Posted on Feb 7, 2021
What are your "best practices" for handling disrespectful, too comfortable subordinates?
3.98K
48
20
5
5
0
When I commissioned out of the enlisted ranks, I wanted to make sure I stayed humble. I was the first to admit that ensigns were noobs, and that there was nothing about my rank that granted me or my ideas some high status. "Hell," I joked once on my first week aboard to my division, "I still need directions to find the head."
Although good in a lot of ways -- folks came to me with problems I don't they would have otherwise -- there were huge setbacks I struggled to handle. Over and over again, my presence would make my Sailors get *very* comfortable in how they spoke to me. I once had an argument with one of my E-6s after he explained to me how he decided whose orders he followed. In his logic, he didn't actually have to listen to someone unless they were simultaneously older, higher ranking, paid more, and had been in longer. Miss one of the blocks, and he doesn't really have to do what you say. Again, Ensign Me actually allowed this to become a debatable back and forth until it occurred to my LCPO that we could be heard on the other end of the barge.
Now I teach leadership and ethics at an NROTC Unit, and I tell these tales to my midshipmen as "what NOT to do". It's not a problem for me now because, frankly, I know what I'm doing, but I still get the cocky Sailor who decides to debate the merits of rank with me. How do you folks handle these things (i.e., your people growing so comfortable with you that they cross the line of professionalism and start explaining how they don't *actually* have to follow your orders)? Shake your head and walk away? Blow up on them? Respectfully explain the concept to them, but chance allowing it to be a debate when it is, in fact, not up for debate? I've found my own path forward, but I wanted to hear some thoughts from this community that I might take back to my midshipmen as "diverse words of wisdom".
Although good in a lot of ways -- folks came to me with problems I don't they would have otherwise -- there were huge setbacks I struggled to handle. Over and over again, my presence would make my Sailors get *very* comfortable in how they spoke to me. I once had an argument with one of my E-6s after he explained to me how he decided whose orders he followed. In his logic, he didn't actually have to listen to someone unless they were simultaneously older, higher ranking, paid more, and had been in longer. Miss one of the blocks, and he doesn't really have to do what you say. Again, Ensign Me actually allowed this to become a debatable back and forth until it occurred to my LCPO that we could be heard on the other end of the barge.
Now I teach leadership and ethics at an NROTC Unit, and I tell these tales to my midshipmen as "what NOT to do". It's not a problem for me now because, frankly, I know what I'm doing, but I still get the cocky Sailor who decides to debate the merits of rank with me. How do you folks handle these things (i.e., your people growing so comfortable with you that they cross the line of professionalism and start explaining how they don't *actually* have to follow your orders)? Shake your head and walk away? Blow up on them? Respectfully explain the concept to them, but chance allowing it to be a debate when it is, in fact, not up for debate? I've found my own path forward, but I wanted to hear some thoughts from this community that I might take back to my midshipmen as "diverse words of wisdom".
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 11
I am prior enlisted too. I have had my share of issues. Whenever I come into a leadership position I explain how we will operate together. I also explain that there will be times we can discuss our actions and then there will be times I expect them to follow my orders. I did have a situation to where I lost faith in a subordinate leader. I went to the senior leader in my company and informed him that I wanted him relieved. He was moved shortly there after. You can't let that fester. You are running into some systematic issues here. He fails to understand his role in the military. He is there to lead his enlisted service members and follow the orders of those appointed over him. The issue is once you lost the confidence of those you work with you won't get that back. Even if you do they will resent you. It's a dangerous place. I know I am in the Army but this is wild to me. As a Captain in the Army we are company commanders. I have only seen once instance where an enlisted Soldier contested his commander. It was a toxic relationship. If this was happening I would try to have a professional counseling session. Do not do a heart to heart. You are not his peer. You are the leader. When you have a heart to heart sometimes you can empower the other party to feel like they are your equal. You are a team but you are the team leader. He has to understand how your team works. If he continues to cross the line I would relieve them.
