Air University

Allen G. Peck, Lt Gen, Commander

Air Command and Staff College

Anthony J. Rock, Brig Gen, Commandant

Zoë M. Hale, Col, PhD, Dean

Brett E. Morris, Col, PhD, Director of Research

Brett E. Morris, Col, PhD, 

and John L. Mansuy, Maj, Series Editors

Brian W. Landry, Lt Col, PhD, Essay Advisor

Air University Press

John A. Shaud, Gen, USAF, Retired, PhD

Director, Air Force Research Institute

Jeanne K. Shamburger, Content Editor

Sherry Terrell, Copy Editor

Ann Bailey, Prepress Production

Daniel Armstrong, Cover Design

Please send inquiries or comments to

Editor

The Wright Flyer Papers

Air Command and Staff College (ACSC/DEI)

225 Chennault Circle, Bldg. 1402

Maxwell AFB AL 36112-6426

Tel: (334) 953-6810

Fax: (334) 953-2269

E-mail: ACSC@maxwell.af.mil
AIR UNIVERSITY

AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLLEGE

Holistic Debriefing

A Paradigm Shift in Leadership 

Rolf Folland

Lieutenant Colonel, Royal Norwegian Air Force

Air Command and Staff College

Wright Flyer Paper No. 41

Air University Press

Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama

March 2010
ii

This Wright Flyer Paper and others in the series are 

available electronically at the Air University Research 

Web site http://research.maxwell.af.mil and the AU 

Press Web site http://aupress.au.af.mil.

Disclaimer

Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are 

solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of Air University, the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense, or any other US 

government agency. Cleared for public release: distribution unlimited.
iii

Foreword

It is with great pride that Air Command and Staff College 

presents another in a series of award-winning student research projects from our academic programs that reach 

nearly 11,000 students each year. As our series title indicates, we seek to promote the sort of imaginative, forwardlooking thinking that inspired the earliest aviation pioneers, 

and we aim for publication projects which combine these 

characteristics with the sort of clear presentation that permits even the most technical topics to be readily understood. We sincerely hope what follows will stimulate thinking, invite debate, and further encourage today’s air war 

fighters in their continuing search for new and better ways 

to perform their missions—now and in the future.

ANTHONY J. ROCK

Brigadier General, USAF

Commandant

v

Abstract

From time to time, paradigm shifts occur in leadership in 

the sense that fundamental assumptions about the mechanisms of human performance change. We are currently undergoing a paradigm shift that might highlight transformational leadership as highly effective in the context of military 

operations. The reason is that transformational leadership 

facilitates the growth of motivational mechanisms when 

confronting extreme situations like war. In essence, military subordinates expect their leaders to have more interpersonal skills than were required before. This is partly a 

result of the shift in community wherein employers now are 

expected to take responsibility for individuals’ lifelong personal growth and partly a result of increased stress due to 

higher demands in international operations. 

This paper explores the utility of a debriefing method resulting in individual, unit, and organizational transcendence 

toward increased effectiveness in the Royal Norwegian Air 

Force (RNoAF). The conceptual framework is centered on 

the transformational and complexity theories of leadership 

science. The study offers for consideration a debriefing 

methodology termed “holistic” as a structure for achieving 

both individualistic and unit inner growth and efficiency. 

The problem examined is the lack of proper leadership tools 

in the RNoAF’s operational units to understand and cope 

with the effects of increased stress. Based on theory and 

examples from operational practice, holistic debriefing is 

presented as a possible means for leaders to increase mission effectiveness through improved stress coping mechanisms. The secondary effects from people engaging with 

themselves and each other through holistic debriefing are 

increased self-knowledge, interpersonal trust, group confidence, and an improved working environment.

vii

Preface

In the last eight years I have been a leader for combat 

helicopter units in the Royal Norwegian Air Force. I have 

served as a squadron commander twice, once at the Norwegian Coast Guard helicopter squadron and a second tour as 

commander of the Norwegian search and rescue helicopter 

squadron. In both situations I was responsible for a 

24-hour-a-day, 365-day-a-year response capability in which 

the crew members had to be capable of performing lifesaving 

missions under extreme conditions. Several experiences 

from these missions and their follow-on debriefings have 

made me question our concepts of learning. As the years 

passed, it seemed obvious to me that a hidden potential of 

growth and development exists in the questions we never 

asked—the questions that dealt with our emotional experiences. I like to view it as the invisible part of an “iceberg of 

information”—we know it is there, but we do not dive into 

the cold water to have a closer look.

In 2001 I decided to initiate a new form of debriefing to 

address the hidden part of the “iceberg.” At that time we 

called it psychological debriefing because we used the same 

procedures to debrief traumatic events. As time went on we 

decided to integrate the emotional aspect into the regular 

debriefing. The title has evolved to holistic debriefing because this method integrates all relevant aspects of the 

learning process—cognitional, behavioral, and emotional—

and better represents the intent of the debriefing style. The 

effects of this holistic approach exceeded all our expectations. First, I witnessed strengthened relations and a more 

open atmosphere among colleagues. Moreover, I received 

feedback from my flight commanders that several crew 

members actually functioned better in their roles on the 

aircraft. A concept that initially started as an experiment 

proved to have an operational value of improved mission 

effectiveness. 

I wish to recognize the inspiration, assistance, and support of several individuals and groups who have helped me 

in the development of holistic debriefing and the preparation of this research paper. First, I owe a special debt of 

gratitude to the Royal Norwegian Air Force, which accepts 
viii

innovative thinking and has given me the freedom to try 

this new concept of debriefing. Second, I’d like to thank my 

friend and instructor at the Norwegian Air War Academy, Lt 

Col Ole Asbjorn Solberg, for supporting and guiding me 

through the implementation of psychological debriefing 

into the 330th Squadron. Third, I’d like to thank the personnel at the 330th and 337th Squadrons for being open to 

innovation, change, and development and having trust in 

the concept. Finally, I’d like to thank my course instructor 

at Air Command and Staff College, Lt Col Brian W. Landry, 

for his enthusiasm in guiding me through the process that 

resulted in this paper.
1

Introduction

One search and rescue (SAR) mission in the northern part of Norway in July 2000 gave me new insight in how the negative effect of stress can have 

a devastating impact on performance. We had first 

been scrambled on a car accident with several injured children. After having landed the helicopter 

on the road, we tried to save the four young siblings who were thrown out of the wrecked car. It 

was a terrible scene. We did our best, but only one 

of the children survived. When we were about to 

hand over the child to the hospital, we got another 

mission. A 17-year-old girl was missing after a 

class excursion in the mountains nearby. The 

weather was perfect, with blue skies, and the terrain was clearly set out with grass-grown hills. 

The girl was dressed in a white T-shirt and red 

trousers. This should be an easy task. After three 

fuel loads we still could not find her. A search patrol on the ground found her some hours later. She 

told them that we had flown over her at least 20 

times while she was waving with her white Tshirt. Six professional SAR crew members had not 

seen her. Why?

—Sea King pilot in command 

Royal Norwegian Air Force (RNoAF) SAR

helicopter, Banak Air Station, Norway

Emotions have for a long time been a neglected area in 

civilian as well as military leadership. Few researchers have 

focused on the emotional aspect of leadership, and literature related to leadership has given very little attention to 

them. Leadership has been dominated by a cognitive focus 

wherein emotions have been viewed as a negative element 

for rationality and efficiency. In the 1990s, the emotional 

element in leadership was the subject of growing interest 

and focus. As an example, Bernard Bass introduced the 

term transformational leadership, in which the emotional 

aspect has important significance for effective leadership.1

In transformational leadership, the leader influences the 
2

followers through an emotional connection involving trust, 

admiration, and respect. But leadership is also a rational 

process in which mutual cooperation is assumed between 

the leader and the follower. Thus, the leader is also a team 

player. A team is better conditioned for success when its 

members experience a feeling of mutual trust, openness, 

and respect. And when team members exchange emotional 

experiences, stronger attachment and mutual connection 

develop that break down anonymity. Effective leadership 

can therefore be viewed as resulting from the leader’s ability 

to integrate the emotional aspect in relation to the followers 

to achieve mission effectiveness. 

