Presence, intimidation and authority

[stiletto raggio]

Instilling presence and authority

I'm an MP officer, which puts me in two rather unique circumstances. First, my soldiers are police. Not just any police, but a police force that deals with soldiers who are trained to kill, who have egos the size of an Abrams, who are equipped with body armor that will stop rifle rounds and laughs at pistol rounds, and who have more often than not had their lives threatened very directly at multiple times. While violent incidents between soldiers and MPs are relatively rare, the threat they pose to an MP is much greater than your common street criminal. Also, because most of my soldiers are E1-E4, a lot of NCOs and officers don't treat them with the same respect they would give a civilian LEO. Basically, my soldiers have a tough client to impress.

Second, the MPs, though not technically a combat arm, see more action downrange than the vast majority of other soldiers, to include a lot of the combat arms guys. Our primary mission is training and joint operations with Iraqi Police, and IPs are known for being bullet magnets. MPs also have a pretty high percent of female soldiers, roughly 30%, and dealing with men who are chauvenistic and disrespectful toward women is a particular challenge. Again, to cut to the chase, we are in dangerous sitautions downrange, situations where we have to rely on interpersonal skills and asserting our authority over locals, which is particularly difficult for female soldiers.

I have told my platoon repeatedly that your "presence," i.e. the way you hold yourself, posture, body language, facial expressions and tone of voice are all very important when outnumbered, outsized and potentially outgunned. Establishing yourself as an authority figure when dealing with someone who is twice your age, twice your size and not inlcined to listen to "a damn woman" is incredibly difficult.

To me, posturing and body language are second nature; I've had a lot of good role models and have developed my own style of physical assertion and establishing dominance in a situation. Then again, I'm 6'3", 240 lbs and blessed (I think) with a rather dominant social personality. The question is, how do I train my soldiers, particularly some of my female soldiers, to do what I do naturally? How do I "drill" them in this subtle skill?

Any and all advice would be appreciated, particularly from LEOs or military types.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Not an LEO or MP; but I question whether you aren't trying to fit a square peg into a round hole? It seems to me that the main benefits female MPs and LEOs bring to a situation is the ability to deescalate a situation.

Conflict resolution is about avoiding their strengths and attacking their weaknesses. I think having a junior enlisted female MP attempt to try and control a male combat arms senior NCO via dominance is an approach that puts her at an automatic disadvantage. Appealing to his fatherly nature, his chivalry, or simply his desire to impress the female of the species is probably going to be an approach that better maximizes their skills.

Now that is certainly a broad generalization and as such, I am sure there are exceptions; but I think instead of teaching them how to deal with the situation the exact way you would, you need to encourage communication amongst them so they can develop and share strategies for dealing with these situations. It may be that what works for you isn't appropriate for them.

I'm not saying they need to be timid or girly; but the female of the species has managed to influence the behavior of men decisively throughout history without using a lot of dominance/alpha male behavior. I imagine that if you encourage them to discuss amongst themselves they are more than capable of developing strategies to take control that are better suited to their particular strengths.

 

[stiletto raggio]

"Appealing to his fatherly nature, his chivalry, or simply his desire to impress the female of the species is probably going to be an approach that better maximizes their skills."

No SFC or higher feels the need to impress a PFC, regardless of sex, especially when they are being pulled over for drunk driving.

I don't mean for this to be just about females, though they generally need more in the way of this training than my male soldiers do. I also don't mean for it just to be in our law enforcement role. You can't always de-escalate a situation, and in a situation that calls for dominance, there is no substitute.

I think the biggest thing for me is that "dominating the situation" from the beginning by virtue of confidence and the way you carry yourself can help you avoid conflict to begin with. People mess with cops/soldiers when they think they can get away with it.

 

[Sam]

You started the thread off badly with the title. You insistance on dominance
finished it.

There is a lot more to being in control of a situation than dominance, and a whole lot more than intimidation. Good way get killed.

Learning to read and communicate with people effectively will go a lot farther than domination, intimidation or authority.

I just spent half the morning ripping an MP SGM a new one because he thought he could intimidate someone and "dominate" the situation. The net result of his intimidation and domination was failure, and that was in a training environment. Complete utter failure.
I pray for his unit when they deploy after they leave my loving and gentle care.

Teach your troops to make good effective judgements about people and to communicate with them effectively.

Sam

 

[orangeninja]

Officer presence begins with the uniform. Everyone should have a spotless uniform, pressed and neat.