(9)
(0)
Sorry, but I guess it was different when I was in. I was prior, too, and if a sailor came put me and told me his "criteria" for who he would follow orders from, it would have taken me less than a nano-second to grab his CPO and get him in the bilge with a toothbrush scrubbing !
(7)
(0)
LT (Join to see)
Yeah, my LCPO was watching the whole thing shaking his head as if to say, "Classic Petty Officer [redacted], no filter."
Interestingly, a new Air Defense Officer showed up a few months later (this guy was a LT prior Chief OS) and had a similar interaction with this Sailor and wondered to me if he had given him too much latitude.
Interestingly, a new Air Defense Officer showed up a few months later (this guy was a LT prior Chief OS) and had a similar interaction with this Sailor and wondered to me if he had given him too much latitude.
(1)
(0)
CWO3 (Join to see)
LT (Join to see) - Maybe that LCPO shouldn't be leading. He might have asked for some private time with the PO1 - a hint for you to leave. The right language should sink in. The Chief might use words like liberty risk, needle gun, daily mid-watches, cross training in engineering spaces etc. A CPO has more experience and can get results. Either with carrot or stick. Call it an off the record counseling. If nothing changes, then make it official with a direct counseling, provided he is in your charge. Just don't argue. If it gets to that point lock him up at attention and have a one way conversation in the least public manner, low voice and not in plain view of others. Many JOs get tested in the manner you describe, if that provides solace.
(2)
(0)
Find his LCPO, he should handle it. If not the CMC will. A lot of the Chops, Chengs, and Bos'ns on amphibs I sailed on were seasoned Mustangs, and they had a low tolerance for BS like that PO1. Better to let the Chiefs handle it IMO. Argument ends as a loss for you. If he's a hard case, XOI and Mast are in his future.
(5)
(0)
Marine Corps Infantry input here. I fully expect someone to tell me it is to "draconian."
In your anecdote, your first mistake was to joke about your own competence/confidence. That does NOT mean you should not be self-deprecating, humble, or unwilling to learn. But if a young leader publicly calls his competence/confidence into question why should his subordinates follow him into combat, where even if he does everything right, someone may die. An officer's integrity, competence, and authority are not appropriate subject matter for that officer's humor. For his subordinates it will most definitely be a subject for their humor. As long as it doesn't take place with intent to insult the officer to his face, so what.
Had an NCO/SNCO in my chain of command publicly or privately questioned the legitimacy of my authority when I issued a legal order, there would have been a private, short, one-sided conversation with that NCO/SNCO locked at the position of attention. I would say
"Petty Officer ______ this is your one and only warning. The standard is immediate, intelligent obedience. If you believe there are unintended consequences to my order that I have not foreseen, by all means respectfully and tactfully bring them up, as the situation allows. How to do something may be up for debate, my authority is not. Dismissed."
Any response but "Aye, aye sir," an about face and smartly marching off would result in a counseling in his performance jacket. Any "attitude," public or private, at a later date would result in a counseling in his performance jacket. Any further unwarranted breach in following orders would result in a charge sheet.
I would like to address the phrase immediate intelligent obedience. Part and parcel of leadership AND followership is understanding that the senior and/or subordinate may have some information that the other does not. This is particularly true in urgent or impromptu situations [i.e., combat crap sandwich]. A subordinate that does not alert the senior to probable unintended consequence and lets the senior screw up to put the senior in "his place" is not being obedient, and furthermore is being disloyal to the unit and to the troops. A senior who does not learn from and take heed of good advice/warnings from his subordinates is a damn fool, destined for a short tenure as a military officer.
