Posted on Apr 14, 2015
What are your thoughts on Anna Granville's (a Navy officer) reasons for resigning?
85.1K
310
163
8
8
0
NOTE: The photo of the Naval Officer attached to the original taskandpurpose blog post is not a photograph of the author of the taskandpurpose blog post, as is noted on the photo at taskandpurpose. This has been brought to my attention by a colleague of the officer in the photo, who is currently serving. I can't seem to get RallyPoint to remove the photo except by removing the URL to the blog, so I'm removing the URL. The photo does not add anything to this discussion, so I'm removing it.
This young Navy officer's reasons for resigning seem applicable across the Services.
1. Promotions are based more on “hitting the wickets” than exemplary performance.
2. Unsustainable strain on your personal relationships.
3. The military is a homogeneous, anti-intellectual organization.
4. Ownership of self.
On point 3, she writes: "When I was a week into my first deployment, I was preparing my slides for a watch turnover brief as the assistant chiefs of staff all filed in. A fellow junior officer, whose watch station was adjacent to mine, muttered, “Man, the Navy has a never-ending supply of middle-aged white men.” And she was absolutely right. The majority of senior military leaders are white, Christian, conservative men with engineering degrees from a service academy, masters’ degrees from a war college, who grew up middle-class or privileged and whose wives do not have a career outside the home. There is nothing wrong with any of this — indeed, this is probably the profile of most executives in America. But this also means there’s a lack of diversity of ideas, a resistance to alternative ways of thinking, and the lethality of group think."
How do those she describes here (senior officers) respond? Is Service homogeneity a problem, and does it create a "lethality of group think" and a "resistance to alternate ways of thinking"?
You can find the article at taskandpurpose; it is titled "4 Reasons I Am Resigning My Commission As A Naval Officer."
http://taskandpurpose.com
This young Navy officer's reasons for resigning seem applicable across the Services.
1. Promotions are based more on “hitting the wickets” than exemplary performance.
2. Unsustainable strain on your personal relationships.
3. The military is a homogeneous, anti-intellectual organization.
4. Ownership of self.
On point 3, she writes: "When I was a week into my first deployment, I was preparing my slides for a watch turnover brief as the assistant chiefs of staff all filed in. A fellow junior officer, whose watch station was adjacent to mine, muttered, “Man, the Navy has a never-ending supply of middle-aged white men.” And she was absolutely right. The majority of senior military leaders are white, Christian, conservative men with engineering degrees from a service academy, masters’ degrees from a war college, who grew up middle-class or privileged and whose wives do not have a career outside the home. There is nothing wrong with any of this — indeed, this is probably the profile of most executives in America. But this also means there’s a lack of diversity of ideas, a resistance to alternative ways of thinking, and the lethality of group think."
How do those she describes here (senior officers) respond? Is Service homogeneity a problem, and does it create a "lethality of group think" and a "resistance to alternate ways of thinking"?
You can find the article at taskandpurpose; it is titled "4 Reasons I Am Resigning My Commission As A Naval Officer."
http://taskandpurpose.com
Culture
Commission
Officers
Edited 9 y ago
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 53
4
4
0
With this attitude I wonder how she thinks she will make it in corporate America?
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
I disagree with 3. I agree with 1 and 2. Not 4. I think she was not cut out for the military, and a applaud her service and candor.
I can't speak for the Navy, but in the Army encourage initiative, and creative solutions, but we also need Leaders to use the tools and systems that we use, teach and train, and that have stood the test of time.
I can't speak for the Navy, but in the Army encourage initiative, and creative solutions, but we also need Leaders to use the tools and systems that we use, teach and train, and that have stood the test of time.
(4)
(0)
COL Charles Williams
MAJ (Join to see) .... Anti-intellectual part. The homogeneous issue is another issue we have been working on for years, since I came in... Women started at USMA in 1976... Desegragation in the military began in 1948... But we still have ground to gain in that area.
(0)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
Homogeneous can be an issue, but not one we really have control over short of resuming the draft. Quite frankly, white, christian males make up a large part of society. It's no surprise then that they make up a large part of the volunteer military. However, we are a far cry from the segregated military of WW2.
