Honouring Arnhem: Leadership, Strategy, and the Fallacy of the Decisive Blow

"We will never forget the heroism and sacrifice made by so many in the pursuit of peace and liberation".

King Charles III

Growing up, I acquired my Dad's fascination for military history. One of our shared pleasures was watching war films together and I first watched Richard Attenborough's 'A Bridge Too Far' when I was 7 or 8. Based on the Cornelius Ryan book, 'A Bridge Too Far' with its star studded cast, the film told the story of the largest airborne operation in military history: 'Market Garden' - a bold move plotted by Field Marshall Bernard Law Montgomery to decisively end the Second World War by creating a route for the Allies to invade Germany's industrial heartland in the Ruhr. The operation failed dramatically at Arnhem in Holland as German armoured units overran the lightly equipped paratroopers of the British 1st Airborne Division. It's estimated the failure set back the Allied victory in the European Theatre of Operations (ETO) by an estimated nine to twelve months as well as decimating the 1st Airborne Division.

This week marks the anniversary of Operation Market Garden so it’s fitting to reflect on the courage and sacrifice of those who fought at Arnhem. As Eisenhower wrote to General Roy Urquhart, Commander of the 1st Airborne Division: "In this war there has been no single performance by any unit that has more greatly inspired me or more highly excited my admiration, than the nine days action of your division between 17 and 26 September". One of the boldest, yet ultimately unsuccessful, operations of the Second World War, I believe it offers profound leadership lessons for today’s public service leaders, particularly when navigating strategic initiatives.

Operation Market Garden was envisioned as a decisive stroke to end the war swiftly. Under the leadership of British Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery, the plan was to deploy airborne forces to seize key bridges in the Netherlands, facilitating a rapid advance into Germany’s industrial heartland. However, despite its audacity, the operation misjudged the situation on the ground and Arnhem became the scene of a brave yet tragic last stand by the men of the 1st Airborne Division.

While those soldiers deserve the utmost honour, their struggle highlights a fundamental leadership error: the fallacy of the "decisive blow". This approach, which focuses on delivering a singular, knockout solution, often underestimates the complexity of the challenge. Both in military campaigns and public service delivery, sustainable success is more often achieved through steady, incremental progress.

Rivalry That Undermines Strategy

To fully grasp the leadership lessons of Operation Market Garden, we must consider one of its most damaging elements: the rivalry between Montgomery and American General George Patton. Both were highly capable Allied commanders, yet their personal competition diverted attention from the shared goal of winning the war.

Montgomery’s focus on landing the decisive blow—racing to be the first to cross the Rhine and enter Germany—was driven not just by military strategy, but by a desire to outshine Patton. This rivalry led Montgomery to press forward with Market Garden, despite intelligence and logistical concerns suggesting a more cautious, phased approach would be wiser. His ambition for personal glory blinded him to the risks of overstretching his forces.

In public services, we sometimes see similar dynamics—whether between departments, organisations, or leaders themselves—distracting from the overall mission. When leaders focus more on personal success or outpacing their peers, the true purpose of public value and service delivery can be compromised. It's human nature but the the lesson here is clear: leadership must prioritise collaboration over competition, especially when resources are limited and the stakes are high. Just as Montgomery’s rivalry with Patton led to disastrous miscalculations, so too can personal rivalries in public services lead to missed opportunities.

The Importance of the Right Capability: A "What If?" Scenario

What if an American airborne division had been deployed instead of the British 1st Airborne? Would they have held out longer? This hypothetical raises a crucial point about aligning capabilities with objectives. The British 1st Airborne fought valiantly, but they were isolated, under-resourced, and tasked with an almost impossible mission. Some argue that an American division, such as the 82nd or 101st, might have fared better, having been more recently engaged in combat, larger and being better equipped.

The key takeaway for public service leaders is the importance of matching the right capabilities to the task at hand. Just as military success relies on deploying the right forces at the right time, so too does success in public service depend on aligning the right people, skills, and resources to each initiative. When forming teams or designing programmes, leaders must assess whether the capabilities available are truly suited to the challenges ahead. Failure to do so risks undermining even the most well-conceived plans.

