- Reaction score
- 6,243
- Points
- 1,260
Keeping the thread firmly derailed, I'm going to jump to Pusser's defence. The problem is not that he, or any staff officer, wants the regulations enforced: that is, actually commendable, or would be if all the regulation he wants enforced are necessary or even useful and Pusser, himself, acknowledges that some (many? most?) are neither, the problem is that Pusser, like so many people, in my experience, mix or misunderstand the rights, duties and responsibilities of commanders and the staff.
I want staff officers to be diligent, even nit pickers, and earnest about their jobs - and if they discover that their job is part of the (bigger) problem I hope they will use their skill, knowledge and diligence to put themselves on the "unemployed" list - but I want them to remember that commanders, not staff officers, have the ultimate responsibility (duty, and sometimes a burdensome one) to give the orders that commit ships and sailors, regiments and soldiers, and squadrons and aircrew to battle, they (commanders) must be able to live with consequences - sometimes failure, often death, even disgrace - of the orders they give. They share neither the burden nor the responsibility nor the consequences of their decisions with the staff, at any level.
Pussr, like good staff officers, everywhere, keeps reminding us to "do things right." But, earlier, MARS told us that his goal is to "do the right thing." And that brings us back to management guru Warren Bennis who said "Managers are people who do things right; leaders are people who do the right thing." That's not a bad definition of the fundamental difference between some staff officers and some commanders.
It is a privilege to be an officer - in any capacity. Command is not a greater (or lesser) privilege than staff work: but it is different. Officers are selected, hopefully with care, for both line (command) and staff work. I can assure you, from experience, that the selection for some senior staff appointments is taken very seriously by commanders and even more senior staff officers and when one considers the HUGE burdens which staff officers try to take off their commanders' shoulders then one understands why only the best will do.
So I don't disagree with the earnestness, even passion, with which Pusser defends the rules and regulations ~ if fact it is commendable. What bothers me, sometimes, is that too many staff officers think that they are somewhere in the "chain of command;" they aren't and they should not want to be.
I return to the two duties of the staff:
1. To assist (or support) commanders in the function of command by relieving them of details; and
2. To assist (or support) subordinate formations and units (or ships) in accomplishing their assigned missions by managing resources, coordinating actions, and so on.
If we can all "stay in our lanes" we will do the right thing and do things right, too.
I want staff officers to be diligent, even nit pickers, and earnest about their jobs - and if they discover that their job is part of the (bigger) problem I hope they will use their skill, knowledge and diligence to put themselves on the "unemployed" list - but I want them to remember that commanders, not staff officers, have the ultimate responsibility (duty, and sometimes a burdensome one) to give the orders that commit ships and sailors, regiments and soldiers, and squadrons and aircrew to battle, they (commanders) must be able to live with consequences - sometimes failure, often death, even disgrace - of the orders they give. They share neither the burden nor the responsibility nor the consequences of their decisions with the staff, at any level.
Pussr, like good staff officers, everywhere, keeps reminding us to "do things right." But, earlier, MARS told us that his goal is to "do the right thing." And that brings us back to management guru Warren Bennis who said "Managers are people who do things right; leaders are people who do the right thing." That's not a bad definition of the fundamental difference between some staff officers and some commanders.
It is a privilege to be an officer - in any capacity. Command is not a greater (or lesser) privilege than staff work: but it is different. Officers are selected, hopefully with care, for both line (command) and staff work. I can assure you, from experience, that the selection for some senior staff appointments is taken very seriously by commanders and even more senior staff officers and when one considers the HUGE burdens which staff officers try to take off their commanders' shoulders then one understands why only the best will do.
So I don't disagree with the earnestness, even passion, with which Pusser defends the rules and regulations ~ if fact it is commendable. What bothers me, sometimes, is that too many staff officers think that they are somewhere in the "chain of command;" they aren't and they should not want to be.
I return to the two duties of the staff:
1. To assist (or support) commanders in the function of command by relieving them of details; and
2. To assist (or support) subordinate formations and units (or ships) in accomplishing their assigned missions by managing resources, coordinating actions, and so on.
If we can all "stay in our lanes" we will do the right thing and do things right, too.
