http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/02/navy_firstclass_080218w/
I was wondering what the cheif's mess thought of this atricle found in the Navy Times Web page. I agree with much of what the MCPON says, especially the part about how the Navy got rid of alot of enlisted leadership in the early 90's, as you can tell by reading my profile, I got out of the Navy in 1992 as a 2nd class PO, and I must say that there was a difinate feeling in those day that you might as well get out, becasue the Navy didn't want you unless you were a 4.0 sailor, which I wasn't (my evals went from about 3.6 to 3.8) so I opted to get out and use my GI bill for school. 20 years later I sometimes wonder what might have been). I also wonder if the MCPON should also further define the role of the 2nd and 3rd class PO's???? Just wondering what your thoughts are on this.

Wow!

So much for "go ask the Chief". I guess they think if you have to ask then you are not ready for a leadership role.

I find it curious, there were plenty of responses when a chief made it in a very short amount of time. There was a whole bunch of commentary on a chief who is guilty of a sex crime and still getting an honorable discharge.

Yet here you are asking an honest question on leadership and you get nothing.

I guess training/mentoring a subordinate to take on a leadership role is not that important.

Then again I have met a lot of e-7s but very few Chiefs.

regards,
Carl M. Ploense III

quote:

So much for "go ask the Chief". I guess they think if you have to ask then you are not ready for a leadership role.

I don't think that is the intent at all. I made 1st class in the late 80's and Chief in 93. I was brought up under the premise that what the 1st class said goes. The Chief was there to guide and train the 1st class and the divo and act as the technical expert when it came to resolving difficult issues.

I always made sure that anyone who worked for me should NEVER be afraid to ask me ANYTHING. But I did make sure that the first question I would ask, before even addressing their question, was "Have you discussed this with the LPO"? It was a matter of keeping the LPO informed of what was going on (unless of course they were personal issues the Sailor didn't want to discuss with the LPO). That way, the LPO and I could discuss what actions were taken and provide positive feedback. I was always trained that I couldn't advance if there was no one to take my place, so I wanted to make sure that everyone under me was able to do their job, their peers job, and their seniors job.

But anyway, I see this as getting back to deck plate leadership and NOT removing the need for the Chief. I don't see it as building walls between levels of leadership. On the contrary, it is likely to bring down walls that seem to exist between the officer and enlisted ranks.

Thanks for responding Chief.

However, where is the rest of the Goat's Locker? I would think that this 1st classes question would bring forth a fountain of answers and leadership ideas. So far you and I are the only respondents.

I'd like to see more commentary on deck plate leadership and how to develop it. I think it is essential. Its virtue needs to be extolled as often as possible and at every pay grade.

I know it is another branch of service. However, in the Corps we were expected to know our MOS at least two pay grades above our current rank. I believe the thinking of the day dictated that in a war time situation there would be a much more fluid and dynamic need for people to step up and fill unexpected vacancies in the chain of command.

V/r
Carl M. Ploense III

In the opinion of one JO, I think the MCPON is right on target.

In my experience as a Reserve Unit CO, I was a wardroom of one with no Chiefs Mess. It was me and a bunch of E6 and below. All our jobs were harder early on than they should have been because I had to spend a lot of time grooming a few First Class POs to take on the leadership role. It seems that the culture has been that we don't bother teaching leadership until you are wearing khaki and we treat a lot of First Class no different than Seamen.

By starting earlier and instilling a leadership mindset in the First Class you will be putting more leadership tools in the Chiefs' toolbox and at the same time when those First Class put on khaki themselves it will be a smoother transition for them.

But then again, I'm just a JO ... what do I know.

My take on this is it is an attempt to put one more paygrade back in the true chain of command. During the 60's and 70's, especially during Viet Nam and especially in the Navy, a lot of the chain between E4 and JO's was decimated. This was because many of the enlistees were college grads and they naturally gravitated toward their ex-classmates, the JO's. They considered themselves intellectual and social peers.

During this period of time the E-5 through E-9 community was unofficially, kind of sort of, removed from the chain. This did a lot of damage, in many ways. All of my shipboard duty was such that, as an E5 or E6, I never had a Chief in my professional chain of command, and most of the time, never in my military chain. Remember this was before MCPOC, CMC, etc., etc.. I had to the be the professional and military senior in offices and divisions ranging from 6 to 20 people. On shore duty, for my three tours, I worked for an E7 who made E9 during the first selection for E8 and 9, and later for LCDR's and above. When I made Chief, I worked for Captains, RADMs, and GS-16s and never had anyone junior in my chain. I had no idea that the E6s had fallen, either actually or figuratively, that far out of the chain.
There was never any doubt in my mind what my role was as a First Class, and I dont see why it is necessary to "codify" that role at this point in time. Of course, there surely have been a lot of subtle unofficial changes in the 35 years since my departure from active duty.

Thank you gentlemen!

This is the kind of commentary I believe the original poster was seeking.

regards,
Carl

Comm, good points.

