalized throughout MBA programs. It has to go beyond Harvard—the oath is not about Harvard, it happened to originated there—and to start to incorporate other schools.

BT: It sounds like a creative and useful tool, and a good connector between business school and entering back into business at large. You mentioned a blog. The address?

MS: http://mbaoath.org.

BT: You have said you see “tremendous potentials for companies to make a favorable impact on the environment and in the global community.” How did the Marine Corps, or your time at business school, influence your thoughts about those partnerships?

MS: The Marine Corps gave me exposure to different cultures, leading socio-economically and regionally diverse teams around the world, which helps equip you to lead any sort of team in the private sector. Harvard Business School—and interacting with my peers at Harvard Business School—has changed the way I think about the role of the corporation. It’s exciting to see the power of capital markets around the world to bring jobs, clean water, supplies, food, to third world countries that otherwise wouldn’t have that option. One of the things I’m most excited about is this new, recently defined concept: social entrepreneurship. The partnering of social entrepreneurs with the corporation; using the resources of the corporation, leveraging networks, assets, and resources to bring about something like that—for me, that’s something I hope to have the opportunity to be involved in, in the private sector.

The conversation continues with Rye Barcott, Nathaniel Fick, and Maura Sullivan in the spring issue of Business Today.