Lt.-Gen. Jennie Carignan chosen as next chief of the defence staff

First!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carignan-new-chief-defence-1.7249581

 

[dimsum]

A lot of them are smart. But I notice a distinct difference from American GOFOs, from my short time in the US. And I do think the emphasis that Americans place on education (particularly STEM) and the more intense competition (relatively harder to make flag ranks) creates a better product. And it's obvious to me in the way they talk, brief, etc. I also think this impacts their technological fluency and risk appetite with new tech.

Can you elaborate on the STEM piece? I’ve been in the US and worked under US GOFOs, and while they are definitely smart, I didn’t notice any real differences between them and the Canadian GOFOs I worked under in Canada.

I found that the US briefs are more “canned” than the Canadian ones - there isn’t much shooting from the hip and people were almost expected to read from the slides. I also think that the tech fluency, etc is also a function of where they work. If they are in a combatant command or a command that deals with a lot of tech (SPACECOM, for example) then definitely. Others…maybe.

Their regular foreign postings to hot spots usually comes with linguistic and cultural competencies which are rare among our GOFOs.

Isn’t the whole issue in this thread about a particular GOFO posted to a hot spot?

 

[ytz]

You have lots of places to hide them too. Here not so many....

What? Their ratio of troops to flag O is higher. So fewer places to hide actually.

 

[ytz]

Can you elaborate on the STEM piece?

Their career system actually gives them more points for STEM Masters than just doing an MBA, as per the explanation given to me by American colleagues at NPS.

I found that the US briefs are more “canned” than the Canadian ones - there isn’t much shooting from the hip and people were almost expected to read from the slides. I also think that the tech fluency, etc is also a function of where they work. If they are in a combatant command or a command that deals with a lot of tech (SPACECOM, for example) then definitely. Others…maybe.

For those generic briefs? Sure. Canned. But I have found a difference in the unscripted environment like when they are on a symposium panel. There's a certain depth of perspective and intellectualism, our guys seem to lack.

Who knows. Maybe I got to experience their best and our average and that biases me.

 

[ytz]

Isn’t the whole issue in this thread about a particular GOFO posted to a hot spot?

See. At least if she learned Arabic or those rugs were priceless antiques, we'd have a certain appreciation for those rumoured actions!

 

[Jarnhamar]

Any real sources, not the old "i heard it..." please.

Given how spiteful and vindictive of an organization we can be I'm fairly certain these allegations will always sit at the reddit stage.


Just ask retired Lt Col Mark Popov.

General Erye admitted Popov had his career cut short for trying to, get this, crack down on sexual misconduct. "He wasn't treated fairly and shouldn't have been removed from command".

If you remember, the Lt Col was blasted for trying to discipline rmc cadets who, among other things, were making sexually explicit comments to children.

If that's what happens to someone for calling out rmc cadets I can imagine what would happen to someone calling out the CDS.

But who knows, maybe the first thing the new CDS will do in office is issue an overdue apology to him.

 

[MilEME09]

Any real sources, not the old "i heard it..." please.

I think that's going to have to depend on what you call a real source. You aren't going to see any CBC articles from 2020 saying "Canadian general tries to leave Iraq before own troop, Americans stop them"

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I think that's going to have to depend on what you call a real source. You aren't going to see any CBC articles from 2020 saying "Canadian general tries to leave Iraq before own troop, Americans stop them"

Doesn't matter the source, not in 2024 at least.

The troops that were involved have let their displeasure be known. Pte Bloggins has a lot more trust in what MCpl Jones (who was there) has to say vice LGen Carignan/CBC. Thus the memes floweth forth, voicing their displeasure of the future CDS being a self-serving coward, proof or no proof.

They honestly could have selected a faceless GOFO from a less reknowned file and everyone would have shrugged and got on with it. LGen Carrignan has far too much, pardon the expression, baggage based on the speculation of what may or may not have occured in Iraq but also the CPCC aspect of having been given a command that has so far not delivered on their mandate.

When this is the first thing that hits my feed on Reddit the day after her appointment got leaked, the game is already lost.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Well...


The CDS is an operator...as are an uncomfortable and unfortunate percentage of Senior Officer....and the poster seems to thinks that all operators need a 7 year old level explanation to understand a "complex engineering issue"...so I guess that is where I got the first part.

The second part was an effort to establish the experiential background that led to that characterization of ALL operators, and hence MOST senior Officers as requiring "complex engineering issues" to be explained to them in at the level of a 7 year old.

Pretty thinned skin interpretation; someone really good at briefing senior people once told me to try and start like you are explaining it to some kids. That's a good way to figure out how to take something complex, explain it briefly for context, then talk about the impact/request decision whatever.

Really has nothing to do with being an operator, but you prep things differently depending on your audience. Take the same approach briefing it up the CoC to engineers in the same trade, because A) they also have things to do and B) they don't necessarily care about the details.

Completely different approach if its with a group trying to figure out the problem; then you dive in the weeds.

But yeah, just went through a giant decision brief very recently that was a few years worth of work in the making from multiple organizations, and boiled down to a few slides with stoplight assessments and a some bullet points. No reason a grade school kid couldn't have followed along, other than all the acronyms. That was targeted at some GOFOs.

 

[Takeniteasy]

I attended one of her culture change town halls. She was even less interested in being there than I was. Which is no small feat. I was rather impressed by her openess to convey her bordem and not feed us feigned interest.

The CWO on the other hand - full culture change echo chamber. I recall him pretty much attacking people for asking questions he didn't like. Really channeled his inner 'you shut your mouth when you're talking to me'.

I logged into one of the online Restorative Engagement info sessions and she pleaded to the participants to help with the current enrolment issues, she said that we needed your positive stories! I then made a comment and followed up with an email to the moderators about her comments, forest for the trees. She was scheduled for the follow up online session and at the last minute was replaced by a senior CWO.