Like TMC, I never had a problem talking to a subordinate. Still don't, although I tell them it is strictly advice and they need to pursue things with the chain of command. If they had a question, I made it a point to teach them where to find the answer - that why they knew where to go for an answer on similar questions. Requests had to go through the LPO unless they were out of the loop temporarily and an immediate answer was needed. Same for problems unless there was a reason the Sailor did not want to talk to the LPO. If they had a situation I wanted them to present me with some ideas on how to overcome it, what they thought the best option was, and why.

Yes, I did work for some Chiefs that were more wrapped up in their careers than in what was going on - and I paid the price for it. The only thing I will say is I did not know what I was doing when I negotiated that particular set of orders and got in over my head.

UndexLT, you know more than you think. I'm kinda sorry I'm retired now - your unit sounded like a good challenge.

Each and every First Class should be able to step up and take on the role of a Chief, just like each and every Chief should be grooming their First Classes to take on their roles. The same can be said regarding Second Classes, Third Classes, etc. After all, what's that Second Class gonna do when the Chief is on emergency leave or there is a gap between the time the incumbent left and their relief arrives, and the First Class goes out and get run over by a beer truck? Just like as a First Class with only one Chief I got him to teach me how to step up and be the Command Chief in case he all of a sudden dropped out of the loop, which did happen when he retired with no relief on the way in (and no, I had not gotten my Anchors yet).

quote:

Originally posted by Boats22151:
UndexLT, you know more than you think. I'm kinda sorry I'm retired now - your unit sounded like a good challenge.

It was definately a great leadership experiment for me. I feel like I really grew up as a leader and a big part of that was having to go it alone. I thought I had a Senior Chief who made it very easy to lean on him way too much. After he left and I found out he was really an E8 I was forced into being the leader I should have been all along. Many lessons learned and I will eternally be grateful to the Sailors who stuck it out with me and allowed me to grow into the title CO. I would have loved having a good Chief that last year though once I got my "CO legs". A lot of my initial goals were left undone.

UndexLT
I'l bet when that SCPO or as you say E-8 went to his new duty station he left with a recommendation for advancement to MCPO.
The 1st class has to take his position as a LPO and seek advice as needed. It is the Chief's responsibility to provide the leadership to any PO because as it has been said here what happens when the leader is gone. It's always said that the next senior takes the leadership position.
I even as a SCPO would seek out info about a subject from from a lower PO pertaining to the Aircraft that was assigned to the SQD I was in if I wasn't familiar with it.
I know the old saying ask the CHIEF but there are times when the Chief has to go someone to get a answer.
TAK AMCS RET.

I was being a little frivolous about not knowing anything. I have noticed a big difference in how I'm treated since I put on my oak leaves, but I think LT and below Officers get a bum rap sometimes. I realize I'm jumping on a huge gernade here, but I think some in the Chief's community do a bit of a diservice to new Officers by allowing ENS and JGs to catch S--- for no other crime than being young and inexperienced and to allow themselves to put on pedestals. I've even had it done to my face by said E8. Yes, he did get a recommendation for MCPO (still hasn't made it 2 yrs. later though even though there have been unfilled quotas) I didn't have the confidence in my self to stand up to the offender at the time, but any Chief who did it in front of me today would certainly get an earful. The difference between a good leader and a bad leader might only be self confidence. I think one of the Chiefs' jobs in mentoring JOs is to help build their self confidence. Allowing themselves to be put on a pedestal, in essence, above the JO doesn't help.

The nice thing about leadership is that it can be learned. I had set the goal of making CPO, but only to run a division. I never did make Chief, but I did get to run the division for a long stint. I think the highest compliment I was ever paid was when the LCPO of the relieveing crew told me that I was doing a Chief's job....

As to the JO's - some realize they still have a lot to learn, and they are a joy to work with. You learn from them, and they learn from you, and EVERYONE benefits.

Some JO's seem to feel that their little silver bars trumped my 15 years of experience. One tries to teach them, but eventually you give them just enough rope to gat themselves yanked on by the Dept Head or the CO.

PO1 Kline,

I agree that leadership is learned. I have all too often seen both the corprate and education worlds try to teach it and fail miserably.

Leadership is an art. Unlike science there are no guaranteed results. It requires experience that allows for success as well as failures.

I learned more about the proper way to work with people in First Marine Division NCO school and in Petty Officer Indoc than I ever learned in graduate school. And that isn't half of what I learned as a squad leader, NRIC, and POOW.

The skills I learned in the military have served me greatly with regards to leadership. I have been promoted to Assistant Principal in my building, ahead of those more senior. It has enabled me to recieve leadership scholarship money for graduate school. To put it simply...it works.

regards,
Carl M. Ploense III

quote:

Originally posted by Boats22151:
The same can be said regarding Second Classes, Third Classes, etc.

I've been thinking for awhile, that we truly have an unsung hero in the Third Class Petty Officer.