Second is posture, the military should have taught you guys how to stand upright....

Next is body positioning....you should already know things like 45 degree blade stance, field interview position....etc.

Fourth is how you conduct yourself, do not get angry, do not get upset, do not show any emotion if possible. Be courteous but firm, be polite but unyielding.

As for female officers dealing with type A males....there's no easy solution for that. Remember, officer presence only goes so far. There is also legitimate authority, which your MPs have and power which your MPs need to establish. Power comes from certainty of the end result. In other words, the certainty that if a female officer's directives are not met, there will be other officers on the scene who will not negotiate, will not compromise, but place the non-conforming suspect in dire straits if further non-compliance ensues. This will instill more confidence in that officer's attitude in the future when dealing with difficult people. Knowing someone has your back is a good feeling and is certainly a boon to officer presence.

Also I recommend further education, such as college, for your officers, this will also increase not only knowledge of the job and confidence, but will teach your officers critical thinking skills (your mind is your primary weapon) and communication skills. I recommend reading books on verbal judo. Force becomes necessary when communication breaks down on either the part of the officer or the suspect….make sure it isn’t the officer.

Next I recommend buying the caliber press books the Tactical Edge, Street Survival and Tactics for High Risk Patrol.

You qualify and train with weapons, you qualify and train in defensive tactics, but the mind is your primary weapon. Try to read at least one law enforcement “how to” book on tactics, law, etc. once a month. It will show wonders within a few months. Suddenly you will see officers swapping ideas, discussing tactics and not football etc.

Lastly, use briefings for training on the basics such as field interviews. Instill a code of conduct in your guys i.e. “we watch out for each other” type of thing.

Lastly, dominance is not the goal. Intimidation of others only incites violence at times and other times will shut down witnesses and complainants.....not desirable. Learn to control a situation without intimidation or dominance. Officer presence is not either of those but instead a calm in a storm, a solid and unyielding presence. Corney, but true.
My .02

 

[ID_shooting]

well, I can't tell you what will work, but I sure can tell you what will not work.

I was stationed on Ft Riley a few years back when it was still Big Red One. We had just got back from deployment to Cuba on a relief mission to help Hatian refugees. We were up at Milford lake having a party, keg floating in the water, several pallets to make a bon fire, we had some gals from the Medic unit out with us. No body was driving, we were having a good time. Commend even knew where we were and that we would not be in the barracks all weekend.

Somone must have seen the fire cuz the MPs showed up about midnight on the first night. The first thing they do is tell us to dump the beer and the booze, no check for ID or anything, just order to dump them. We flat refused, then they went into some speel about having girls from town and how thier parrents will have us all tossed in jail. Remember, all of us were GIs, even the females. We told them to go fly a kite and leave us be. we were off duty and off post so they could take a hike. They got all mad the got right in our faces telling us how they had jurisdition and could lock us all up for teh rest of the weekend, get us demoted and have 6 months of barracks arrest.

They got all mad and threatend to call our command, we told them to go right ahead. Me being the unit armorer had the 1SG's and CO's home number in my wallet. Well, they called and our CO told them just where to shove the kite we told them to fly. He wasn't fond of MPs, especially ones bugging his troops that just got back from a 6 month mission.

They finally got around to checking IDs, saw thet we were all GIs, all over 21, and no one was doing stupid crap like driving, they decided they were going to let us be, but not with out big lecture about drinking and driving and being drunk in public.

So no, IMO, trying to be super cop and brow beating every person you see doesn't fly well in my book.

 

[sacp81170a]

One thing I could suggest is to visit a local county jail and listen to some of the senior people there on how they deal with inmates. The inmates are always playing little dominance games and you can probably learn more about how to handle hardcases from a 20 minute conversation with an experienced jailer than you thought there was to learn. In particular I know one lady at our county jail who is a lovely, matronly, mother type, but she can handle some of the hardest dudes just by her attitude and her air of "the iron fist in a velvet glove." I would *not* cross her, not on your life!

 

[strambo]

Well, I can see both angles. I'm infantry prior enlisted and current officer. I've also got a CJ degree, am good friends w/ an MP and have worked with them at home and on deployment.

Anyway, the most problems occur when MP PFC snuffy is in full up "don't confuse your rank w/ my authority mode" over a piddly traffic stop (like 1-3 MPH over the limit) or like the situation described above. On the big bases, the MPs seem to be pretty anal (sweeping generalization, I know). This breeds contempt and problems before the big stuff occurs. Save the attitude for when it matters like DUI, domestic, violent crime etc...

