[Eddie]

Originally Posted by jester

DAMN!

I am so glad I am out and from what I hear glad they denied me when I tried to get back in, sorry if this seems like a slap, but especialy the army.

No problem. I'm more than happy to debate leadership styles and philosophies. For the sake of clarity, you are a former Marine, correct? I believe I read that on one of threads around here...

It sounds like there is little is any leadership, and thus everything is micromanaged. And that sort of system does not develope leaders. It developes bureaucrats, which is the enviroment that was allowed to develope durring the 90s so the senior level zeros and ncos of today were learning their craft then, and poof here we are.

That's an easy assumption to make based on a few posts on an internet forum. Please define leadership for me as you mean it here.

In my take, its part of uniformity.

That's a huge part of it. If we're in the middle of a patrol and our truck gets hit, rolls, and things get jumbled up, you grab the nearest rucksack and unass the truck to take cover, it helps if everyone packs the poncho in the same pocket, or the etool, or whatever you need so that you can grab it blindly in the dark without having to use a red lens flashlight (or for that matter even having to see it period).

Everyone knows their duties, and knows the kit they are required to have for said duties. Poof enough said, done. A man is supposed to have the items he needs to handle his tasks. Part of SOPs and such.

So an officer, a Platoon Leader/Commander doesn't have any responsibility for his men or his mission? They get paid so much more than an E5 because that shiny bar looks prettier?

And what happens when TSHTF and dude who had X job and stashed the gear for that in the bottom of his ruck isn't conscious to tell the others where it is? They dump his ruck? Does the platoon take a timeout to reset themselves? Having a packing list and an SOP of what goes reasonably where is a method of mitigating that tactical risk.

In the olden days it was the NCOs and even non rate team leaders to ensure their men had what they needed to handle their mission, and that is what we did.

And they still are. The Team Leader is the first person responsible. It's his job. It's his purpose. But who checks to make sure he isn't too busy worrying about Momma back home with his newborn kid that just went to the hospital? Who checks to make sure that he isn't too busy playing the PS3 to verify his team has what they need? And so on and so forth.

PCCs (Pre-Combat Checks) are the sole realm of the NCO. A layout. A simple question of "Do you have everything?" A visual checkover. Whatever works for him. He knows his troops better than anyone else. PCIs (Pre-Combat Inspections) are the realm of the Officers. A spot check of this, a pet peeve of that, making sure that everyone's water is full. Not a complete walk through of every little item because that is what the NCOs did.

But what happens when he's an idiot? What happens when he comes up to his squad leader and says, "Hey Sergeant X, can I use your NODs tonight at the Range, I forgot mine?"

In front of the whole company (I was both thankful that he wasn't and wishing he was in my PLT that day).

How does that PL trust him to do his job after that? How can you trust that he did his job prior to that and you just didn't get lucky?

All were deemed capable of doing their jobs and expected to do them, if they didn't preform well they found a place for them in supply or the mess hall counting, inventoring or something else that needed to be done but required no knowledge, skill or initiative where a screw up couldn't result in casualties or degraded mission.

It's not that simple in a wartime environment. And it's been proven that not everyone is capable of doing the job that they're expected to. You can't tell me that you didn't see guys that got promoted when they shouldn't have? That weren't put in a position that they weren't ready for?

"F*ck up, move up." Any ever hear that?

Hell, it's not that simple in a peacetime environment.

And I'd say that there is very few jobs at the company level and even Battalion level that don't degrade mission if done poorly or result in someone becoming a casualty if the right equipment isn't there.

The junior NCOs did their jobs, they were treated as adults and became leaders.

Really? All of them? You never looked at a guy and just said, "How? How did that guy get picked/promoted?"

The Platoon Sgt simply checked with the squad and team leaders who would give the thumbs up, or alert any issues, and the Pltaoon Sgt would handle it or refer it to the platoon comander (seldom was this done, things got handled "inhouse" at usualy the squad level.)

How is the Platoon Commander not "in-house?" It's his platoon. If his mission fails, the Battalion Commander isn't coming for that guy that forgot his widget...he's going to fire that Platoon Leader.

And I completely agree with handling things at the lowest level possible. No issue with that. But once again, the PL needs to know what is going on so that he doesn't step into a minefield or get blindsided by his superiors.

Thus, our leadership became excperienced, we became professionals and considered ourselves such, the officers and seniopr NCOs left us alone and they did their own jobs and not ours

In general I agree with this, but your next comment that I'm going to quote is very unprofessional.

(unless new Lts showed up who seemed to want to do everyones job which we had to show them we knew our shit and they didn't so we would expose them at every chance when they messed up.

Wow. All I can say is wow. That's a very professional tactic as opposed to, I don't know, consulting him privately and expressing your concerns or demonstrating your alternative to his course of action.