Debriefing, in the traditional military context, has been 

used to analyze the mission to increase effectiveness by 

gaining experience through behavioral and cognitive learning. An emphasis on these aspects will amplify operational 

learning and improved tactical knowledge and skills. But 

learning is more than just an accumulation of knowledge. 

It is learning that causes a change in an individual’s behavior in the manner of dealing with things that the individual 

chooses in the future and the individual’s opinions and personality. Learning involves change in one form or another: 

either the inner, experience-based level or in the external 

behavior that can be observed by others.2 Therefore, since 

it is difficult to imagine emotionless human behavior and 

cognition, the traditional debriefing is insufficient. Stressors 

like high-risk missions and accidents involve strong emotional and physiological activation, and if the emotional activation and experience are not included in the debriefing, 

valuable knowledge can be lost and stress may accumulate. 

Because of this, mission effectiveness may be degraded. 

After the accident I experienced nightmares. I was 

always on the same approach for landing, but the 

outcome could vary. Some nights I handled the 

situation well, other nights I crashed and burned. 

But it was not only the nightmares that were difficult. In connection with approaches for landing I 

experienced discomfort, especially with corresponding weather conditions. I felt my reputation as a good 

pilot was weakened and was afraid of situations 

where I once again could fail. My self-confidence 
3

[was] reduced to a level that made me avoid challenging situations at work. And I did not even discuss the problems with my wife. On the contrary, I 

got annoyed by comments about the accident and 

fled away from the difficulties instead of facing them.

—Norwegian F-16 pilot

Moldjord et al., Liv og lære i operative miljøer

Emotions have often been perceived as negative since 

they are often associated with a lack of control and difficulties with learning.3 Jerome Bruner introduced an optimal 

learning process with the integration of three aspects: behavior, cognition, and emotion.4 This process is useful when 

establishing a holistic approach for debriefing in the modern military unit. Individual emotions experienced before, 

during, or after the mission may or may not have an impact 

on the operational effectiveness of the group. 

Communication of emotions is often difficult and is dependent on the level of trust and confidence established 

within the unit. It is the leader’s responsibility to establish 

a sufficient level of trust and confidence, and it is therefore 

necessary to focus on the emotional and relational aspects 

in leadership training. Military leaders are responsible for 

the effective use of available resources to accomplish quality 

missions in hostile environments. Personnel are their most 

important resource, and mission effectiveness is dependent 

on individual maturity and knowledge. Using a more holistic debriefing, the military leader can build trust and confidence to a level that makes growth and development possible. The result can be increased mission effectiveness in a 

robust working environment characterized by openness, 

confidence, and mutual respect.

This study explores the benefits of holistic debriefing as 

a method of individual, unit, and organizational transcendence toward increased effectiveness in the RNoAF. It is 

presented in the context of the transformational and complexity theories of leadership science. This work offers for 

consideration a methodology termed holistic debriefing as a 

way of achieving both individualistic and unit inner growth 

and efficiency. The problem examined is the lack of proper 

tools given leaders in the RNoAF’s operational units to understand and cope with the effects of increased stress. This 
4

study also examines holistic debriefing as a possible solution for leaders to mitigate the threat to operational personnel exposed to cumulative stress by creating a process for 

sharing experienced stressors valid for learning, including 

the emotional elements.

Debriefing: Old versus New

In traditional military debriefing, the focus has been reflection on the behavioral and cognitional aspects to provide the opportunity to review how the mission was conducted regarding procedures and tactics. It takes place 

through a structured dialogue between colleagues in a unit 

after a mission and is often led by the mission commander. 

Holistic debriefing addresses the emotional, cognitional, 

and behavioral aspects of military missions. By utilizing the 

psychological debriefing model Stress and Its Mastery as a 

framework to understand the emotional aspect of individual reactions, holistic debriefing integrates the emotional 

aspect in the traditional debriefing within a structured dialogue.5 While the traditional debriefing focuses on facts and 

action in relation to procedures and tactics, the holistic debriefing integrates facts and action in relation to emotional 

tension experienced by the individual. The essence of holistic debriefing in a military context is improvement of individual self-knowledge and interpersonal trust through effective integration of behavior, cognition, and emotional 

aspects to a level that makes further growth and development 

possible.6 The ultimate goal of incorporating holistic debriefing in the RNoAF is to increase mission effectiveness. 

Significance of Debriefing

The Royal Norwegian Air Force has recognized the leaders of the organization—its officers—as the key. Leaders 

constantly have to balance shortfalls because there is never 

enough time, money, or manpower to accomplish the missions with guaranteed success. It is therefore important for 

military leaders to understand and develop both themselves 

and those under their command to meet the challenges 

with confidence and robustness. Leadership training is one 

of the most important means available for the organization 
5

to achieve exactly that. The chief of the Norwegian Defence 

Staff stated that “leadership training through personal development is the starting point for leaders who are responsible for individuals’ performance in a stressful environment.”7 Furthermore, he has stated that the development of 

leaders and the exercising of leadership must go hand in 

hand and be a part of normal operations.8 The chief of the 

Norwegian Defence Staff’s approach to leadership emphasizes that military leaders must be able to lead their people 

in life-or-death combat situations. Therefore, in peacetime, 

leaders must train and develop personnel to create combatready units and functionally efficient staffs.9 This sets clear 

guidance for the armed forces’ training plans. Training in 

the management of crisis and combat, using learning by 

experience under guidance, is a declared area of emphasis.10 In times of great transition and change, the situation 

demands not only more leadership but also newer forms of 

leadership.11 A holistic view of human performance is one 

step toward this goal. 

Since 1990 the amount of risk and stress for operational 

personnel in the RNoAF has increased due to a step-up in 

international engagement and higher demands for efficiency. Several aircrews have experienced the emotions related to the fear of death. Norwegian pilots have bombed 

live targets in Afghanistan. The tempo and intensity of and 

requirements for training and exercises have increased. At 

the same time, there have been political demands for workforce reduction and increased focus on financial management. The RNoAF has fulfilled the operational requirements, 

but the signs of negative effects are present. “Pilots are applying for the War Academy because they need some rest 

from the operational environment. The maintenance personnel resign due to stress. Officers are advertising for a 

better care-taking system after a traumatic event.”12 Therefore, the RNoAF is focusing on tools that can help the organization to sustain its proficiency in this “new” reality and 

thereby maintain itself as an attractive future employer and 

effective contributor of airpower. 

Emotional debriefing has been used as a supplement to 

the traditional debriefing in two RNoAF squadrons since 

2001, and the positive effects have raised the question of 

whether this concept can be integrated into the entire orga-
6

nization. Will the integration of emotional aspects in the 

traditional debriefing help leaders increase mission effectiveness in operational units and mitigate stress? First of 

all, this depends on the leader’s confidence in bringing 

emotions to the surface within the unit. A sufficient confidence level can only be reached through education and 

practice in a safe environment, and it is crucial that the 

perception of insufficiency and failures in the training period do not lead to resistance and rejection later in the leader’s career. 