(3)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
LTC Paul Labrador COL Charles Williams Gentlemen: I acknowledge that the Army is working on its diversity issues. But it isn't doing such a great job, and there's much work to be done: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/04/14/black-officers-army/25729125/
(1)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
LTC Paul Labrador COL Charles Williams Gentlemen: I acknowledge that the Army is working on its diversity issues. But it isn't doing such a great job, and there's much work to be done: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/04/14/black-officers-army/25729125/
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
When I was a younger lad, I had conversations with other Soldiers in reference to how CSM _____ or LTC _____ got (noticed I didn't use the word achieve) their rank. Whether the general thought was because she's a female, he's someone's son, etc. And until the Army takes away photos, names, sex, and the first three numbers of the Soldier's SSN there will always be that view. Here's the fix:
1. No picture necessary! A person of rank (CSM in the case of senior enlisted promotion boards) from another unit "certifies" that the Soldier is fit and their uniform is squared away.
2. Instead of a name or first three numbers of a SSN being on any of the paperwork, the promotion packet gets a number. Ensure there’s no reference to her or him on any of the evaluations.
3. The board is given explicit instructions on what kind of Soldier that particular branch wants to promote, i.e., Soldier’s with 24 months of Squad Leader time, 100 hours of volunteer service, at least 30 hours of college complete, etc.
I know that this also isn’t the perfect system (CSM’s talk and one could ‘hook up’ the other’s Soldiers) but it would alleviate some of the possible misconceptions.
1. No picture necessary! A person of rank (CSM in the case of senior enlisted promotion boards) from another unit "certifies" that the Soldier is fit and their uniform is squared away.
2. Instead of a name or first three numbers of a SSN being on any of the paperwork, the promotion packet gets a number. Ensure there’s no reference to her or him on any of the evaluations.
3. The board is given explicit instructions on what kind of Soldier that particular branch wants to promote, i.e., Soldier’s with 24 months of Squad Leader time, 100 hours of volunteer service, at least 30 hours of college complete, etc.
I know that this also isn’t the perfect system (CSM’s talk and one could ‘hook up’ the other’s Soldiers) but it would alleviate some of the possible misconceptions.
(3)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
1SG Michael Hargis 1SG: I like your ideas. I really do find it odd that we still have photos in our personnel files--the idea of an official photo being included in a promotion packet seems really out-of-line. I also like the thought of getting rid of names and SSNs on promotion files; I'm sure the Army could just find a way to blot this stuff out. On point 3, though, officers compete against other officers in groups of branches (Maneuver, Fires & Effects (MFE), Operations Support (OS) and Force Sustainment (FS)), we'd need these branches to agree on what is most important for their grouping. Thanks for identifying a potential pathway to a more merit-based promotion system. Think the Army will ever change, though?
(2)
(0)
1SG Michael Hargis
Sir I’m on my third PT uniform; third generation of helmet (no I’m not old enough for steel pots); and this is the second time I’ve seen the Army shrink. So yes the Army can change. Change is painful, and no one likes it, but if you can’t handle change you’ve got to go.
I know time is precious, but I believe that at least a mock board just to test this would be interesting.
Sorry for the double post, I failed to add my segue at the beginning of this thread.
I know time is precious, but I believe that at least a mock board just to test this would be interesting.
Sorry for the double post, I failed to add my segue at the beginning of this thread.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
1SG Michael Hargis Fair points--I'm with you, as I'm on my third PT uniform, too. The institution can change-but if you recall all the whining about the black beret and etc, even small change is extremely difficult. But the mock board is a good idea---run a mock board with an already conducted board, using your suggested methodology, and see if the results are different (they would be, just by removing the photo).
(2)
(0)
3
3
0
I completely understand what she is referring to. I have seen a number of things in my army career and my previous career as a contractor for the usaf. I think the examples she gives and way she goes about explaining them leave a little to be desired, though.
