I posted a few days ago about Commander Mike Ward's firing as CO of USS PITTSBURGH and pointed readers to a good article written by Captain Mark Light HERE. Various Navy spokesmen have cited that there are over 1500 Navy COs at any given time and only the smallest percentage (cited as between 1% to 3%) are fired in any given year. The Navy has fired 13 Commanding Officers so far this year and a lessor number of executive officers and senior enlisted leaders. Some, including Galrahn over at Information Dissemination express their satisfaction that this percentage is acceptable and it reflects the Navy's 'pretty good job of evaluating people' for command. I think social media and information technology are helping the Navy do a better job of identifying misfit COs because Sailors have so many avenues now to report abhorrent behavior by their seniors to the proper authorities for action.
What we see in the CO firings is really a much smaller cross-section of the commanding officer domain than the reported "1500 individuals in command at any one time". The population we are really talking about are the COs in command of ships, submarines, aviation squadrons and significant shore commands. That number is much smaller than 1500 and is certainly closer to 400 than 1500 and effectively triples the percentage of COs being fired annually.
So, while some in the Navy are reportedly content with the percentage of CO and other senior leader firings, I promise you that the Chief of Naval Operations is not content and feels the pain in a personal way when each Commanding Officer is relieved for cause (any cause). Our CNO is a former VADM James Bond Stockdale Inspirational Leadership Award winner. He knows what leadership is all about. He expects more from his COs - and the majority are meeting his expectations. But, is that enough? It may not be.
8 comments:
If you were to contrast how industry selects its senior executives and how the armed forces select its senior executives it is no surprise there are some issues. Using fitness reports exclusively is like hiring someone based on a resume only. No interviews, no checking references no background checks.
I do not understand your point about the much smaller cross section than 1500 in command at any given time.
Are you saying that there are only 400 in command at any given time or that only 400 out of approximately 1500 commands amount to significance? Please expound.
I do not understand your point about the much smaller cross section than 1500 in command at any given time.
Are you saying that there are only 400 in command at any given time or that only 400 out of approximately 1500 commands amount to significance? Please expound.
Anon at 2:12 - That is what I am saying. Command of a billion dollar warship and command of a PSD are not equivalent. Many shore commands can be commanded by most naval officers. Aviation squadrons are not commanded by SWOs or submariners. Some ships have aviation COs. For the most part, there is not equivalency across the 1500 commands that the Navy is aggregating and discussing as the pool of COs.
IMHO Command is Command. Period.
Agree. Command is command.
Mike - I am a sitting CO of one of those "less equivalent" shore commands. My commannd is certainly not the same as, say, an aircraft carrier, but my authority, responsibility, and ultimate accountability for my command and our ~300 Sailors is very real - and I feel it every day. The Charge of Command that I was required to read, understand, and sign prior to assuming my duties is no different that the one that carrier COs sign - so I believe that our CNO expects the same high standards, no matter what the size or significance of the command. Our Sailors certainly derseve the same standards, no matter where (or with whom) they serve.
V/r, Joe.
@ Joe Johnson
In now way am I trying to diminish the "lesser command positions". I was in an O5 shore command myself and was schooled on how different those responsibilities were from DDG and SSN command by a couple of those COs.
Post a Comment