Holistic View on Debriefing

After the near-miss I started to back off. I was no 

longer the first one to volunteer for the difficult missions. I felt both anxiety and shame. Me—the best, 

toughest and roughest pilot in the squadron. . . . 

And since I did not manage to talk about it to the 

other pilots in the squadron the tension grew inside me. I only did it worse.

—Norwegian F-16 pilot

Moldjord et al., Liv og lære i operative miljøer

This section explores the emotional aspects of our personality and their central function in regard to cognition and 

behavior in the professional arena. Specifically, it focuses 

on the existence of emotions and their functions in addition 

to the cognitional and behavioral elements. Jerome Bruner, 

an American psychologist and one of the principal architects of the cognitive revolution and educational reform in 

the United States and Great Britain in the second half of 

the twentieth century, argues that there is a close connection between cognition, emotion, and behavior in the human mind.13 David Krech uses the expression perfink, 

which means that people perceive, feel, and think at the 

same time.14 Bruner claims that they also act as a result of 

what they perfink and that the three elements have to be 

viewed in a holistic manner. He posits that “we can abstract 

each of these functions from the unified whole, but if we do 

so too rigidly we lose sight of the fact that it is one of the 

functions of a culture to keep them related and together in 
7

those images, stories, and the like by which our experience 

is given coherence and cultural relevance.”15 It can be fruitful to pursue the linkages between cognition, emotion, and 

behavior when designing a tool for learning from experience 

and reflection, and the military debriefing is meant to be 

such a tool. Its function is to improve mission effectiveness 

through a strengthened learning process of reflection on 

past performance. The problem is that the traditional debriefing is not balanced in relation to Bruner’s “tripartism” 

because the emotional aspect is not given enough attention, if any at all. In other words, we do not reflect on what 

and how we were feeling as we executed the mission.

Bruner’s classical triad visualizes the learning process 

consisting of action, cognition, and emotion, as depicted in 

figure 1. This can be expressed as a learning process 

wherein the three human operative systems are fully integrated into the learning environment. The components of 

behavior—emotion, cognition, and action––are not isolated 

from each other but are aspects of a larger whole that 

achieves its integration only within a cultural system.16

Furthermore, Bruner claims that emotion should not be 

isolated from the knowledge of the situation that arouses it 

and that action is a final common path based on what one 

both knows and feels. It is important to recognize that “all 

three terms represent abstractions.”17 They are constructions 

Action Emotion

Cognition

Figure 1. A visual picture of Bruner’s triad. (Adapted from J. Bruner, 

Actual Minds, Possible Worlds [Cambridge, MA: Harvard University 

Press, 1986], 61.)
8

that are structurally independent and constitute a unified 

whole in our personality. Personality can be defined as “the 

characteristic patterns of behavior, thought, and emotion 

that determine a person’s adjustment to the environment.”18

The reason for focusing on emotion is the perception that 

feelings, emotion, or affection tends to live in the shadow of 

cognition and action in the military environment. Military 

personnel are traditionally trained to base their analyses, 

decisions, and interactions on cognition, with minimum influence from emotion. Emotions and feelings are traditionally viewed as signs of weakness in the professional military 

environment. The importance of emotional and relational 

aspects in human interaction, both in war and peace, can 

therefore be viewed as underestimated in the military environment. Misjudgment of the situation, suboptimal decision making, and difficult interaction can, in this context, 

be seen as a result of inadequate knowledge and/or acceptance of the emotional aspects in human interaction. Stress 

is a matter of regulating emotions, and the same mechanisms can therefore be present when coping with stress. 

Stress

Stress is influential on holistic debriefing along two lines. 

First, sharing emotional aspects in a group can be stressful 

by itself. Second, sharing emotional experiences can be a 

relief valve that mitigates stress. Both aspects are important when integrating emotional aspects in the traditional 

debriefing and are discussed in this section.

The precondition for growth is the will and ability to challenge established structures and, thereby, security. Through 

holistic debriefing, one gets the chance to challenge existing 

self-knowledge in spite of insecurity and anxiety. Erich 

Fromm asserts that man’s internal strength depends to a 

large extent on the truth about his real self.19 But such 

training can be hard, and the truth about oneself can be too 

tough for the individual. Carl Rogers asserts that personal 

learning involves a good deal of pain and anxiety. And according to Paul Moxnes, “the word anxiety contains a meaning that is very similar to the term insecurity.”20 However, 

Søren Kierkegaard describes anxiety as “the possibility of 

freedom, where life is a synthesis between what is given 
9

and what we can choose.” Nevertheless, standing face-toface with the opportunity to choose may be a frightening 

experience because freedom to choose may involve endless 

consequences. Kierkegaard articulates that “anxiety is an 

experience of the possibility of freedom. It is only by relating 

to ourselves that we are in a position to undertake an existential choice.”21 Moxnes claims that “anxiety is an experience, and how the situation is perceived is the critical factor for anxiety, not how real the actual danger is.”22 In other 

words, anxiety is the object of perceptual interpretation. 

From this perspective, participants in holistic debriefing 

could experience different degrees of anxiety, and some will 

not experience any anxiety at all. Many factors can influence this, including the individual’s self-perception, previous experience, motivation, and so on. Thus, participants 

will have differing suppositions regarding the activities to 

be undertaken, and they will have differing perceptions of 

whatever it is they will be attempting to do. Anxiety arises 

when there is lack of congruence between a person’s selfperception and the new experiences to be undertaken. 

Steinar Bjartveit and Trond Kjærstad posited that anxiety 

can express itself as “a vague, uncomfortable feeling where 

one perceives oneself as insecure, tense, and helpless.”23

In spite of this potential insecurity and anxiety about the 

unknown, the assumption is that the personnel will participate in holistic debriefing to undergo new experiences 

that contribute to development. The challenge in relation to 

self-development consists of finding the optimal level of security for each individual, that is to say, a level of stress 

sufficient to motivate growth.

Stress, Panic, and Performance

There is energy in stress, and this is often the source of 

motivation and improved performance.24 The problem is, if 

stress becomes too powerful, it destroys motivation and 

worsens performance. The Panic and Performance Model, 

developed by Michael Useem, shows the basic relationship 

between stress and performance (see fig. 2). The key point 

about the curve is the “panic point” where the performance 

level is at its highest. To the right of the panic point, the 

performance level will decrease rapidly due to overwhelm-
10

ing stress. According to Useem, “psychologists tell us that 

panic sets in when the mind succumbs to stress and fails 

to take in new information about a threatening event, or 

fails for similar reasons to take advantage of prior experience germane to the threat.”25 Nevertheless, the object 

should never be to remove stress but to build up the confidence necessary to reduce stress to an acceptable level.26 A 

leader should therefore want stress to remain at a level that 

makes growth and development possible. Kierkegaard analyzed Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice Isaac to show that 

through experiencing stress one will experience growth in 

the strength of the self.27 The self and its security are 

strengthened by saying yes to challenging one’s fears. In 

this way stress facilitates positive development. 

Coping with Stress

One assumption is that holistic debriefing allows personnel to access the skills needed to cope with stress simply by 

establishing a dialogue that does not stigmatize emotions in 

military activity. After all, everyone experiences stress, and 

Figure 2. Panic and Performance Model. (Adapted from M. Useem, The 

Leadership Moment: Nine True Stories of Triumph and Disaster and Their 

Lessons for Us All [New York: Three Rivers Press, 1998].)