For those who think homogeneous thought is good, is that not the cause of, that's what we've always done? If you don't have a person to challenge you always think you have the best plan. I blew the minds of several civ and s/g-6 personnel when I told them a plausible way to remove classified data via 2 different methods, neither of which would be detected. There is still no fix. But hey, why fix it when there hasn't actually been any removal this way. Well, at least not known.
For the white middle aged man remark, I have watched black females who have large bust and butt fail pushups on the apft because their arms physically could not get parallel to the ground without lifting them off the ground. The opposite can also be true. The politicians have fostered an environment where people are afraid to correct or challenge a person of a different race or sex on hair regs or shaving profiles or a number of other issues.
The relationship thing, eh, you know that going in. The services all have their own programs for those that have been in a bit to allow family accommodations.
I know of at least 1 col and 1 MG that have no business leading any troops. One used to call cpts fatty and yell at them come on fatty. Hurry up fatty.
One of the most discouraging things is trying to get simple things done. Processes have caused things to become so convaluted that people don't bother. I was told the other day that I am going to be formally counseled for theft because our 3 shop was out of toner despite 4 months of requesting more. When I was at the company for something else I asked someone about toner and they led me to 3 cases that the supply guy knew nothing about. I took what our shop needed and when I was back 48 hours later, told the supply folks I took it. Apparently, not telling them is the right thing to do, since they didn't even know it existed.
Working with gs civ can be a terrible, ok, or great experience. Once they get past probation some don't care. I interact with 2 that think they are my boss. They aren't even close. There are 2 that work with them that will do my job for me if I simply ask. I don't, but still.
I know this may seem like a rant, but I'm not unhappy. There are problems in the institution and the senior leadership knows. They want to fix it, but either don't know how or are unable for one reason or another. I have been changing things and Implemented several changes to processes in the 5 months I've been in my new section. Things are improving by others as well. It really takes the effort of the whole. One person can sink the ship of they are allowed
For
For those who think homogeneous thought is good, is that not the cause of, that's what we've always done? If you don't have a person to challenge you always think you have the best plan. I blew the minds of several civ and s/g-6 personnel when I told them a plausible way to remove classified data via 2 different methods, neither of which would be detected. There is still no fix. But hey, why fix it when there hasn't actually been any removal this way. Well, at least not known.
For the white middle aged man remark, I have watched black females who have large bust and butt fail pushups on the apft because their arms physically could not get parallel to the ground without lifting them off the ground. The opposite can also be true. The politicians have fostered an environment where people are afraid to correct or challenge a person of a different race or sex on hair regs or shaving profiles or a number of other issues.
The relationship thing, eh, you know that going in. The services all have their own programs for those that have been in a bit to allow family accommodations.
I know of at least 1 col and 1 MG that have no business leading any troops. One used to call cpts fatty and yell at them come on fatty. Hurry up fatty.
One of the most discouraging things is trying to get simple things done. Processes have caused things to become so convaluted that people don't bother. I was told the other day that I am going to be formally counseled for theft because our 3 shop was out of toner despite 4 months of requesting more. When I was at the company for something else I asked someone about toner and they led me to 3 cases that the supply guy knew nothing about. I took what our shop needed and when I was back 48 hours later, told the supply folks I took it. Apparently, not telling them is the right thing to do, since they didn't even know it existed.
Working with gs civ can be a terrible, ok, or great experience. Once they get past probation some don't care. I interact with 2 that think they are my boss. They aren't even close. There are 2 that work with them that will do my job for me if I simply ask. I don't, but still.
I know this may seem like a rant, but I'm not unhappy. There are problems in the institution and the senior leadership knows. They want to fix it, but either don't know how or are unable for one reason or another. I have been changing things and Implemented several changes to processes in the 5 months I've been in my new section. Things are improving by others as well. It really takes the effort of the whole. One person can sink the ship of they are allowed
For
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Now she is going to find out how much that intellectual aspect is overstated in the civilian world. LTC Stephen C. 1LT L S
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Honestly it sounds like a lot of whining on her part. Here's my thoughts:
1. I think she was somewhat of a point on this. If seniority is more important than performance in the Navy then there needs to be a change. While the Army system has it's own flaws, this is not an issue we deal with. As an Army Officer, you're ranked against all of your peers within your formation regardless of duty position. In other words it is very possible for a junior 1LT in an XO position to get a better overall rating than a senior 1LT Mortar PL. The Navy could easily transition to such a system.
