The reason Navy writing is horrible is because many naval officers are afraid. Afraid to say what they mean and share what they think, because they might be criticized for it. Afraid to be misunderstood, to be accused of saying what they didn't mean, because they might be criticized for it. Or simply afraid to share. And because of that fear, there is no writing to be criticized, commented upon and improved. The common thought is that knowledge is power, after all. And shared knowledge = reduced power. So, keep it to yourself. Quite the opposite is true. Share your knowledge = increased power for all.
Seth Godin's advice: Just say it. SHARE IT. Say it clearly. Say it now. Say it without fear of being criticized and say it without being boring. If the goal is no feedback, then say nothing. Don't write the memo/e-mail/letter/article/note. If the goal is to communicate and share your knowledge/thinking, then say what you mean. AND PUT IT IN WRITING !!
6 comments:
Fear? Possibly. But, I also think there is no clear incentive for writers to write. Good writing is a lot of work. Is the pay greater for Navy writers? Does the Navy have a "publish or perish" policy similar to academia? Is the linkage between writing and career success made clear in career counseling sessions? It seems to me that such incentives that exist for Navy writers are primarily either altruistic or ego-gratifying.
That doesn't work on everyone.
The foremost military writer is undoubtedly Admiral Stavridis. Did his writing cause him to be lose appointment as CNO or CJCS?
It has been widely reported that H. R. McMaster was passed over twice for brigadier general because of his outspokeness in his writings. He was eventually promoted in the board that was chaired by Petraeus and was noted for selecting independent officers. The lesson learned is get off the reservation as your peril.
So, we end up with a lot of cheerleading articles that people don't find interesting or productive.
After writing daily/weekly/monthly reports, e-mails, evals, mid-terms, etc etc all day...Who has time? I leave the writing to authors.
Writing is but one means (albeit the most powerful) to share opinions/experiences/knowledge and an unwillingness to share opinions/experiences/knowledge is nothing more than apathy. There is way too much apathy in our line of work.
Is it not ironic that we occasionally refer to our profession as the “Military Arts” when hard science dominates just about everything we experience as warriors – from the logistical metrics of the supply train to megatons of nuclear yield over a Circle of Probable Error? It is a rare raptor-warrior who is equally comfortable with the war verses of Siegfried Sassoon and William Butler Yeats as with a fire-control solution at the SSN Position Keeper or orienteering in unknown hostile territory. Just three come (not easily) to my mind at this moment: the Roman general-philosopher Marcus Aurelius, larger-than-life General George S. Patton, and Union Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, whose heroic leadership at Gettysburg’s Little Round Top for all intents and purposes saved the battle for Meade and spelled the beginning of the end of Robert E Lee’s strategic weight in the Civil War.
What binds such soldiers in common bond? Skill in writing. Peruse writing by JRR Tolkien (who survived the awful Somme, 1916); or FADM Nimitz’s pithy, clear notes to staff – or any number of Japanese warrior-poets whose near-clairvoyance across life’s line into death leave a reader with gooseflesh even after their reason for being has gone.
Most of us do as best we can when crafting words that will lead to action; however, we should try always to communicate well and wisely.
“Paint a word-picture!”” my best mentor told me as a young officer, “If you can, let it sit for a day – and then look it over. If you think it’s something correct in content and that people will understand it easily, share it.”
That’s what ADM Stavridis advises isn’t it?
V/r, Steve Myers, author of “Ice Road to Hell; War at Sea on the Murmansk Run”(Feb 2011//Amazon.com, Barnes & Noble et al)
The Navy does not incentivize writing - in fact it is discouraged. There is active suspicion and distrust of officers who write well or often. For evidence, all you have to do is compare Proceedings today with 20 years ago, or 50 years ago. The Navy needs a vigorous open discussion about its missions and future now more than ever - but that discussion is mainly online, mainly among us old retired farts, and mainly anonymous - because it isn't tolerated in the fleet.
Post a Comment