Performance

Panic Point

Stress
11

there is little stigma attached to improving coping skills in 

the military organization. For example, some military personnel are suffering the effects of post-traumatic stress disorder and are forced to leave the military because of their 

inability to cope. Historically, the professional military environment has not been able to meet the psychological or 

emotional impact of combat with the same seriousness as it 

meets physical injury. Emotional disorder has been labeled 

as cowardice, desertion, and lack of moral fiber. The cause 

of the problem has been isolated to the individual’s inability 

to cope with stress. However, it is more likely that the cause 

is the accuser’s own inability to deal with the stigmatized 

emotional aspect. Certainly, some individuals are more vulnerable than others. But modern military organizations are 

investing more and more resources in each individual for 

specialization and professionalism, and it is not efficient to 

prevent highly skilled personnel from achieving their potential because of organizational inability to cope with the negative effects of stress. It is much easier to create an environment that gives individuals the ability to bring their 

emotional experiences to the surface among colleagues to 

prevent stress accumulation. Inasmuch as stress arises 

from the interaction between the person and the environment, stress management may require both organizational 

and personal change.28 The strength of holistic debriefing 

lies in its flexibility. It gives the leader the ability to respond 

both to the requirements of the organization and to personal needs. Through holistic debriefing, personnel can 

learn new skills, either in self or others, and the organization can establish a strong connection to the individual.

Individual’s Needs and Tendencies

Holistic debriefing can be a tool for learning more about 

“the unknown self.” Part of the reason for this rests in fundamental human needs.29 Abraham Maslow describes the 

need for self-realization as the only need that, in principle, 

cannot be satisfied.30 The most important aspect of Maslow’s 

theory is that it points out the need for growth and development. Learning that involves a change in self-understanding 

and self-perception is threatening and can lead to opposition and defensive reactions in some people. Giving up 
12

one’s defensive behavior and thereby broadening one’s horizons are often difficult for an individual. This is why it has 

to be accomplished under conditions hallmarked by trust 

and confidence.

Moxnes describes two fundamental levels of needs, primary needs and secondary needs, which contain dimensions 

that may be seen as contradictory. Primary needs concern 

security and growth. On one hand, man is driven to seek 

security. We flee from dangerous and threatening situations, resist change, and oppose new learning. On the other 

hand, growth is influenced by man’s curiosity, which leads 

him to seek excitement in his life and drives him toward the 

maximization of achievement. Moxnes claims that “these 

two needs are to be found in every person, and they conflict 

with one another.”31 In essence, growth is usually at the 

expense of security, and contrarily, when man seeks security, it is usually at the expense of growth. 

Secondary needs relate to the need for control (meaning) and freedom. Man’s need for meaning and control

means we seek values and norms; we want order and system. At the same time, we have a need for freedom and the 

ability to choose. We desire to stretch our boundaries with 

the fewest possible restrictions.32 These two secondary 

needs are more concrete than primary needs. Moxnes articulates that “a desire for freedom indicates an underlying growth need, and a quest after meaning expresses an 

underlying security need.”33

In addition to primary and secondary needs, two fundamental tendencies, courage and fear, are found in most people. 

On the one hand is the tendency toward courage or heroism. On the other is the tendency toward fear or cowardice. 

Moxnes states that “these two tendencies can be present in 

one and the same individual, and they will mutually try to 

exclude one another.” Courage is hallmarked by people being persistent, being willing to take risks, and thus being 

willing to take the consequences that follow from that. The 

consequences of fear are that people stay within themselves 

and withdraw. We want to preserve what we are used to and 

what we feel safe with. Thus, we shy away from the possibility of freedom and growth. Courage and fear are not 

needs but tendencies that follow man through his life. 

Moxnes claims that “people can change from the one ten-
13

dency to the other, but when they do so they also change 

personality.”34 Traumatic experiences can make people 

change their personality, and one can assume that powerful mental stressors experienced in extremely uncertain 

situations can create a personal crisis. Prolonged exposure 

to the environment of war will affect a person’s feelings and 

reactions in some way. Unofficial surveys indicate that the 

divorce rate among Norwegian military officers with multiple 

deployments is as high as 70 percent.35 The US Army reports suicide rates among active-duty soldiers to be at an 

all-time high since it started tracking soldier suicide rates 

in 1980.36 The numbers indicate two important aspects for 

any military commander in war. First, military organizations in war are morally obligated to develop systems and 

procedures that can mitigate long-term negative effects on 

personnel. In addition, the numbers indicate that our current systems and tools are not sufficient. 

War challenges an individual’s primary and secondary 

needs because of its uncertain and brutal nature. Thus, it 

is crucial for military personnel to understand the emotional impact of traumatic events and to therefore develop a 

secure collegial arena where experiences can be shared and 

diffused. Growth, freedom, and courage are dimensions 

that relate to holistic debriefing. The assumption is that 

most personnel will consciously seek growth in spite of the 

prospect of increased fear, reduced meaning, and deficient 

security. These dimensions create a fundamental starting 

point in the person. According to Moxnes, “the question becomes simply to what extent one can teach oneself to know 

oneself, how painful this will be, and what consequences it 

will have.”37

Learning and Transfer of Learning

The purpose of the military debriefing is to filter the most 

important elements from the mission for learning and 

growth so that the next mission can be performed with 

higher proficiency. It is a common perception that learning 

has to do with change. Carl Rogers said that meaningful 

learning is that which is more than just an accumulation of 

knowledge. “It is learning that causes a change in an individual’s behavior, in the manner of dealing with things that 
14

the individual chooses in the future and in the individual’s 

opinions and personality. Learning involves change in one 

form or another, either at the inner, experience-based level 

or in external behavior that can be observed by others.”38

Transfer of learning is a very important problem in educational theory.39 The question is whether what one discovers in debriefing is transferable to operational performance. 

Moxnes says that transfer of learning often has its limits. 

Methods such as sensitivity training seem to have great 

meaning for the individual participant in the short term but 

have little effect on the organizational productivity in the 

long term.40 These training programs have often been shortlived and taken place in an unfamiliar environment that 

makes it difficult to transfer the learning back to the work 

environment. Viewed against this potential pitfall, holistic 

debriefing can offer an easier way to transfer new individual 

insight from the debriefing process to the performance of 

the next mission. Holistic debriefing builds on and expands 

from the traditional debriefing well-known to all airmen, 

and the basic security necessary for learning is therefore 

already established. Furthermore, the emotional part of the 

debriefing will always build on trust, willingness, and the 

individual’s ability to adapt. The core of the concept is that 

the group decides how fast and how deep the emotional 

process shall progress—not the leader. Individual drive for 

growth must come from within, and it is the individual who 

must transfer new insight from theory to practice. However, 

the fact that the process is open will secure common insight, and relations within the group will aid individual 

learning to occur in practice. 

The Psychodynamic Model

The human mind is complex and diffuse, and a common 

model for simplification is necessary to make the journey 

toward better understanding possible in the military working environment. Holistic debriefing is a structured dialogue in which the purpose is to bring all potential learning 

aspects of a certain situation to the surface, including the 

emotional aspect. Several conditions have to be present for 

individuals to share emotional and often diffuse experiences with colleagues. The key words are trust and confi-
15

dence. The individual must feel that colleagues will listen 

openly and try to understand the shared information in a 

constructive context. This requires a common language 

and a shared reference point. The primary premise for a 

successful holistic debriefing is to work on a basic level 

with tools that make our behavior and actions understandable. Bruner’s classical triad represents an example of a 

basic visual picture of personality, wherein the balance between the three human operative systems forms the personality and the individual’s behavior. Nevertheless, one 

premise in this kind of debriefing is to establish a common 

understanding of some central mechanisms for human behavior. One central aspect in this context is the protecting 

layer between our inner feelings and our visible behavior.

