What makes a good Officer? What makes a bad Officer?

[2 Cdo]

The urge to launch an extremely smartass answer is almost overwhelming! ;D

 

[George Wallace]

The urge to launch an extremely smartass answer is almost overwhelming! ;D

It is an inhuman, saddistic Test.  ;D

 

[Franko]

I am soooooo biting my toungue....

Regards

 

[vonGarvin]

OK, okay.  Let 'er rip, knowing that I am not too far off the mark 




;D

 

[glock17]

that King in the play by Shakespeare (can't remember which one)

Henry V - Truly outstanding work  " we few, we glorious few, we band of brothers"

 

[raymao]

I am interested in hearing everyone's opinion in regards to this post as I am currently contemplating my application with CF. The officer's route utilizes my education versus the NCM which would utilize more of my work experience. I have more or less differentiated the two as being, officers take care of the operations on a wider perspective, while NCM's are specialized positions. If one were to compare the CF to a business, officers are more of the executive class, which look after larger organizational issues, while NCM's are the experts in the field and need more technical knowledge. While officers should know what NCM's do in the field on a general level, they could probably never acquire the hands-on skills that NCM's exhibit. Vice-versa, while NCM's need to relay information that is useful for the officers, there is a level of responsibility that transfers up the chain of command as well that an NCM would never have to concern him/herself with. In regards to leadership, everyone has to display a level of leadership if there are subordinates below that position. The level of responsibility is what probably differentiates the two classes the most. I have heard a few members defending NCM positions as being sometimes well educated, of course they can be, but the difference in positions are the levels of responsibility they choose. This does not mean one responsibility is necessarily more important than the other, they are simply different. In a hospital, there is no question about the importance of the surgeon performing an operation on a patient, but can you imagine the effectiveness of a hospital that failed to have a proper staff of administration as well? Supplies, paycheques, quality of the training, quality of the environment would deteriorate very quickly to the point that it may even interfere with the performance of that surgeon.

 

[Good2Golf]

The scale of accountability of one's actions and those under one's command certainly are different for officers and NCMs.  A CO for example, through his or her actions, is responsible and held accountable for the conduct and well-being of hundreds of soldiers.  If somthing happened to any one of them through improper actions or lack of action by anyone under the CO's command, he/she would wear a lot of the responsibility.  As an interesting question, how much responsibility/accountability would the RSM bear?  Had a good friend demoted and eventually leave the CF for his acceptance of responsibility for events that resulted in a soldier's death.  Interestingly, the CO and the Base Comd accepted no blame whatsoever, especially after the OC verbally accepted responsibility before the BOI even hit the ground.  No responsibility was attributed to the CSM or other NCMs...OC took it all.  A particular and unfortuante case, perhaps, but it does point out differences between responsibility of one's personal actions and responsibility for the actions of those in a unit/organization.

Cheers,
Duey

p.s. some officers are not only commanders and leaders, but also technical experts in their duties...I don't have a Flt WO or SWO advising me how best to operate and employ my aircraft, while I also would affect command of a flight or squadron.

 

[TN2IC]

Officers make the work
NCM's get the job done


Quote from my PLQ.

 

[Franko]

The scale of accountability of one's actions and those under one's command certainly are different for officers and NCMs.  A CO for example, through his or her actions, is responsible and held accountable for the conduct and well-being of hundreds of soldiers. 

Hate to bring this oldie up but......as an example only....

What happened then during the Somolia debacle?

I'm not trying to stir up the hornets nest on this but a fair amount of "responsible" officers and NCOs walked away from it all.

Responsibility only goes so far in regards to the actions of the soldiers under their command.

Just my $0.02 worth

Regards

 

[scoutfinch]

Re Somalia

Perhaps the proper wording is "should be held accountable".  Unfortunately, you are correct that those that *should* have been held accountable in Somalia simply weren't.

