News of yet another conduct-related firing of a Navy commanding officer causes me to think about the subject again. Most of the time, I find the news of firings to be a cost of doing business, one born of a culture that demands much from its leaders. But sometimes--and this is one of them--I find myself thinking that the Navy is not doing something right; that these firings are the result of systemic issues. Most of the time though, folks who look for systemic clues to these issues advocate looking into the front-end of command, that is, the selection process. Presumably, some feel that with a better process including 360 degree feedback and other tools, we will be able to weed out the raging narcissists that seem to be spoiling it for everyone else. Perhaps; but I would like to focus on the other end of the issue. That is, the Navy needs to make it fundamentally more painful to be removed from command.
Truth be told, this view is one I'm borrowing from a retired two-star friend of mine who wrote in a recent email linked to the above story with this approach. Now--neither he nor I is a JAG, so this might not be implementable. But here's the bottom line: no more administrative punishment for misconduct in command. No more "removals for lack of confidence" followed by quiet retirements. If the failure of personal conduct coincides with a UCMJ violation, it will be handled judicially (in addition to removal from command). Reduction in grade, fines, and confinement--in addition to discharge PRIOR TO THE ATTAINMENT OF RETIREMENT STATUS--all are on the table.
I realize this is a bit "Old Testament" for some, but I think the Navy needs to make the prospect of disgrace and punishment more real for those who attain the position of trust that command represents.
Bryan McGrath
No comments:
Post a Comment