Kinda like the saying don't give an order you know won't be followed. Don't make a stop you know will result in problems...unless it is deemed worth it before hand. Like in the party situation above, they should have came in "conversational" as opposed to "confrontational" and they would have learned in 2-3 minutes all the details, then they could say "enjoy yourselves and be careful" after verifying everyones legal. The soldiers would have been left with the impression that "those MPs were pretty cool" vs the one they really got. OTOH, when it's serious and time to throw down...well, you gotta do what you gotta do.

 

[Jeff White]

I am retired Infantry now working as a full time police officer. The biggest problem with MPs is they recruit them too young. Few people male or female are mature enough to do that job at 17 or 18. There is a reason that most civilian departments don't hire until age 21.

Police work is not about intimidation. You're not going to be successful if intimidation is the only tool in your tool box.

How much actual training in your law enforcement mission do you get? I'll bet your METL is full of convoy escort and rear area security missions. I thought the DOD police were taking over the law enforcement mission at most places stateside?

Tae what alduro said to heart. Get your S-3 to part with some funds and get a verbal judo class for your soldiers.

I wouldn't worry so much about the gender differences. I've found that women adapt pretty well to police work and those that don't usually get out fairly quickly. On the other hand, men who are unsuited often stay with it too long because they feel it would be unmanly to quit.

Jeff

 

[TallPine]

trying to be super cop and brow beating every person you see doesn't fly well in my book.

i just thought that needed repeating (MP or civilian)

 

[JMusic]

I think you have a long way to go in human relations. Your comment that you are dealing with a much more dangerous element in a military soldier compared to street criminals is without merit. If anything you are dealing with a more diciplined lot. Who do you think deals with soldiers once they are discharged.

 

[LCConrad]

I am a retired law enforcement officer. I spent a majority of my career working the streets and have worked in three states. There are a few things I learned during that 31 years.
Intimidation very seldeom works and usually only gets your butt in a sling in more ways that one.
Defuse the situation, use a soft calm voice. Be cool and confident.
Take what legal enforcement action that is needed in a professional manner, be consistent and confident.
Don't let your guard down, be aware of your surroundings and the entire situation.
Most people you can reason with, use logic.
If forced us needed use what ever force is called for, be swift and conistant.
I had my share of use of force situations up to and including deadly force. I found that dealing with professional athletes was far worse than dealing with military members, the main differnce was disapline and respect for authority.

 

[Sheldon J]

I'm a FireMarshall and what I say is law, which is backed up with 35 years and thousands of hours of training. Authority and presence is the first line to enforce the rules, all this to keep people from doing some really stupid and killing their self, you would be surpirsed as just how obstinate some people can be about doing something really retarded and seriously dangerous.

 

[stiletto raggio]

I really don't think I'm taking a macho attitude about this. I never said anything about verbally threatening people, destroying their property or being disrespectful. In fact, I think those are very good ways to make a situation worse, and I can't see a time when those would be the best solution to a problem. Perhaps "intimidation" is the wrong word but I hardly think it "finishes" me.

I hope your impression of me based on this thread is not that I walk into every situation yelling at people or saying, to quote one of my least favorite partners, "do you want to make the blotter?" In reality, I try to keep things either lighthearted or somber based on what seems appropriate. Escalation of verbal force is just like escalation of physical force in that it can get the other person to back down or make them puff up their chest even more.

MPs that are dicks only make situations worse. To me, an ideal night on the road (or as duty officer, in my case) invovles no soldiers getting arrested. Sometimes the soldiers will make the decision for you (drunk driving, assault, etc) but a lot of times the MPs on the scene can stop the real trouble before it gets out of hand. That has to do with interpersonal communication skills and each situation can be handled in any number of ways.

The title of this thread is not "I want to turn my soldiers into bullies and jerks." I am trying to inculcate a type of confidence and, to repeat myself, presence that is communicated through physical mannerisms and verbal interaction. Anyone can make threats; the point here is that I want the authority to be self-evident and genuine. If you have to say that you are in charge, there is a good chance you aren't.

"Your comment that you are dealing with a much more dangerous element in a military soldier compared to street criminals is without merit."