In your anecdote, your first mistake was to joke about your own competence/confidence. That does NOT mean you should not be self-deprecating, humble, or unwilling to learn. But if a young leader publicly calls his competence/confidence into question why should his subordinates follow him into combat, where even if he does everything right, someone may die. An officer's integrity, competence, and authority are not appropriate subject matter for that officer's humor. For his subordinates it will most definitely be a subject for their humor. As long as it doesn't take place with intent to insult the officer to his face, so what.
Had an NCO/SNCO in my chain of command publicly or privately questioned the legitimacy of my authority when I issued a legal order, there would have been a private, short, one-sided conversation with that NCO/SNCO locked at the position of attention. I would say
"Petty Officer ______ this is your one and only warning. The standard is immediate, intelligent obedience. If you believe there are unintended consequences to my order that I have not foreseen, by all means respectfully and tactfully bring them up, as the situation allows. How to do something may be up for debate, my authority is not. Dismissed."
Any response but "Aye, aye sir," an about face and smartly marching off would result in a counseling in his performance jacket. Any "attitude," public or private, at a later date would result in a counseling in his performance jacket. Any further unwarranted breach in following orders would result in a charge sheet.
I would like to address the phrase immediate intelligent obedience. Part and parcel of leadership AND followership is understanding that the senior and/or subordinate may have some information that the other does not. This is particularly true in urgent or impromptu situations [i.e., combat crap sandwich]. A subordinate that does not alert the senior to probable unintended consequence and lets the senior screw up to put the senior in "his place" is not being obedient, and furthermore is being disloyal to the unit and to the troops. A senior who does not learn from and take heed of good advice/warnings from his subordinates is a damn fool, destined for a short tenure as a military officer.
(3)
(0)
LT (Join to see)
Thanks for this response. I agree wholeheartedly. I try to explain it to midshipmen as "respectful intensity". It's the same way you would be expected to correct a safety deficiency (i.e., someone horsing around near a ladderwell, or not wearing hearing protection in an engine room). It's short, purposeful, immediate, and you never talk to them like they're not human.
To reveal a kind of ending to the story, we eventually caught this E-6 skipping shore training (he claimed he was attending a week-long training seminar on the base but had, in reality, spent the week at home when he found out the course was overbooked on the first day). We sent him to NJP; no lost rank, but a fair certainty that CPO would never be in his future. My LCPO was relieved and kicked off the ship a few months later for fraternization with an E-5 in an adjacent division. It was a tough first tour for me as an ensign. However, despite the shortcomings I've mentioned here, the division always performed well and never suffered any other major issues. The LCPO had mentored me in a ton of other great ways that made me a better officer. Nothing, in the end, was simple.
To reveal a kind of ending to the story, we eventually caught this E-6 skipping shore training (he claimed he was attending a week-long training seminar on the base but had, in reality, spent the week at home when he found out the course was overbooked on the first day). We sent him to NJP; no lost rank, but a fair certainty that CPO would never be in his future. My LCPO was relieved and kicked off the ship a few months later for fraternization with an E-5 in an adjacent division. It was a tough first tour for me as an ensign. However, despite the shortcomings I've mentioned here, the division always performed well and never suffered any other major issues. The LCPO had mentored me in a ton of other great ways that made me a better officer. Nothing, in the end, was simple.
(2)
(0)
Sgt George Lawrence
Right or wrong, I always respected and admired mustangs more than most others. Not only to have humbled themselves in enduring and completing OCS and TBS after already having completed enlisted boot camp, but for understanding the enlisted experience having lived it. Semper Fi.
(0)
(0)
When I became a chef, I fired a cook at random to establish dominance. All the other cooks fell in line.
