In the Navy we see it all too often, a Commanding Officer relieved for cause. For those not in the military, that is merely a kind way of saying, “You’re fired!”. Whether it is misconduct, a lack of personal integrity, incompetence, or blatant disregard of direction from senior Commanders if someone is relieved for cause it is “due to loss of confidence in his/her ability to Command.” Senior Commanders have the authority to relieve a subordinate Commanding Officer and have the responsibility to do just that when confidence is lost, but what happens when the team serving below this leader has lost confidence in their senior’s ability to Command? We don’t have that authority or do we? In my experience, we have three options:
- We can tactfully make them aware of our observations and provide recommendations on how they might want to change their approach. This comes with some risk, as one never knows how even the most constructive of feedback is received.
- We can engage a third party and provide similar insights by proxy, whether that be a climate survey or an individual who we trust that might be better positioned to communicate the message.
- We can submit a formal complaint in hopes of giving a reason for someone in authority to conduct an investigation and fix the problem.
Over the last year, I have personally executed both option 1 and option 2 in my current command, and I have served as that proxy for members of another command. I have never personally been a part of, nor do I wish to experience option 3. That said, it is a necessary course of action when options 1 and 2 fail to achieve the results we expect. Unfortunately, I have been recently made aware of leadership practices outside of my current command that make option 3 necessary. As I reflect on experiences closer to home, I can’t help but realize that there is a 4th option, that of firing our boss.
Some may say that firing our boss is nothing more than quitting, and I guess to a certain extent that may be true. When we quit something we leave it, we stop doing it, or we give up. The actions we take prior to our decision to do any of those things make all of the difference. If we execute options 1, 2 and/or 3 to no avail, is it us who quit? Was it the system? Or was it the leader who quit? As I type these words, my memory goes back to a scene in the movie “All The Right Moves” in which Tom Cruise’s character (a high school football player) engages his coach at the end of the big game, which they lost. The coach accuses the player of quitting on a play that ultimately cost the team the game. The player replies, rather passionately, “We didn’t quit, you quit!” That scene represents the storyline of the movie, a coach who holds the team back and has a special interest in holding back one specific member of the team. That storyline plays out many places each day in many places and many accept it. We decide to wait out that leader, we try to convince ourselves that fulfillment and personal enjoyment isn’t a requirement for the 10+ hours we spend at work each day, or we make ourselves believe that whatever opportunity behind door number two is likely just as bad. I am certain we have all attempted the wait out approach and some of us are more patient than others. That said many people refuse to accept a work environment that isn’t fulfilling, yet aren’t ready to pursue the abundance of opportunities elsewhere.
So how do we fire our boss? How about the same way that subordinates are fired, by letter…
Dear Sir/Ma’am,
We must inform you that after numerous attempts to help you to grow into the leader we need, a command climate survey that helped us to understand how to focus our improvement efforts, and recommendations on how to both address our most critical challenges and seize our most significant opportunities, you have shown no visible interest in effectively leading our team. Months ago you had stated your intent to make your commitment to the employees you claim to value visible through action, to invest in the development of the team who remains focused on leading with you, and to lead strategically. We have attempted to work with you in every way possible and remained both hopeful and optimistic for far too long, but you clearly are not interested. We are tired of being held back by you. We are tired of being less than the team we aspire to become. We have lost confidence in your ability to lead us.
This leaves us with no choice but to tell you that your employment is terminated effective immediately. Please inform your direct senior of our decision. We are sure that this will come as a surprise to him because your deliberate focus on satisfying his tasking at the expense of the team undoubtedly has him believing you are the leader we know you are not.
Sincerely,
The Team You Chose Not To Lead
I don’t believe that anyone will write a letter like this, let alone deliver such a message and that is unfortunate. Instead, we will choose to accept our circumstances, convincing ourselves that it is OK or that we brought it upon ourselves. That bothers me tremendously. The other likely alternative is to quit, which I believe to be far more admirable than acceptance and assimilation. I can assure that when I find myself in this situation I will not quit, at least not before ensuring that my boss knows that he quit on us.
- Are you getting the leadership you deserve?
- What course of action will you take when you aren’t?
- How are you helping your seniors to become the type of leader you and your team deserve?