Not true. First, I never said that the average soldier is more dangerous, only that if a soldier wants to hurt you, he is trained. Would you rather get in a firefight with two gangbangers who have never seen a firing range or a couple guys who have been to combat and have been trained to survive? Like I said, violent incidents with soldiers are exceedingly rare, but more and more soldiers are being recruited into gangs, and more and more gang members are being recruited (unknowingly) into the Army. MS-13 is a particular worry in this area.

To those of you who haven't been dismissive, I appreciate it. I have posted this thread verbatim on other sites and have not received the chastising I have gotten from a couple of the posters here. I do have things to learn, but I really don't think I have a cavalier attitude about this subject. Strong-arming will only get you so far, and that is most definitely not my intent. Using logic, empathy and restraint do a lot more to help a situation than being loud-mouthed or aggressive. I am completely aware of this. But when someone wants to pick a fight, or when the idea is floating around in their head, having a strong (not arrogant or abusive) presence might make them think twice.

 

[Jeff White]

First you need to frop the notion that soliders are a more dangerous lot to deal with then real criminals. It's not so. Soldiers have discipline and will generally respond to authority better then civilians. And while military installations are far from crime free, it's not at all like working in an inner city or being a rural officer, deputy or trooper and having to deal with viturally every situation alone.

Most of the crimes an MP has to deal with are are those brought on by that wonderful combination of youth and alcohol.

The soldiers are trained killers argument doesn't wash either. The state of combatives traaining has never been very good outside of specific units. The soldier will most likely be unarmed do to the restrictions on privately owned firearms on post. The average soldier is no more trained to fight without his M16 or M4 in his hands then any civilian. The average combat veteran hasn't been in a hands on fight. It's one thing to put out small arms fire even at very close range, and it's something else altogether to go hands on.

If your soldiers aren't being respected or are having to use force when it really isn't necessary, then you probably should look at how they show up for work. Appearance and the military bearing any good soldier should have should solve the presence issue.

Are you going to check into verbal judo?

Jeff

 

[stiletto raggio]

"First you need to frop the notion that soliders are a more dangerous lot to deal with then real criminals."

I don't think most soldiers are as dangerous as "real criminals." Most of the time soldiers do respond to authority, and most of our problems are the result of young kids getting drunk and doing something stupid. I'm not trying to rag on soldiers or make it seem like Army posts are a war zone, but as a matter of personal safety I would much rather throw down with the average gang-banger than a soldier.

"The soldier will most likely be unarmed do to the restrictions on privately owned firearms on post."

Enter the gun control fallacy. On the contrary, we are seeing more and more unregistered weapons on post, concealed weapons and threats involving weapons. The first thing most osldiers do when they get back from deployment is buy a gun. I, of course, have no problem with this. I encourage it, provided it is done responsibly. But a lot of soldiers are carrying these guns illegally in their cars and on their persons. This is not speculation; it is a fact daily reinforced in our blotter.

"The state of combatives training has never been very good outside of specific units."

True, but only in the sense that it is a past-tense statement. DA is now mandating combatives training. Does it turn you into Chuck Norris? No, but the skill set is definitely better than your average gang-banger, esfpecially among the combat arms guys. When you add in that soldiers are generally in better physical condition than civilians, you can see that if there is going to be a fight, it has the potential to be very ugly.

I'm not saying my guys are working South Central or Fargo, but we do patrol alone. Our law enforcement training is minimal and my soldiers are, as pointed out earlier, much younger than your average civilian LEO. Making them press their uniforms and shine their boots (both of which are a thing of the past with ACUs) is not going to give them a magical aura of authority. Besides, a lot ot he trouble on post is not with soldiers, but with civilians, and not necessarily dependents. The Rally Point (a bar on post) is open two hours later than any other bar in Kansas, and we see a lot of hoods come in from KC, Topeka, and other cities. The worry about an increase in drug and gang activity is justified, because the rough types converge at the Rally Point.

Yes, I am checking into verbal judo. That is the type of class that we would be getting if they hadn't cut into our LE certification time. Although the DA cops are supplementing us, we are still responsible for the majority of the road commitment as well as gates. Our METL tasks are pretty broad and since we are heading toward a deployment, most of our training time is dedicated to our combat mission. We are going to be doing Police Partnership Training almost exclusively when deployed because they have trained other MOS's to cover down on many of our other missions. To me, this underscores the necessity of having good law enforcement training for our soldiers; we are going to be teaching these practices to Iraqi Police, and they certainly have a tough crowd to deal with.

 

[ID_shooting]

"we are still responsible for the majority of the road commitment as well as gates."