In psychodynamic literature, different labels are used for 

the concept of the human core. E. Tory Higgins labels the 

human core as “the actual self.”41 Other terms are Donald 

Winnicott’s “the true self,” Frode Nyeng’s “the authentically 

human,” Nina Monsen’s “the loving human,” John Pierrakos’s 

“the higher self,” and so on.42 All these names call attention 

to the essence of holistic debriefing: a proper balance between cognition, action, and emotion in the individual and 

between the individual and the situation he or she is facing. 

Higgins is indicating three self-conditions: “the actual 

self,” the attributes believed to be possessed by an individual; 

“the ideal self,” the attributes an individual would like to 

possess; and “the ought self,” the attributes an individual 

believes he should possess. Furthermore, he outlines two 

types of standpoints on the individual self: one’s own personal standpoint and the standpoint of a significant other 

(for example, a colleague). According to Higgins, when discrepancies involve the self and standpoints on the self, 

emotional tensions can be heightened (anxiety and stress).43

Different development programs within the RNoAF have 

used Joar Skjevdal’s Core Model as a basic tool for analysis 

and understanding of the human core (see fig. 3). This is an 

idealistic model of the human being where different layers 

or elements form the total “self.”44 Skjevdal suggests that 

the Core Model contributes to a common language on the 

inner journey for better understanding oneself in relationship with others.45 In this way, the model provides the foundation for the collegial relationship in holistic debriefing. 
16

The basic assumption is that the natural core self first of all 

wants to relate to the environment with sufficient openness, acceptance, and trust for safe self-actualization. The 

two fundamental sources for human motivation—the need 

for appreciation and development—work in mutual dependence in real life. The drive for development is dependent 

on sufficient openness, acceptance, and trust.46 This idea 

complements Higgins’s self-discrepancy theory. First, selfdiscrepancy theory assumes people are motivated to reach 

a condition in which their self-concept matches their personally relevant self-guides; and second, relations between 

and among different types of self-state representations represent different kinds of psychological situations, which in 

turn are associated with distinct emotional-motivational 

states.47

Some people do not have a large discrepancy between 

their actual self-conception and their ideal self. These people 

Observing and Reecting Self

Emotional Reaction

Core

Self

Cognitive Defense

Figure 3. The Core Model. (Reproduced and simplified with permission 

from Joar Skjevdal, AFF Consulting, Oslo, Norway. See C. Moldjord, A. 

Arntzen, K. Firing, O. A. Solberg, and J. C. Laberg, Liv og lære i operative 

miljøer. Tøffe menn grater! [Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget, 2007], 369.)
17

are presumed to be more motivated and to have greater 

self-esteem. The individual illustrated in the ideal Core 

Model is a person with an accessible core self and a growing 

observing and reflecting self characterized by empathy, 

understanding, and boundary setting for oneself and the 

environment.48 With flexibility, individuals can use their innate ability for openness, intellectual development, creativity, 

trust, vitality, empathy, care, and energy, depending on the 

situation. This is fundamental to the individual’s ability to 

regulate emotions and cope with stress. When these qualities are present, the individual has a healthy capacity for 

self-regulation because of highly developed self-knowledge. 

The holistic debriefing can be a valuable tool to build a better capacity for self-regulation. Increased ability to regulate 

emotions and cope with stress will increase mission effectiveness because each individual will be able to meet the 

challenges with more mental robustness and colleagues 

will be able to understand the individual’s reactions in a 

more constructive way.

The Holistic Debriefing Model

The Stress and Its Mastery Model (fig. 4) is taken from 

the RNoAF Academy’s manual Emotional Debriefing.

49 This 

model creates a clear framework for understanding the individual effects of stress and the resulting stress reactions 

and has mainly been used for debriefing traumatic events. 

Figure 4. Stress and Its Mastery Model. (Adapted from Ole A. Solberg, 

Krisehaandtering—Emosjonell Debriefing [Emotional Debriefing], a compendium at Norwegian Air War Academy [Trondheim, Norway: Luftkrigsskolen, 1997].)

Stressor Intermediate Factors Stress Eect

Event

Threat

Loss

Responsibility

Combinations

Personality

Trust

Motivation

Stress

Reactions

Positive

Negative
18

The model visualizes some of the mechanisms in play when 

a person experiences stressful events and can therefore be 

a viable tool when establishing a structured approach for 

holistic debriefing. The intent is to integrate the emotional 

aspect into the traditional debriefing with an understandable structure. This model represents a visualization of the 

framework used in psychological debriefing in the RNoAF’s 

330th and 337th Squadrons in the period 2001–2007. This 

model illustrates that the effect of stressors is modified by 

intermediate variables like personality factors, trust, and 

motivation and that stress reactions are the result of interplay between stressors and intermediate variables. In reality 

the concepts are far more complex.

Stress has traditionally been used as a collective concept 

with a large degree of subjectivity and is measureable only 

to a limited extent. In the context of holistic debriefing, 

stress is regarded as experienced emotional reactions within 

the individual and the unit. Karsten Hytten and Holger Ursin 

label a stressor as “external loads on the organism.”50 This 

can be present as a psychosocial threat. Psychosocial 

threats can be further divided into “threats to others’ lives,” 

“threats to social values and the values of others,” “the 

stress of responsibility,” and “the fear of making mistakes.”51

The intensity of the stress and its effect on the individual 

seem to be dependent upon proximity to the event, exposure time, and distance from the centre of the event.52 The 

stressor becomes overwhelming when it jerks individuals 

out of their normal equilibrium and when the external event 

represents a threat to people’s fundamental values.53 The 

stressor concept used in the holistic debriefing relates to 

Hytten and Ursin’s definition and is viewed as “external 

stimuli that represent a potential burden.” In the holistic 

debriefing the stressor is detected by focusing on facts and 

perception by answering the question what happened? The 

key is to create a common understanding of the entire situation. Typical follow-up questions are where did it happen, 

what was said, and what made you react? 

Individuals measure or filter stress through several 

mechanisms. In the debriefing process the intermediate 

variables are detected and analyzed through asking the 

questions what did you hear, what did you see, what did 

you think, and what did you feel? The key in this phase is to 
19

understand the background or framework for decisions and 

actions that have been made, including the sense impressions that had a potential impact on the individual’s judgments. This is then followed up with the question how did 

you react? The purpose is to integrate the emotional aspects with the cognitive and behavioral aspects to create a 

better understanding and normalization of the individual’s 

reactions and behavior. 

Initially, it is recommended to establish a basic structure 

of variables when integrating emotional aspects in the debriefing process. The assumption is that this will help the 

participants avoid an amorphous discussion that confuses 

the process. As the concept of holistic debriefing becomes 

more integrated into the unit’s regular debriefing, the structure should be looser. The structured elements used in the 

psychological debriefing initiated in the two maritime RNoAF 

helicopter squadrons have been personality factors, motivation, and trust. These variables are valuable in holistic 

debriefing because they seem to be important when trying 

to understand human growth and development.

Personality Factors

Most definitions of personality build upon the assumption that the individual’s characteristics remain fairly stable 

over time. Gordon Allport viewed personality as “the dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his unique adjustments to 

his environment.”54 This definition represents a holistic dynamic perspective. Psychologists do not agree on the degree 

of consistency in personality, but most agree that people 

are predisposed to act in certain ways based on individual 

characteristics and situational conditions. If we as military 

leaders are interested in effecting change, growth, and development, it is vital to focus on developing greater individual self-knowledge as well as knowledge of each other 

within the unit. In her book Leadership and the New Science, Margaret Wheatley claims that if we want to bring 

health to a system, we must “connect it more to itself.” She 

says that “the system needs to learn more about itself from 

itself.” This applies to the individual as well as to the orga-
20

nization. Furthermore, Wheatley asserts that “the system 

needs processes to bring it together.”55

Holistic debriefing can be the process or framework that 

establishes an arena for officers to connect, develop relationships, and learn how to better cope with stress based on 

new insight. By using the framework of emotional debriefing, visualized in the model Stress and Its Mastery, holistic 

debriefing can contribute to increased self-awareness. By 

establishing a cognitive map and offering time for reflection 

in small groups, holistic debriefing can be a way for the 

leader to help subordinates understand their personal 

characteristics and mechanisms that make them behave in 

a certain way. The new insight may lead to change if the 

individual is motivated.