(2)
(0)
COL (Join to see)
I highly recommend the Boundaries series of books....authored by J Townsend and H Cloud. Start with book by said name then read Boundaries for Leaders and Having That Difficult Discussion and Leading From your Gut...Books by John Maxwell helped me grow as a leader also. I wish my cadre had given me these before my commission. Military leadership is not civilian leadership because your actions and words have the weight of law ( Specifically UCMJ). Following orders is not a matter of choice unless they are illegal or unethical. Decisions made in a moment of crisis to save lives and the ability to make them and have them followed is absolutely crucial in the military....not about seniority or pride or likeability. Good leaders will never be liked by everyone and those with true integrity that hold themselves and others accountable even less so...officers and NCOs who truly care about their folks must have clear boundaries to protect themselves and their people from harm when crises occur. Don't get drunk with them, talk about your marital/intimacy problems with them or let them unload theirs on you...that is what best friends are for or peers or chaplains.
Thanks for letting me add my 2 cents :)
Thanks for letting me add my 2 cents :)
(3)
(0)
LT (Join to see)
COL (Join to see) - Great feedback, thank you. It reminds me of a quote I heard once: "I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everyone."
(2)
(0)
Mustangs always got respect, imo it was well earned. This is where maybe the Sr NCOs failed by not putting out the word. Your a noob O1 not a noob to the Navy, world of difference.
(1)
(0)
The responsibility of leadership is that you're there to earn respect, not friendship.
(1)
(0)
This doesn't really answer the question, but it does, in a way...Don't let them get too comfortable.
I made it very clear there was a difference in personal and professional. My Soldiers could always come and talk to me personally - behind closed doors, and when the mission permitted (usually during breaks or after hours). If they wanted to talk to Casey, instead of SFC O'Mally, they had to let me know, and we could figure out when a good time was. Any personal issue that was big enough that it could not wait for a convenient time to be discussed was no longer personal, it was now professional, because it obviously impacted mission readiness.
I also made it clear that if their personal problem required a professional solution (i.e. they reported a sexual assault, which I am REQUIRED to report, or crimes, or other issues which actually impacted mission), I would counsel them as Casey, but I would absolutely act on it as SFC O'Mally.
Aside from that, in my professional capacity, I always made sure that my Soldiers understood that I issued both orders and suggestions, and there was a definitive tone of voice used for each. Orders were not up for debate (but my immediate subordinates (i.e. not random private) could talk to me offline and see if there was a better way, or let me know why it was a bad idea). Suggestions, on the other hand, WERE open for debate, but I ultimately had the last call.
Additonally, whenever possible, I didn't make the decision, and pushed it down the chain as far as I could. There is no reason I have to tell a Soldier where to eat lunch, or which college to enroll in. I can offer advice, when asked, but utlimately, I preferred to give the Soldier (and first line leader) as much personal authority and responsibility as I could, so that when I DID issue orders, they knew it was because I was serious, and not just trying to run every aspect of their lives.
Finally, I tried real hard to participate ion projects, events, and activities in which one of my subordinates was in charge. If one of my squads is going out to do some individual training on (for instance) first aid, I would tag along as a trainee. I would let that squad leader run the training, with no interference from me (as long as he wasn't training the wrong procedures, like using CPR to treat choking), and just be "one of the guys." This helped to A) keep the squad leaders on their toes, because they never knew if I was going to show up to training, B) let the Privates know that I was paying attention and cared about the training they got, and C) let everyone see that I was not a control freak and was humble enough to be given instruction by my subordinates.
I believe that through that combination, I was able to show that I was approachable, but professional. I never had any issues of subordinates trying to undermine or ignore me (aside from one, but that was an individual issue - he ignored EVERYONE, and was eventually chapterred out of the Army). I also consistently had Soldiers willing to come to me with both personal and professional problems, and subordinates discussing planning or execution shortfalls in a professional manner both before and after mission execution.
That is not to say everything was perfect - there WERE heated conversations from time to time. There were a couple cases where I found out about problems too late because the Soldiers didn't know yet if they could come to me (all of those were when I was new to a position and to the Soldiers). But, for the most part, it seemed to walk a good line between being approachable and being "in charge."