It has been over 10 years since I have been to Ft Riley. You mentioned gates, is it still an open post? I know we used to have trouble with civilians comming up to Custer Hill, especially if they thought some GI tagged thier sister or some such. There used to be at least one incedent a month there some GI got his butt kicked on post (usually outnumbered).

The drugs and gangs started comming on post while I was there. I imagine it has gotten worse. I forget the name of the club, it was down by the shopette next to the parade field on the way to JC, it was real bad there. Good luck with that.

The MPs on Riley really were a great bunch back then, with the exception of a couple of incidents like the one I posted about, most I ran into were helpfull and respective of rank in the course of thier duties.

Every now and then there would be some Private that tried to be bossy to a CPL or SGT. Even if you are right, you still can not win in a battle of rank if your collar is lighter than the other guys.

 

[Thin Black Line]

Second, the MPs, though not technically a combat arm, see more action downrange than the vast majority of other soldiers, to include a lot of the combat arms guys.

+1. A lot of the NG MP units I worked with were providing security for
convoys and doing patrols around the Iraqi countryside. The only MPs
actually doing MP work was the AF around their own airfields or the small
handful who took care of crimes inside the wire at the larger LSAs.
Short of the big stuff, or if people complained elsewhere, everything
was handled within units.

A lot of people have said "looking professional" is the key. True, too.
The insurgents can also tell who is new to the AO as opposed to who
has been around for a while and they respond accordingly. Professionalism
definitely comes into play there.

You had 30% females in your unit --How many were you actually running
outside the wire in Iraq and in the turrets? (PM me). I don't recall a single
female in many of the NG MP units, but I worked with AD units who did.
Some of the FOBs I stayed at were truely "front-line" and cdrs would not put
females there. However, there were also male soldiers who preferred to
spill their guts (information-wise) to female rather than male soldiers. I
think this came from the females being better at the conversation game
than their male I-can-bench-more-than-you-with-one-hand counterparts.

Verbal judo and all else comes from the martial mindset. I'd suggest far east
writings on the topic (Japan and China). There are many good English
translations of ancient works out on the shelves that were not around over a
decade ago. You reinforce the mindset by what you put into it and proven
philosophy is better than the xbox.

Most BGs who are actually *good* at what they do have a slightly higher
than average IQ. Whether you're mil or civilian LEO, it's good to have the
brighter officers do interrogations with them. I've heard opportunities
missed on tape (or read in transcript) because the GG wasn't as sharp as his
opponent BG during questioning. Know who your bright people are, male or
female, and use them for the heavy brainwork.

 

[HankB]

Soldiers have had discipline drilled into them, so they'll generally respond well to authority . . . but when MPs are concerned, there ARE limits.

My Dad told me a story about his experiences just prior to embarkation during WWII. Guys were going into town on their last leave and getting drunk, and they'd made arrangements that every half hour or so, a deuce and a half from the unit would come down the main drag and pick up the drunks and return them to base. All the guy had to do was find his way back to main street and he'd be picked up.

Well, this went OK for a while, but after a couple of "drunk runs" no more guys were showing up. It turned out that the MPs were hauling them in to the local lockup - none too gently - and throwing them in cells, after robbing them of what little they had.

Word got back to the base, and in minutes a line of trucks and jeeps, all filled with men in varying degrees of sobriety - and armed to the teeth - were headed for town.

The MPs tried some bluster, and tried to used their "presence and intimidation" but in short order were subdued (no shots had to be fired.) But they stubbornly refused to unlock the cells.

Guess what? The cable and winch on a G. I. truck WILL, when wrapped around bars, pull the bars off a cell . . . along with a good part of the wall.

The guys were freed, the MPs (somewhat the worse for wear) spent some time in the lockup themselves, all crowded into one little cell . . .

Next morning, guys are wondering how hard they were going to be dumped on for what they did . . . just waiting for the hammer to fall. But nothing official was ever said.

I guess the brass figured that these guys were going overseas - a lot of them would never be coming back - so there really wasn't much they COULD do that would be worse.

 

[XLMiguel]

Some things remain the same over time

They's good cops and bad cops. Hopefully, in the long run, there's more of the first kind, and the bad ones get theirs . . .

I knew most of the MPs on post when I was in and got along well, generally a good bunch of folks. I worked in the AGDP Data Center and ran payroll and had access to all kinds personnel records. I could get even with most anybody

 

[Thin Black Line]

Guys were going into town on their last leave and getting drunk, and they'd made arrangements that every half hour or so, a deuce and a half from the unit would come down the main drag and pick up the drunks and return them to base. All the guy had to do was find his way back to main street and he'd be picked up.

