When the Navy removes a senior leader for misconduct, officials disclose it and explain what happened.
It’s a valuable, instructive practice that sets the Navy apart from the other services, which generally refuse to acknowledge any failure of leadership.
That Navy leaders are considering a regressive path to joining the practices of those other services is dismaying — instead, they should endeavor to follow the lead of the sea service. Navy leaders are now rethinking some of these long-standing policies.
That’s a mistake.
Navy policies These practices ensure that admirals, commanding officers, executive officers and command master chiefs are held publicly accountable when they fall short, whether for poor performance, misbehavior or committing crimes. This transparency serves as “lessons learned” and demonstrates accountability for misconduct is not just carried out on junior sailors but up the entire chain of command. for those in the fleet while also addressing addresses concerns among the rank and file by showing that the people at the very top, who run the disciplinary processes, are subject to the same consequences when they break the rules.
Shipmates will notice when their skipper or CMC is gone one day. Rumors and misinformation proliferate. Best to be upfront about what happened and what the Navy is doing to address it.
Though only the The Navy admits it, every is the most transparent of the military services, but make no mistake: Every military branch fires leaders who prove incompetent, below standards or in violations of policy or law. The other services, however, prefer to cashier leaders quietly. Experts argue and commentators argue that being transparent about these firings forces the service to acknowledge and address problems its problems, like toxic climate, bullying and inappropriate relationships. These issues
In 2015, 2019 Navy skippers were relieved for cause, a small percentage of the roughly 1,500 Navy commands. All of these leaders fell short of the exemplary conduct the Navy and the nation expect of their COs. As the Navy’s personnel boss said, these leadership failures are studied as closely as a jet crash for lessons learned to prevent another career from being ruined, another crew from being demoralized. The service is right to look at ways to identify patterns of misbehavior early in an officer’s career, well before he or she is they’re screened for command.
Of course, firings generate headlines. In 2015, 19 Navy skippers were relieved for cause, a small percentage of the roughly 1,500 Navy commands. All of these leaders fell short of the exemplary conduct the Navy and the nation expect of their COs.
Navy Secretary Ray Mabus has set the right policy by insisting the service be “completely transparent, particularly for those in places of high responsibility.” This acts as a deterrent to others and, he said, “because it’s just the right thing to do.”
Instead of the Navy watering down its standards, the other services need to step up to match the Navy’s rules. It’s transparent, fair and the right thing to do.