I am actually planning to write such a letter in the near future. I believe in the “vote of no confidence” approach and will vote with my feet.
Would you say that the Navy has changed due to sailors being too sensitive? Have we not seen more Commanding Officers relieved recently than the past? Are sailors complaining more because they have grown up in a different generation compared to the CO’s that have seen the “old” navy?
I’m thinking who’s quitting who? Are we, the younger generation of sailors can’t understand the CO’s leadership style, or the CO’s don’t understand the new generation of sailors? Would that be the disconnect of the issue in our Navy?
I grew up with no issues of school bullying. What caused this bullying to arise? Are people more sensitive now than before? Let’s bring this back to our Navy, are CO’s bullying sailors? Are we sensitive than before? Or is it really CO’s taking advantage of his/her subordinates knowing that they will not talk back due to their career is on the line. We’ll always work for the CO but I don’t like the fact that I have to work in fear of the CO or my COC. Working in fear and disliking the person is different. I will be loyal to my COC regardless of our differences in personality, but to have to interact my COC and knowing more than half the time you will get yelled at for incompetence is not healthy.
The letter to fire our boss would be great but maybe not realistic. But what about a FITREP that subordinates can add their responses and allow the board members to not only see how great of a job he/she did but also hear what his/her division/department/command was ran then they were in charge? Wouldn’t this give someone a 360 degree view of the person? I’m sure even I can look good on paper whether I stepped all over my sailors or took great care of them and they worked hard for me to get the job done.
This resonated deeply with me.
I think the hardest thing is to admit there is nothing more you can do for an organization in the position you are in and it is time to move on. You see all the doors closing around you with the only hope that the next boss will be better, or more attentive to your needs, or see the big picture, and you hope when you close doors, others will open. They usually do.
This doesn’t remove our own responsibility to inform the chain of command of our wants, needs, and wishes – and of our opinions on how we can best serve and how to best position our unique talents for the mission.
If the chain of command doesn’t listen, or their priorities are different from those you believe are best designed to serve, then maybe the best thing for you and them is to move on. In the military, for better or for worse, we are trained to wait it out. We lose productivity because we know those who do not choose to lead us will transfer soon, or we will transfer soon and we will not have to deal with them. So we wait them out.
Unfortunately, this does not serve the community. It only passes the buck.
I have only once in my 15 years had the cajones to fire my boss. I took option three and as a result the leader in question was assisted to retirement. I did it with the command well in my rearview mirror, and in retrospect I know of at least three others who were hurt the same way I was because I did not speak up sooner.
I regret not doing more sooner. I don’t think I had the power to do what I needed to do while under their command, and so self-preservation was important because you can’t act if you are put out of the fight.
We can assist others to do the right thing by providing cover for them to act as they see fit. If they are going to burn bridges, we should offer them a line of retreat, after being sure their complaint is valid and in perspective to the consequences of them being right. In the vast majority of cases, I believe, if someone has the courage to speak up and put their own careers in danger, it is likely the problem is real and needs to be addressed.
We can help bring problems to the attention of our leadership by encouraging white papers, discussion, and linking complaints with recommended solutions.
In the end, if the leadership won’t listen. They should be fired from above or below… even if they never know they have been fired.
We shouldn’t minimize our importance in the military. We provide defense and security to the people of the United States. We should not put up with bad leadership to protect a career.
So, why are we forced to?
What an amazing and true post. Captain, you have personally helped me through some of the trials you mention and unfortunately it seems that too often, certain leaders lead by personality and not true purpose or use of factual information. They use anecdotal evidence to “go after” those they to not like, probably because these individuals do not “fall in line” nor do they hold back important opinions that need to be spoken. Even more odious is some of these leaders harken back to the days when there was a strong aristocratic air to the Officer Corps, of those who felt above their lower ranked personnel rather than feel the weight of responsibility in leading these Sailors.
Most worrying is the fact that I witnessed good people literally thrown away because of personal challenges and just having a really hard time getting it. Ironically, I received blame for some of this at one command. My personal take away is leaders should be interviewed by commanders and peers somehow up and down the chain of command to ensure worthiness of an to take command. Also, potential CMCs should be selected from a pool of interested Master Chiefs who are vetted by a potential CO via looking at a group of records, doing a rack and stack and personally interviewing by phone each candidate and selecting from there. I believe a CMC then should not be able to walk into another CMC job until selected by a CO to transfer to their command.