 

[vonGarvin]

Another example from a war between Great Britain and France many a moon ago.  Apparently some ship was in battle, all the officers were dead, save one very young midshipman.  The Cox'n had someone throw salt water in his face to rouse him.  The Cox'n advised him that the battle was lost, and that the colours must be struck.  The young midshipman agreed.  The ship was captured by the French.  A few months later, in a prisoner exchange, the ship's company returned to Ol' Blighty.  The midshipman was found guilty of cowardice in the face of the enemy for surrendering a battle-worthy ship to the enemy, and hanged by the neck until dead.  The Cox'n had no charges laid against him.  (I'll have to research a reference: learned this story many moons ago during one of my phases)

So, in essence, Somalia notwithstanding, that's what officers are supposed to do: accept responsibility.  Ultimate responsibililty.  Perhaps what happened over Somalia was a text book example of how NOT to be an officer.  
My $0.02 worth

Cheers

 

[reccecrewman]

If there is a single test of what distinguishes an Officer from and NCM, it is that, while hoping to celebrate victory, he accepts the risk of being branded a loser; and a loser whose failure condemns not only himself, but his Army and perhaps his Country to the most painful of consequences.

John Keegan

 

[Good2Golf]

Hate to bring this oldie up but......as an example only....

What happened then during the Somolia debacle?

I'm not trying to stir up the hornets nest on this but a fair amount of "responsible" officers and NCOs walked away from it all.

Responsibility only goes so far in regards to the actions of the soldiers under their command.

Just my $0.02 worth

Regards

Franko, more than "fair enough"...you are absolutely right and I am with you 110% on that one! 

Somalia was, in my personal opinion, the worst example of the opposite happening to the example I gave above.  I think that was the lowest of low points in officership in the CF, without doubt.  Shameful.

Leadership happens at all levels but the overall tone of where that leadership develops clearly comes from the top.

Cheers,
Duey

 

[GINge!]

She said that basically the only time a Jr NCM should be in an officer's office is when they are getting in trouble.  Thought it was a little funny, although I didn't tell her that!

I love it when BPSO's try to relate to an NCM what it means to be an officer. Especially BPSOs who are fresh off the street and have never had to lead.

 

[Wookilar]

I hated that question.  :-\ He must of liked my answer though (but I can't really tell you what it was, that was almost two years ago now). I also have to agree with GINge!.
We all have our own ideas of what the differences are between NCM's and the officers are, but I can tell you some of the "official" differences are (according to what is being taught to the CF's "young" leaders). Officers do swear another oath upon commissioning. Due to this second oath, those with the Queen's Commission are considered to be the "professionals" of the CF. Then we get into the level of responsibilities, accountability for others, etc, yada yada.
Now, this opens up a whole other can of lung in a bag. The whole issue of being a professional being reserved for officers is a bit of a sore point for me. It doesn't matter to me whether you are a 031 Death Tech or a 411 Veh Tech, we are all "professionals." However, the official stance is that those with a Queen's Commission are compared to other trades (civvy, mostly) that require another oath. Doctor's, lawyer's, any job where the individual is not only responsible for their duties, but also answer to another "higher" call.
Don't know if I exactly buy the entire line of reasoning, as I would hope that anyone considering the CF for a career is answering to a kind of a higher call in the first place.

 

[Kat Stevens]

As was explained to me by my first Tp WO, in '80: "See that office over there?  That's the Troop Commanders office.  He's an officer. He's called that because he never comes out of his office, and you have to call him sir.  'Office + Sir= Officer'.  That's all you need to know about him, Sapper".

 

[Good2Golf]

As was explained to me by my first Tp WO, in '80: "See that office over there?  That's the Troop Commanders office.  He's an officer. He's called that because he never comes out of his office, and you have to call him sir.  'Office + Sir= Officer'.  That's all you need to know about him, Sapper".

:rofl:

That's great...can't believe I haven't heard that one before!

Cheers,
Duey

 

[Wookilar]

LOL, that's excellent.
When I get an office, would you mind if I put that on my name plate? ;D

 

[cdnsignaller]

Some of the best officers that I ever met are mustang'd NCM's

 

[reccecrewman]

I'd concur with that - one of the best troop leaders I ever had was an ex Corporal on the Guns.