After a while they would learn and back off.)

It sounds to me more like they would just not care. Or were weak leaders and wouldn't stand up to his NCOs.

In the end, we did run like the proverbial machine, trust of the enlsited was developed by the officers and we developed trust in them

Which is what everyone is striving for. But I ask, why did it have to become a confrontational, Es vs. Os type occurrence?

<or made them look like utter fools and they would disapear to supply or the motorpool> and we all could focus on our jobs and mission and have much less stress for all invovled.

Couldn't your professionalism have spoken so much better for you by showing that new LT the error with his suggested COA and the effectiveness of the recommended COA

One thing, and again this is from my time back in the stone age and now sitting on the sidelines, but, isn't leadership "inastilled!" I do not mean through classes or reciting codes and creeds or being sent to a school or course.

Instilled? Or innate? Is leadership something that you're born with or taught? Or is it a combination of both?

For us, you already had to be a leader to go to those things.

To what? Schools and stuff? Once again, assuming I'm correct in your Marine background, the Corp doesn't have people getting promoted into a higher rank based on time or, more often, people he knows in high places. SGMs never took care of their driver in the Corp?

It sounds like the leaders are just laying down on the job,

Which is exactly what it sounds like to me in perardua's posts.

and I mean the small unit leaders, or has it become such a climate where "that is the way it is." Because the system has been doing that for so long, where the officers don't let the men and junior leadership do what they are supposed to do.

I know very few officers that don't listen to NCOs. There are some out there, yes, I don't deny that. But the majority listen, heed, and respect the wealth of knowledge that the NCO Corps brings to the military. I know that I made very few decisions both as a PL and as a Company Commander without consulting my Platoon Sergeant and my First Sergeant, and even when I did consult my First Sergeant I checked with one or two of my Platoon Sergeants usually as well. Granted this was in a training environment for the Company Command time.

In combat, though, I was the decision maker. I was the one responsible for those men. I was the one that was maneuvering that assault element where I wanted them. I was the one telling that squad leader to take his people there and secure that. Not my Platoon Sergeant. Not my squad leaders who were too focused on their little piece of the fight. Were they capable? I have no doubt that two of them were. The other not so much.

I didn't promote him. I couldn't trade him. I couldn't demote him. So I was just supposed to accept that he's an NCO and thus he knows what he's doing and will keep my men alive? Hell no. If that's micromanaging, then so be it. I'm not a leader to be a friend, I'm a leader to accomplish the mission and keep my men alive.

Remember, trust is needed because you are going to have to trust everyone in your team with your life!

Exactly. You are trusting them with your life, and as a leader, you're trusting them with the lives of your other men. Don't you owe it to those other men to ensure that people are doing the right thing behind just saying, "We good, Sarn't?"

So, they need to be trusted to do their most basic of tasks and that is pack their own gear and what is needed to accomplish the mission!

How do they know what is needed to accomplish your mission though? Does a Private know what the effectiveness of a PAS-13 is and that it has to have special Lithium AA batteries as opposed to just Duracell AAs or it will die in less than 30 minutes? Are you willing to bet the ability of your machinegunner to see the enemy at 800m as opposed to right in his face on that trust? Suppose he gets lazy just one time? Is it realistic to expect everyone to be 100% disciplined every day?

Lists are needed, but not down to how many needles in your sewing kit.

Yack, :spit:, ugh. Is that words someone is trying to put in my mouth? I never said anything to that detail. I said a packing list. Not an inventory of every piece of BII in the TM.

I could care less if my guys have the polarized filter for their NODs. But I want them to have a helmet mount, a swing arm, and the PVS-14 as well as a serviceable battery cover, fresh batteries, and a tie down. Is it asking too much that as the single guy that will be held responsible if something does go wrong, that I be allowed to spot check guys and make sure they're doing the right thing?

How can troops learn to be good NCOs if they aren't allowed to do their jobs?


Sadly, I am told this is similiar with junior officers as well.

But you're ranting that a junior officer shouldn't learn his job. He shouldn't be in charge. He should just shut up and let the NCOs and Es do all of the work and then take the credit for it. And if he does try to learn, make fun of him until he goes away and lets you do what you want to do.

Being a "good" NCO and being a "competent" NCO are not the same thing in my opinion. A "good" NCO, is a guy who strives to know his job inside and out, is physically fit, and imparts that philosophy on those around him for the betterment of the unit, whether that person is a Joe or his new PL.

That's how I tried to behave and that's what I took with me when I made the switch over to the O side of the house.

If there is one thing that I absolutely hate and wish I could change every day, though, is this erroneous attitude that it's Os vs. Es in the military. That shit pisses me off to no end, because my life, and my wife and children's husband and father, is on the line just like that NCO who may or may not be ready for his job.