Iterative Delivery in Public Services

One of the central leadership lessons from Market Garden is the danger of overconfidence in a single bold strategy. Montgomery believed Market Garden could be the knockout blow to break German resistance. Yet, like many sweeping strategies, it crumbled when confronted with the realities of logistical delays, stretched resources and an unexpectedly strong enemy defence which intelligence had failed to anticipate or detect.

In public services, leaders often face similar pressures to deliver rapid, transformative change. There may be a temptation to push through large-scale reforms, believing one bold move will resolve deep-rooted issues. However, as Market Garden demonstrates, genuine progress comes not from grand gestures but from incremental, carefully planned steps.

Take the example of healthcare reform. Leaders might be drawn to the notion of a single transformative policy to fix systemic issues. But, as Market Garden teaches, complexity demands patience and adaptability. Large-scale transformation in public services—whether in healthcare, education, or welfare—must be approached iteratively. Pilot programmes, phased implementations, and continuous feedback loops are critical to achieving lasting success. True progress is not about quick victories, but about sustained, long-term impact.

Resource Constraints and Strategic Flexibility

One of the most striking aspects of Market Garden was the failure to adapt to resource constraints. By September 1944, Allied supply lines were overstretched. The paratroopers at Arnhem were deployed without adequate reinforcements or supplies and communication breakdowns isolated them further. The ground forces meant to relieve them were delayed by logistical bottlenecks and fierce enemy resistance. Drop zones were too far from the objectives that the troops had to secure and there weren't enough cargo aircraft to transport all units to their objectives at once. While D-Day had seen mass parachute drops into Normandy, these drops had been done at night. Those dropping on Arnhem, Nijmegan and elsewhere; did so in daylight - leaving them vulnerable.

In public services, resource constraints are all too familiar. Budgets are tight, teams are stretched and leaders are often tasked with delivering more with less. The lesson from Arnhem is clear: when resources are limited, strategic flexibility becomes even more vital. Montgomery’s inability to adapt his plan to the realities of the situation was a key factor in Market Garden’s failure. Public service leaders must avoid this trap by building flexibility into their strategies and being prepared to pivot when circumstances demand it.

Leaders can learn from this by ensuring that their plans are adaptable and resilient. A rigid, top-down approach to delivery is unlikely to succeed in the face of real-world challenges. Instead, leaders should be ready to scale back initiatives to fit budget constraints or phase in changes to allow teams time to build the necessary capacity.

Collaboration Over Competition

The failure of Market Garden also underscores the importance of collaboration over competition in leadership. Montgomery’s rivalry with Patton, his reluctance to listen to subordinates, and his insistence on pressing forward despite contrary evidence all contributed to the operation’s downfall. In public services, effective leadership requires fostering collaboration rather than pursuing individual recognition and having the humility to listen to dissenting voices. A strong sense of self-belief can be an advantage but being receptive to being told your wrong, is the mark of a great leader.

Leaders must cultivate a culture of open communication and cooperation. Just as failing to heed intelligence about German tanks in Arnhem contributed to Market Garden’s failure, public service leaders who do not encourage critical feedback risk similar failures. I believe the best decisions are made when diverse perspectives are considered and information flows freely, not when driven by individual ambition.

Conclusion: Leading with Humility and Iterative Success

As we honour the sacrifices made at Arnhem, we should also reflect on the leadership lessons the operation provides. Montgomery’s pursuit of a decisive blow, his rivalry with Patton, and his failure to adapt to changing circumstances all serve as important lessons for today’s public service leaders. Success, especially in resource-constrained environments, is not about grand gestures or sweeping reforms. It is about careful planning, collaboration and incremental progress.

Public services face complex challenges that cannot be solved with a single stroke. The problems we face today are incredibly complex - ‘meta-problems’ that cross sectors, organisations and domains. Whether it is healthcare reform, improving education, or tackling social inequality, these tasks require humility, flexibility, and a commitment to iterative progress. By learning from the mistakes of Market Garden, we can adopt a more resilient, adaptable approach to leadership—one that ensures success over time, even in the face of the most difficult circumstances. My challenge to you, is that this challenge is immediate. We cannot wait for tomorrow to address the challenges of today and that means learning the lessons of Arnhem and taking them into our day to day practice.