Well, this went OK for a while, but after a couple of "drunk runs" no more guys were showing up. It turned out that the MPs were hauling them in to the local lockup - none too gently - and throwing them in cells, after robbing them of what little they had.

This is a great story. I wish my grandpa had more funny ones like this
rather than the Battle of the Bulge horror tales at bedtime.

There's a certain amount of leeway allowed with deploying/re-deploying
troops. Any veteran cdr, or at least life-experienced, knows this and allows
the release valve to get turned on --within reason. What probably happened
here was that someone in town griped and/or the MPs got ordered by
someone higher in the chain who didn't have a clue --someone who stayed
CONUS. The MPs then took advantage of the situation and added some
theft. Trust me, they didn't decide to do the initial round-up independently.

The MPs I worked with in Iraq would have given you their last MRE and asked
if they could get you some water to wash it down, too. Great guys.

 

[dfaugh]

Well, I'm not LEO or military, but I need to say something on this subject, as it applies to many situations.

Years ago, when I was young and stupid, I got into a few fights (high school and college). I always won, in short order, but only because if someone hurts me, it doesn't slow me down, it just makes me go ballistic.

I DID hang around with a few military guys (I couldn't join because of health issues---never woulda passed the physical), including a couple of Force Recon Marines, who taught me a little bit of hand-to-hand.

But anyway, I eventually started traingin in the martial arts, and continued to do so for several years. From that time until now, 30+ years, I have never gotten into a fight, and I've been in some BAD situations (especially when I was still in my 20s, nothing now that I'm older). The key is to project ABSOLUTE CONFIDENCE. And I could always do that, due to my martial arts training. I KNEW that I was capable of handling most opponents, and even multiple opponents, with no problem. And because of that, I carried myself with a demeanor that basically backed off any one that wanted to screw with me. In one case I was confronted by 8 or 9 guys, maybe 19 or 20, all in far better shape than I was. But, I stood my ground, and they backed off, found somewhere else they had to go.

Now, to your situation....I'm sure your people have all had training in hand-to-hand...but its probably the same training the guys they need to subdue have had. So I would suggest some SERIOUS martial arts training, to build confidence, and improve their skills beyond the norm. This will naturally carry over in their demeanor.

P.S. As one part of my training I taught a class in "self defence" for women. When they were done, each of them could easily disable a 200+ lb. guy with one blow. It was actually amazing to see the confidence in some of these women (many who weighed about 100 lbs.) build over time.

 

[Thin Black Line]

From that time until now, 30+ years, I have never gotten into a fight, and I've been in some BAD situations

You have achieved true enlightenment (insert meditative face on lotus
blossom here).

 

[crofrog]

No, but the skill set is definitely better than your average gang-banger, esfpecially among the combat arms guys. When you add in that soldiers are generally in better physical condition than civilians, you can see that if there is going to be a fight, it has the potential to be very ugly.

You're average gang-banger has been in more fights than you, and your soliders.

You're average gang-banger is in decent shape.

Never underestimate your oppentent.

 

[MrZ]

"The question is, how do I train my soldiers, particularly some of my female soldiers, to do what I do naturally? How do I "drill" them in this subtle skill?"

Training...

Simple answer, but true.

First, educate your MP's on the skills you want improved on. There have got to be countless studies on human interaction, which mirrors animal interaction in many ways, that deal specifically with posture, body language, voice, etc... Find the studies that can best help you, and educate your troops. This will explain WHY those skills are important, and should provide some motivation. Look for psychological research on the web, law enforcement, corrections, etc... All of which should be able to provide useful information.

Next, train on the specific techniques you want to improve on. Whether it is a SOP you develop on stance, body language, or whatever, they have to see how you expect them to employ those techniques.

Lastly, conduct situational training exercises that allow them to practice their technique based on a given situation. Provide them feed back so that good performance is reinforced, and poor performance is identified and retrained.

You are absolutely right regarding posture, etc... Those traits can absolutely effect human behavior in both positive and negative ways. The key is to assess the situation, and use the techniques that will work best for you based on your individual abilities. Sometimes the best technique to employ is the "call for back up" technique.

Be careful when you use the word "intimidation". Intimidation lends itself to fear, and fear can trigger natural "fight or flight" instincts that we all have. This can often turn out ugly.