If no command is available or none will take the CMC on for a fixed time period, the CMC should revert back to their original rating. I think these ideas can help break a cycle of poor leadership we seem to be saddled with and that make the good leaders work even harder to fix the carnage left behind by bad leadership.
Finally, the Fleet and Force Master Chief positions should be one tour only and then the individuals in those positions should either go back to being CMCs or should go back to their rating.
My two cents and again, great article sir!
CTICM(retired) William A. Altizer
This is a wonderful course of action but nonetheless one that is never followed. This is a wonderful gesture that should be taken with high regards, yet it is the gumption of the mid-level leaders or lack thereof that would never allow this to come to fruition. It takes an open minded leader and one who can see things from all angles, from all aspects, from all levels of pay grade, to attain the work environment that is most productive.
Hi Sean, Thanks for bringing up this issue…it’s a tough one to deal with. My advice, based on personal experience, is that except for cases of willful misconduct or acts of an illegal nature (alcohol abuse, sexual harassment, financial fraud, etc.) that Commanding Officer’s subordinates have some responsibility to get that CO to recognize the consequences of their actions – in other words, “if your boss is screwing up, you are probably partly to blame.”
I call this “Leading Up” and involves taking action to prevent your boss/supervisor from making wrong choices. I have personally had to invoke this more times than I care to remember. It’s not easy, but if you DON’T step up and lay it on the line, inaction can have even worse consequences for your reputation, the mission, and the morale and welfare of the crew.
Unfortunately, I find quite often that the CO’s subordinates try “nice” ways to handle the situation instead of simply going in his/her office and telling them what you observe and why it constitutes grounds for action – it’s important to focus on the BEHAVIORS and not the PERSONALITY TRAITS; say “we need you to make a decision about the ____”…don’t say “you have to stop procrastinating on the _____ matter.”
Truth be told, I take this approach even with my clients in private practice – on more than a few occasions I’ve had to walk into their office and say “Look, you can fire me, but you are screwing up.” You may choose to not use those exact words, but if you really care about that person, honest, direct communications is the way to go.
Of course, he/she may still ignore you. If that’s the case, then you have to decide to either pursue it up the chain, or not. If it is a matter that affects the mission, then you must take it up the chain. If not, then you have to decide what you will do next. Chances are that if it is a fairly serious matter, that CO’s boss probably already knows about it, and may or may not be taking action.
I always say that “Leadership is a contact sport” – you cannot pussyfoot around it. Good leaders know that they have to LEAD UP – their boss, LEAD DOWN – their subordinates, and LEAD OUT – others that have a stake in their team’s/organization’s success.
r/Chuck
Chuck Georgo
CTMCMC(SS), USN Ret.
We are dealing with a very similar situation now in my reserve unit, I’m not in the Navy. We have a new unit commander who started in the past 6 months, and the unit is beginning to fall apart, he has told an O-3 to pack his bags, our E-9 avoids working with him, so far 6 E-7/8 have either retired early or transfered to other units or quit their full time postion and became TR (weekend warriors). So yes we all have the option to quit and many are quitting.
A poorly leading commander is causing the enlisted leadership in place to leave, and what are all the workers left with, Blind leading the blind. Its really sad to see a unit I have been in for nearly a decade and with the great legacy it has to be in the position it is in now.
Not sure how to make the bleeding stop. This turnover is rapid and the experience we would have replacing are getting their hands tied as soon as they take the leadership position, not really giving them authority, so as a worker we all just look at each other and ask are we doing our jobs right. There is only 80 people and 1 full time officer. About half the senior NCOs have left in the past year
Lost all my confidence in him, would not like to deploy with him in charge.
What really can we do, watch him fail, watch the unit fail, don’t want retribution if this is seen by the people in my unit so pretty vague and some numbers have been slightly skewed.
Just want it to be great, like it had been under the 3 previous commanders
Anonymous – 12+ years military service, 3+ Middle East tours