One of the respondents in a survey that asked about the 

perceived effects of psychological debriefing at the RNoAF’s 

337th Squadron observed that “many of the flight safety 

initiatives, the way we debrief and interact with each other, 

lead to increased self-knowledge. Self-knowledge makes it 

easier to understand a colleague’s situation––and thereby 

we have increased empathy and trust within the unit.56

Several of the respondents from the RNoAF’s 330th and 

337th Squadrons reported a perceived improvement in the 

working environment together with leaders who have become more focused on both the operational and emotional 

aspects of daily operations.57

Motivation

Motivation for lasting individual change is not in response to a leader’s demands or wishes. For a change to be 

more than transitory, the motivation has to come from the 

individual. The concept of motivation comes from the Latin 

movere, which means “to set in motion.” It can be viewed as 

a force that makes a person take action in a particular way 

and drives the person toward achieving something. Motivation is connected to emotion, since a driving feeling starts 

off or creates a physical action. And as Moxnes describes, 

the individual’s primary (security and growth) and secondary (meaning and freedom) needs are fundamental to that 

individual. Since new insight in all three aspects of Bruner’s 

triad is the central factor in holistic debriefing, the creation 
21

of an environment able to meet the individual’s primary 

and secondary needs is crucial for success. 

Motivation, in the holistic debriefing context, is related to 

the individual’s wish and desire to be more effective through 

personal growth and development. The assumption is that 

by engaging together to learn more about themselves, people 

tend to establish strong relations and a collective identity 

that lead to increased motivation for improvement. The experiences after introducing psychological debriefing to the 

RNoAF’s 330th and 337th Squadrons indicate this assumption is right. One subjective example of this is the author’s 

personal experience as a pilot in command on a SAR mission where 12 Icelandic fishermen were about to be crushed 

against the North Cape during a hard winter storm:

The weather was terrible with heavy snowfall and gusts of 50 knots. 

It was night and total darkness. But we had a job to do. As we lifted 

off, everything seemed to be fine. But five minutes after takeoff, the 

winds changed direction and increased due to the Venturi effect 

from the steep Stabburs Valley. And the snowfall intensified. The 

helicopter was more or less uncontrollable for a while due to turbulence, and we started to pick up some ice. I remember telling myself, 

“I should never have lifted off tonight!” I asked the crew members 

how they felt and indicated that I wanted to continue for a mile or so 

and then turn back home. They understood that I was uncertain 

about the situation and that I was about to lose confidence in our 

ability to perform a safe pickup under these conditions. One by one 

they started to give me positive feedback. I remember the rescue 

swimmer said he trusted my skills and that he would go down the 

wire if I wanted him to! My confidence increased, and we continued. 

We accomplished the mission successfully. 

This example indicates that the bonding of the unit and 

individuals’ will and commitment to each other’s performance had been strengthened after the integration of emotional aspects into debriefing. 

Trust

Trust is another critical variable that is closely related to 

motivation because an environment of trust is the foundation for relationships and open feedback. It is difficult to 

define trust since it is a vague term that depends on individual perception, and literature on leadership does not 

contribute a blueprint of the term. Ronald Heifetz describes 

trust in authority relationships “as a matter of predictability along two dimensions—values and skill.”58 Roger Mayer, 
22

James Davis, and F. David Schoorman explain trust as “the 

willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other party 

will perform a particular action important to the trustor, 

irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other 

party.”59 In the holistic debriefing model, the meaning of 

trust is a positive expectation that another will not act opportunistically, where “opportunistically” refers to the risk 

and vulnerability that exist in any trusting relationship. 

Positive expectation means that relationships with the 

other party already exist and that the trust is built on earlier experiences. It takes time to build trust, and it is preserved through a continuous process. Unfortunately, trust 

can easily be lost if the positive expectations are not met. 

William Dyer states that trust is “the glue that keeps team 

members working together, and when trust is lost, it is very 

difficult to regain.”60 Ron Zemke asserts that “trust develops over time, can be dashed in an instant, and repairs very 

slowly.”61 In holistic debriefing, trust is the central factor in 

the process’s success because trust provides the foundation for sufficient openness among individuals in the group. 

To build trust, the leader must know what generates it. 

Mayer, Davis, and Schoorman assert three important 

leadership characteristics for creating an environment of 

trust: ability, benevolence, and integrity.62 The introduction 

of psychological debriefing in the RNoAF’s 330th and 337th 

Squadrons in the period 2001–2008 was internally supported by several feedback sessions in which the squadron 

commander together with the wing commanders tried to 

summarize and categorize the feedback from subordinates 

to define the leader’s role in this type of debriefing. This 

feedback indicates that the leader had to be perceived as 

honest, interpersonally competent, loyal, and consistent 

before the subordinates responded with trust. Honesty is 

linked to integrity, and this was seen as the most critical 

dimension of trust. The leader’s willingness and effort to 

establish an environment of trust within the unit is critical 

because it signals to the personnel that the leader believes 

in them and the potential of growth within the unit. This type 

of community building is a central factor in servant leadership based on the concept that true leadership occurs from 

the deep desire to serve others.63 Nevertheless, the element 
23

of trust must go further than the leader-subordinate perspective within the unit itself.

The organizational community as a whole should ideally 

signal trust and caretaking as a foundational element that 

“runs like a red thread” through the entire RNoAF. The feedback gained from the initial introduction of psychological 

debriefing in the two RNoAF maritime helicopter squadrons 

indicates a perception among the personnel of insufficient 

organizational focus on these elements. As one helicopter 

pilot expressed during one feedback session: 

In the operational environment it always comes down to focusing on 

the operations—how you accomplish the mission. The RNoAF does 

not have a strong culture of benevolence. If you are strong and do 

your things right, then everything is fine. But if you make some 

mistakes and show uncertainty, you will lose your respect, authority, 

and support. So I do not feel the need to share my inner experiences 

and show my weaknesses outside this squadron. . . . It is difficult 

enough to share them with you.

This statement highlights the contradiction that exists between the dimensions of security and growth and the challenges associated with it. A sense of distrust, insecurity, or 

lack of organizational foundation will represent a challenge 

for the leader when implementing holistic debriefing within 

the unit. Organizational cohesion is critical because the 

leader must be perceived as trustworthy by the subordinates for them to give up some security for growth. If the 

subordinates sense a lack of support or organizational 

foundation, they will most likely be more skeptical and reserved. Thus, for an organization to facilitate growth, it 

must be able to signal coherent trust from top to bottom.

Recommendations

After the accident I experienced many strong emotions and difficult feelings. I wanted a confirmation . . . that I had done the right thing—but I never 

got it. The response I got was just, “It’s good you 

are safe on ground. Can you fly again tomorrow?” 

The surroundings did not understand my emotions 

and experiences. I think this is very sad.

—Norwegian F-16 pilot, 2006

Moldjord et al., Liv og lære i operative miljøer
24

After an accident, most people will experience some degree of emotional turmoil. In most situations this turmoil 

will disappear quickly, but in other situations it will not. 