When the Third Class Petty Officer screws up - even if it's something minor, such as forgetting to shave that morning, we remind him that he's a Petty Officer and shouldn't be told to do certain things. We don't give him an official place in the chain of command, yet hold him responsible when an E3 or below in the division screws up. Yet still, he is in the same rotation for grunt work as the E3 and below in the division.

We remind the Third Class Petty Officer that he is a Petty Officer, yet two minutes later, all duty section not on watch, "E4 and below" are called to the quarterdeck - and in many cases, five people are needed to do the job, when there are eight available E3 and below, and there twelve Third Class Petty Officers...

Yet, what separates the Navy and Coast Guard Third Class Petty Officer from E4's in other services? They are the only E4's who are addressed the same way as those in the next two paygrades; the only services whose E4's though E9's share a common title - that of Petty Officer, where, in the other services, the common title of Sergeant doesn't start until E5.

I'd like to see a Navy where that second tier within the enlisted rates begins at E4, as the crow and "Petty Officer" implies, but this doesn't seem to be the case... if we can address the issues for First Class Petty Officers, I think we can for our unsung heroes.

quote:

I don't think that is the intent at all. I made 1st class in the late 80's and Chief in 93. I was brought up under the premise that what the 1st class said goes. The Chief was there to guide and train the 1st class and the divo and act as the technical expert when it came to resolving difficult issues.

I was in from 1987 to 1992 and I was was always taught that the CPO's ran the show and the 1st classes were there to enforce the CPO's verdicts.

Although I never had the priveledge of being a Chief, I think I had some damn good ones and I had some bad E-7s in my day. The good ones always pushed you in ways that even if you didn't like it, you understood it. And maybe you didn't get an answer to "why". Problem today is to many Chief's are too willing to tell you all the why's even when you didnt ask. Part of growing into leadership, is learning to lead, to find the answer to your why before asking. Some people never know enough to ask the question. The old chiefs instilled that in us. The left the question open for us to find the answer. They didnt always fill us full of info for hours for a 15 minute job. By the time I retired I realized it was my time to retire, the old chiefs had all but disappeared and I was too damn crusty to be one of the new and improved model.

I agree with my esteemed colleague in that the Third Class Petty Officer needs to receive more recognition and more of a true front line leadership role.

Coming into the Navy from the Marines it was a matter of culture shock to see how 3rd classes were treated. From my vantage point it was more of a glorified e-3 than a Petty Officer. I am not sure what the source of this is; however, it is counter to the UCMJ which classifies Petty Officers as a Non-Commissioned Officer. It is a violation of the law for a non-rate to be disrespectful to a Petty Officer.

This fact seems lost in the Navy. The Marines made a much greater distinction. I said in other posts the norm is for a Marine to be ready to take over the duties of a Marine at least two pay grades above his own. I have seen Non-commissioned officers and Staff Non-commissioned officers assume roles that far exceeded their rank. I can only theorize that this emphasis on recognizing the first tier of leadership comes from a history of men being moved up the chain of command rapidly in war time. This holds especially true in a combat situation. Marine history is complete with examples of this happening. The blood stripe, for example worn by Corprals and above is a hold over from the Mexican American war. At the battle of Chapultepec Castle the fighting was so fierce that all the officers and NCO's were killed and the battle was won by senior privates. Other examples abound, but I think by contrast the Navy has not been in such casualty rich environments since the Second World War.

Perhaps that is what brings us to our current situation.

With the War on Terror going the way it is and Red China pushing for a blue water fleet it is now the time for a re-evaluation of how rank is handled.

V/r
Carl M. Ploense III

I was rarely in a postition to see PO3 in a leadership role. As a submariner nuke, the junior guys I had working with me were generally PO2s. I never had a problem with throwing them "into the fire", as it were, and letting them take on positional authority (i.e. a senior watchstation), and watching them run with it. You could tell who was going to be a good leader very quickly doing that. Some tuned into Napoleon (or Hitler, in worst cases), others were quick to ask the team for help....they would practice that rarest kind of leadership. Seek inputs, value inputs, but leave no doubt as to who makes the decision.

Oh, yeah...and accept the consequences if the decision is the wrong one. That's important, too.

YES THEY SCREWED UP GETTING RID OF E-5/E-6 IN 92 he STOPED ALOT OFF THE CHIEFS TRYING TO TORPEDO ME I GOT OUT WITH AN HONERABLE AND WAS A4.0 SAIOLOR I GOT OUT ON SSB BECAUSE of a CHIEF BUBBLEHEAD/in his shallow mIND IF YOU WERENT A BUBBLE HEAD YOU WERE NOTHIN I wAS SURFACE NAVY sURFACE WARfARE quilified AS A COOK AND WAS A lpo we DIDNT get ALONG but WHEN hE HAD hIS buBBLE HEAD FIRST CLASS AS lpo THE WERE tO PEAS IN A POD. thank GOd THE SUPPLY oFFICER was A surface ware fare blue water vavy.

Alrighty then...Thank you for your personalized and interesting input.

regards,
Carl M. Ploense III