I made it very clear there was a difference in personal and professional. My Soldiers could always come and talk to me personally - behind closed doors, and when the mission permitted (usually during breaks or after hours). If they wanted to talk to Casey, instead of SFC O'Mally, they had to let me know, and we could figure out when a good time was. Any personal issue that was big enough that it could not wait for a convenient time to be discussed was no longer personal, it was now professional, because it obviously impacted mission readiness.
I also made it clear that if their personal problem required a professional solution (i.e. they reported a sexual assault, which I am REQUIRED to report, or crimes, or other issues which actually impacted mission), I would counsel them as Casey, but I would absolutely act on it as SFC O'Mally.
Aside from that, in my professional capacity, I always made sure that my Soldiers understood that I issued both orders and suggestions, and there was a definitive tone of voice used for each. Orders were not up for debate (but my immediate subordinates (i.e. not random private) could talk to me offline and see if there was a better way, or let me know why it was a bad idea). Suggestions, on the other hand, WERE open for debate, but I ultimately had the last call.
Additonally, whenever possible, I didn't make the decision, and pushed it down the chain as far as I could. There is no reason I have to tell a Soldier where to eat lunch, or which college to enroll in. I can offer advice, when asked, but utlimately, I preferred to give the Soldier (and first line leader) as much personal authority and responsibility as I could, so that when I DID issue orders, they knew it was because I was serious, and not just trying to run every aspect of their lives.
Finally, I tried real hard to participate ion projects, events, and activities in which one of my subordinates was in charge. If one of my squads is going out to do some individual training on (for instance) first aid, I would tag along as a trainee. I would let that squad leader run the training, with no interference from me (as long as he wasn't training the wrong procedures, like using CPR to treat choking), and just be "one of the guys." This helped to A) keep the squad leaders on their toes, because they never knew if I was going to show up to training, B) let the Privates know that I was paying attention and cared about the training they got, and C) let everyone see that I was not a control freak and was humble enough to be given instruction by my subordinates.
I believe that through that combination, I was able to show that I was approachable, but professional. I never had any issues of subordinates trying to undermine or ignore me (aside from one, but that was an individual issue - he ignored EVERYONE, and was eventually chapterred out of the Army). I also consistently had Soldiers willing to come to me with both personal and professional problems, and subordinates discussing planning or execution shortfalls in a professional manner both before and after mission execution.
That is not to say everything was perfect - there WERE heated conversations from time to time. There were a couple cases where I found out about problems too late because the Soldiers didn't know yet if they could come to me (all of those were when I was new to a position and to the Soldiers). But, for the most part, it seemed to walk a good line between being approachable and being "in charge."
(1)
(0)
LT (Join to see)
Thank you for this response. I'll definitely take it back to my folks.
I respect your ability to segregate yourself as necessary for different tasks and competing concerns. I don't think I ever sat with someone as "Cody", but I did have numerous instances where a Sailor of mine would come to me with a problem -- in most cases these were issues that, if left to fester, would have potentially destroyed the Sailor's ability to operate in the division -- because they believed I was the only person who would care. Then, of course, some would look to take advantage of that and push their boundaries just to make themselves feel important or tough. Handling the latter appropriately without losing the former is what you're describing perfectly.
I respect your ability to segregate yourself as necessary for different tasks and competing concerns. I don't think I ever sat with someone as "Cody", but I did have numerous instances where a Sailor of mine would come to me with a problem -- in most cases these were issues that, if left to fester, would have potentially destroyed the Sailor's ability to operate in the division -- because they believed I was the only person who would care. Then, of course, some would look to take advantage of that and push their boundaries just to make themselves feel important or tough. Handling the latter appropriately without losing the former is what you're describing perfectly.
(0)
(0)
There were several times I brought a disrespectful serviceman/woman to my desk, laid out a DA 4845 Counselling form and pen, and told said soldier there were two ways we could handle their attitude. The second way was for them to have a Federal Felony conviction and find themselves on the street with no benefits, including their GI Bill. Couched in those terms, they usually saw the light.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next