The central question is always how the individual experienced the situation. What kind of emotions and thoughts 

did the individual have? How did the surroundings help the 

individual to freely express those emotions and thoughts 

afterwards? As mentioned earlier, emotions have a tendency 

to be shadowed by cognitional and behavioral aspects of 

the traditional military debriefing. To bring the emotions to 

the surface, one must establish a routine for sharing all 

aspects of valid experiences in the regular debriefing. This 

means a sufficient trust and confidence level must be established within the unit at an early stage. To be able to 

successfully create a debriefing concept with sufficient trust 

and confidence, the leader must clearly state the intentions 

of the holistic debriefing concept and bring it to realization 

through training. The RNoAF would benefit in many ways 

from bringing the emotional aspect to the surface. 

First, airmen are valuable resources with critical professional competence that the RNoAF cannot afford to lose because of their inability to cope with accumulated stress. 

Second, solidarity and loyalty will be strengthened if leadership shows insight in and acknowledgement of individual 

needs. In other words, the practice of true servant leadership can lead to increased trust and confidence. Last, one 

positive spin-off effect of establishing an environment in 

which colleagues can share their inner feelings is strengthened unity. This is an effect that has increased in importance because of the shift in community. The family, hometown, and church have traditionally been the vital sources 

for community, while today our workplace is more and more 

becoming this vital source.64 The RNoAF should therefore 

aim to build the competence and interpersonal skills necessary to build the trustful community that makes employees 

loyal and united. One effective way of doing this is to implement the emotional aspect into leadership through holistic 

debriefing and make it a regular element of daily operations.

In times of great transition and shift in community, 

leadership becomes the key to mission accomplishment. 

The leader points the way and establishes confidence in 

the midst of seeming chaos. Jay Conger claims that the 
25

magnitude of today’s changes will demand not only more 

leadership but also newer forms of leadership.65 He tells 

us that “the danger in any period of paradigm shift is that 

we will turn to our old tried-and-true ways to answer the 

new paradigm’s demands.”66 The essence in our context is 

that military subordinates expect their leaders to have 

more interpersonal skills than before. This is partly a result of the shift in community where the employer now is 

expected to take responsibility for the individual’s wellbeing and partly as a result of the desire for lifelong personal growth in the Western world. Servant leadership offers a leadership philosophy that encourages people to 

become more than a mere worker in an organization.67

“With servant leadership, people grow as individuals and 

find meaning in and through their work.”68 The servant 

leader may be like a coach and teaching supervisor. Stephen Covey describes characteristics of a servant leader 

as being a whole person, similar to the ideal individual 

visualized in the Core Model.69 These skills can be trained 

in supportive and constructive environments that assist 

in deeper learning experiences. The educational entity 

within the RNoAF can represent such an environment because the setting is operationally safe and there is room 

for failure. But the critical transition back to the operational environment has traditionally not safeguarded the 

leader’s newly learned skills. 

Coaching is critically important, and it should not end 

the moment the participants leave the classroom. Active 

and persistent coaching must be a continuous activity 

for new leadership skills to take hold. It is therefore important that leaders in the RNoAF are not only given the 

opportunity but also are enrolled in a mandatory coaching program. Continual contact and follow-up support 

through coaching is the key to success when bringing the 

emotional aspect of leadership into play at the operational level. Further support and coaching for leaders 

can take place by creating three- or four-person teams of 

peers. The idea is that these leaders learn from each 

other in “a mutual support system with encouragement, 

wisdom, and truth.”70
26

Conclusion

The reason for incorporating holistic debriefing in the 

RNoAF is to increase mission effectiveness. By integrating 

the emotional aspect into the traditional debriefing, the 

leader can establish a more holistic arena for learning that 

covers all essential aspects of individual growth and development: behavioral, cognitional, and emotional. This is important for individuals, units, and organizations because 

emotions that were experienced before, during, or after the 

mission may have an impact on operational effectiveness. 

The leader is responsible for mission effectiveness, and for 

holistic debriefing to be successful the leader is the key. 

Hence, the practice of holistic debriefing has to be adopted 

as a standardized concept throughout the organization to 

be fully integrated in the RNoAF. Knowledge of essential 

elements for human growth and development must be integrated in the leadership training at educational entities 

throughout the RNoAF. This should include basic understanding of individual needs and tendencies, motivation, 

and trust. 

This study has shown how theory relates to practice by 

exploring some of the positive effects experienced after integrating emotional aspects into the traditional debriefing at 

the RNoAF’s maritime helicopter squadrons. It is difficult to 

objectively measure how the integration of emotional aspects 

into the traditional debriefing has affected mission effectiveness. However, the use of a holistic approach indicates 

that the working environment has improved due to increased trust and confidence, better interpersonal exchange 

of information, and increased individual self-knowledge. 

The assumption is that these variables are important for 

mitigating the negative effects of stress. Hence, stress can 

be kept below a threatening level and thereby improve overall mission performance. Literature on the theme supports 

these assumptions. 

The positive effects of a holistic approach in leadership 

through debriefing create a hope for the RNoAF’s future as 

an attractive employer and a professional producer of airpower. The community is in many ways going through a 

paradigm shift in that personnel now expect the RNoAF to 

take more responsibility for their well-being and lifelong 
27

personal growth. The holistic approach in the practice of 

leadership is an important step for the RNoAF to achieve 

exactly that, and the holistic debriefing described in this 

paper can be a valuable tool.

Notes

(All notes appear in shortened form. For full details, see the appropriate 

entry in the bibliography.)

1. Bass, “From Transactional to Transformational Leadership,” 19–31.

2. Bjartveit and Kjærstad, Fra kaos til kosmos, 17.

3. Bruner, Actual Minds, 111.

4. Ibid., 61.

5. Solberg, Krisehaandtering—Emosjonell Debriefing, 1–2.

6. Moldjord et al., Liv og lære i operative miljøer, 390.

7. Chief of the Norwegian Defence Staff, Forsvarssjefens grunnsyn på 

ledelse i Forsvaret.

8. Ibid.

9. Royal Norwegian Air Force, Håndbok i lederskap for Luftforsvaret, 

348.

10. Chief of the Norwegian Defence Staff, Forsvarssjefens grunnsyn på 

ledelse i Forsvaret, 1–3.

11. Conger, “Brave New World,” 46.

12. Moldjord et al., Liv og lære i operative miljøer, 11.

13. Bruner, Actual Minds, 69.

14. Ibid.

15. Ibid.

16. Ibid., 117.

17. Ibid., 118.

18. Atkinson et al., Introduction to Psychology, 417.

19. Fromm, Man for Himself, 45.

20. Moxnes, Hverdagens Angst, 33.

21. Bjartveit and Kjærstad, Fra kaos til kosmos, 22–23.

22. Moxnes, Hverdagens Angst, 194.

23. Bjartveit and Kjærstad, Fra kaos til kosmos, 17.

24. Useem, Leadership Moment, 60.

25. Ibid., 59.

26. Moxnes, Hverdagens Angst, 48.

27. Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling, 30.

28. Aldwin, Stress, Coping, and Development, 79.

29. Maslow, Motivation and Personality, 77–97.

30. Ibid., 273.

31. Moxnes, Hverdagens Angst, 46.

32. Ibid., 47.

33. Ibid., 46.

34. Ibid., 47, 49.

35. Moldjord et al., Liv og lære i operative miljøer, 11.

36. Burnette, “Suicide Rates.”

37. Moxnes, Hverdagens Angst, 52.
28

38. Bjørvik, Arbeids-og lederpsykologi, 132.

39. Ibid., 133.

40. Moxnes, Hverdagens Angst, 78.

41. Higgins, “Self-Discrepancy,” 319–40.

42. Winnicott, Maturational Process, 140–52; Nyeng, Det autentiske 

mennekse; Pierrakos, Core Energetics; Monsen, Det elskende menneske; 

and Moldjord et al., Liv og lære i operative miljøer, 373.

43. Higgins, “Self-Discrepancy,” 319–40.

44. Moldjord et al., Liv og lære i operative miljøer, 370.

45. Ibid., 369.

46. Bowlby, Secure Base, 1–38.

47. Higgins, “Self-Discrepancy,” 319–40.

48. Moldjord et al., Liv og lære i operative miljøer, 373.

49. Solberg, Krisehaandtering—Emosjonell Debriefing.

50. Hytten and Ursin, “Outcome Expectancies,” 171–84.

51. Retterstøl and Weisæth, Katastrofer og kriser, 67.

52. Ibid.

53. Christianson, Traumatiska minnen, 48.

54. Allport, Personality, 48.

55. Wheatley, Leadership and the New Science, 145.

56. Stueland, “Mental oppfølging etter hendelser,” 48.

57. Ibid., 31.

58. Heifetz, Leadership without Easy Answers, 107.

59. Mayer, Davis, and Schoorman, “Integrative Model of Organizational 

Trust,” 712.

60. Dyer, Team Building, 22.

61. Zemke, “Can You Manage Trust?” 77.

62. Mayer, Davis, and Schoorman, “Integrative Model of Organizational 

Trust,” 714.

63. Greenleaf, Servant Leadership.

64. Conger, “Brave New World,” 49.

65. Ibid., 46.

66. Ibid., 47.

67. Ruschman, “Servant-Leadership.”

68. Landry, “Servant Leadership,” 219.

69. Covey, 8th Habit, 21.

70. Conger, “Brave New World,” 56.
29

Bibliography

Aldwin, C. Stress, Coping, and Development: An Integrative 

Approach. New York: The Guilford Press, 1994.

Allport, G. Personality: A Psychological Interpretation. New 

York: Reinhart & Winston, 1937.

Atkinson, R. L., R. C. Atkinson, E. E. Smith, and E. R. Hilgard. 

Introduction to Psychology. 9th ed. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1987. 

Bass, Bernard. “From Transactional to Transformational 

Leadership.” Organizational Dynamics 18, no. 3 (Winter 1990): 19–31.

Bjartveit, S., and T. Kjærstad. Fra kaos til kosmos. Oslo, 

Norway: Oslo Kolle Forlag, 1996.

Bjørvik, K. J. Arbeids-og lederpsykologi, 3. utgave. Oslo, 

Norway: Bedriftsøkonomisk Forlag, 1987.

Bowlby, J. A Secure Base: Clinical Applications of Attachment Theory. Bristol, UK: J. W. Arrowsmith, 1988.

Bruner, J. Actual Minds, Possible Words. Cambridge, MA: 

Harvard University Press, 1986.

Burnette, A. “Suicide Rates at All-Time High among ActiveDuty Soldiers.” The Science behind Today’s News, 5 

February 2008. Science in the Headlines. The National Academies Office of News and Public Information. http://www.nationalacademies.org/headlines/

20080205.html.

Chaudron, D. “Avoid the Training Hammer When Implementing Change.” Organized Change Consultancy, 

2008. http://organizedchange.com/trainham.htm.

Chief of the Norwegian Defence Staff. Forsvarssjefens grunnsyn på ledelse i Forsvaret [The Approach to Leadership 

in the Armed Forces]. Oslo, Norway: FO/P&I, 1992.

Christianson, S. Å. Traumatiska minnen. Stockholm, Sweden: Bokførlaget Natur og Kultur, 1994.

Conger, J. A. “The Brave New World of Leadership Training.” 

Organizational Dynamics 21, no. 3 (Winter 1993): 46–58.

Covey, S. R. The 8th Habit: From Effectiveness to Greatness. 

New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc., 2004.

Dyer, W. G. Team Building: Current Issues and New Alternatives. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1995.
30

Fromm, E. Man for Himself: An Inquiry into the Psychology 

of Ethics. New York: Rhinehart & Co, Inc., 1947.

Greenleaf, R. K. Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Mahwah, NJ: 

Pulist, 2002.

Heifetz, R. Leadership without Easy Answers. Cambridge, 

MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 

1994.

Higgins, E. Tory. “Self-Discrepancy: A Theory Relating Self 

and Affect.” Psychological Review 94, no. 3 (July 1987): 

319–40.

Hytten, K., and H. Ursin. “Outcome Expectancies and Psychosomatic Consequences.” In Personal Coping: Theory, 

Research, and Application, edited by B. N. Carpenter, 

171–84. Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood, 1992.

Kierkegaard, S. Fear and Trembling. Princeton, NJ: Princeton 

University Press, 1941.

Landry, B. W. “Servant Leadership, Building of Community, 

and POWs.” International Journal of Servant Leadership 4, no. 1 (2008): 217–32. 

Maslow, A. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper, 

1964.

Mayer, R. C., J. H. Davis, and F. D. Schoorman. “An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust.” Academy of 

Management Review 20, no. 3 (1995): 709–34. 

Moldjord, C., A. Arntzen, K. Firing, O. A. Solberg, and J. C. 

Laberg. Liv og lære i operative miljøer. Tøffe menn grater!

Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget, 2007.

Monsen, Nina Karin. Det elskende menneske [The Loving 

Human]. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget, 1987.

Moxnes, P. Hverdagens Angst. Vol. 3, Utgave. Oslo, Norway: 

Forlaget Paul Moxnes, 1995.

Nyeng, F. Det autentiske mennekse—med Charles Taylors 

blikk på menneksevitenskap og moral [The Authentically Human—with Charles Taylor’s View on Human 

Science and Morale]. Oslo, Norway: Fagbokforlaget, 

2000.

Pierrakos, J. C. Core Energetics: Developing the Capacity to 

Love and Heal. Mendicino, CA: LifeRythms, 1987. 

Retterstøl, N., and L. Weisæth. Katastrofer og kriser. Oslo, 

Norway: Universitetsforlaget, 1985.
31

Royal Norwegian Air Force. Håndbok i lederskap for Luftforsvaret [Handbook in Leadership for the RNoAF]. 

Oslo, Norway: FO/P&I, 1995. 

Ruschman, N. L. “Servant-Leadership and the Best Companies to Work for in America.” In Focus on Leadership: 

Servant-Leadership for the 21st Century, edited by 

L. C. Spears and M. Lawrence, 123–40. New York: 

John Wiley & Sons, 2002.

Solberg, O. A. Krisehaandtering—Emosjonell Debriefing 

[Emotional Debriefing]. A compendium at Norwegian 

Air War Academy. Trondheim, Norway: Luftkrigsskolen, 

1997.

Stueland, E. “Mental oppfølging etter hendelser [Mental 

Follow-Up after Incidents]—en mangelvare i dagens 

Luftforsvar?” Postgraduate thesis, Norwegian Air War 

Academy, Trondheim, Norway, 2006.

Useem, M. The Leadership Moment: Nine True Stories of Triumph and Disaster and Their Lessons for Us All. New 

York: Three Rivers Press, 1998.

Wheatley, M. J. Leadership and the New Science: Discovering Order in a Chaotic World. San Francisco, CA: BerretKoehler Publishers, Inc., 2006.

Winnicott, D. W. The Maturational Process and the Facilitating Environment: Studies in the Theory of Emotional 

Development. New York: International UP Inc., 1965. 

Zemke, R. “Can You Manage Trust?” Training 37, no. 2 

(February 2000): 76–81.