2. She joined the Navy, which is arguably the hardest on personal relationships. There's a reason it's called service, not employment. It's hard for me to feel sorry for her on this.
3. This reeks of political correctness. While there is certainly a disproportionate representation of some demographics within our force, diversity for diversity's sake alone does not increase our effectiveness or lethality. Furthermore, as opportunities for ethnic minorities and females continue to improve this perceived "problem" will likely address itself. It will just take time. Until then we need the best person for the job, even if that creates a force led largely by white males. I agree the other issues are a problem, but they're arguably just as prevalent in corporate America as well.
4. Sounds like the military wasn't for her. I'm glad she moved on.
1. I think she was somewhat of a point on this. If seniority is more important than performance in the Navy then there needs to be a change. While the Army system has it's own flaws, this is not an issue we deal with. As an Army Officer, you're ranked against all of your peers within your formation regardless of duty position. In other words it is very possible for a junior 1LT in an XO position to get a better overall rating than a senior 1LT Mortar PL. The Navy could easily transition to such a system.
2. She joined the Navy, which is arguably the hardest on personal relationships. There's a reason it's called service, not employment. It's hard for me to feel sorry for her on this.
3. This reeks of political correctness. While there is certainly a disproportionate representation of some demographics within our force, diversity for diversity's sake alone does not increase our effectiveness or lethality. Furthermore, as opportunities for ethnic minorities and females continue to improve this perceived "problem" will likely address itself. It will just take time. Until then we need the best person for the job, even if that creates a force led largely by white males. I agree the other issues are a problem, but they're arguably just as prevalent in corporate America as well.
4. Sounds like the military wasn't for her. I'm glad she moved on.
(3)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
MAJ (Join to see)
1. We clearly have different experiences in the Army. Yes, we're ranked against our peers according to rank. But senior 1LT/CPTs/MAJ/LTC/etc have an advantage in evaluations over their junior peers. Perhaps not so much at the 2LT/1LT level, but clearly at the CPT/MAJ/LTC/COL level, especially now that not everyone is getting promoted to O-5.
2. Yep.
3. Disagree--diversity does increase effectiveness. Also this: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/04/14/black-officers-army/25729125/.
1. We clearly have different experiences in the Army. Yes, we're ranked against our peers according to rank. But senior 1LT/CPTs/MAJ/LTC/etc have an advantage in evaluations over their junior peers. Perhaps not so much at the 2LT/1LT level, but clearly at the CPT/MAJ/LTC/COL level, especially now that not everyone is getting promoted to O-5.
2. Yep.
3. Disagree--diversity does increase effectiveness. Also this: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/04/14/black-officers-army/25729125/.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
Sir,
1. You're probably right on the point of differing experiences. I've seen a number of Soldiers on the enlisted side make E7 in under 10 years. Likewise I've met a number of MAJs, LTCs, and COLs who were below the zone promotions. My wife's former Battalion Commander made COL in a little over 20 years. I was given a command as a 1LT over a number of 1LTs senior to me, as well as a number of CPTs. Like I said in my original post, our system is far from perfect. But seniority seems to at least play less of a role than what she's describing.
3. I found these excerpts from your article relevant to the discussion:
"Among the issues confronting the Army: channeling young black officers into combat fields when many have traditionally favored fields such as logistics."
"'This is a long term effort for the Army," Frost said. "Progress cannot be accurately measured in one year.'"
At MCCC we had a similar discussion about underrepresentation of black enlisted Soldiers in Combat Arms. Perhaps we should be asking why Soldiers of certain ethnic groups are drawn to one career field over another? Especially since it is well known that progression to our senior ranks typically requires a specific career path.
I think it is also important to look at the demographics in a historical context. We like to compare our leadership demographics to our current population, when in fact it takes 20-30 years to progress to our senior ranks. A more accurate comparison would be our leadership demographics v. the population demographics of 1985. In a time where college was much less common, how many ethnic minorities even held the requisite degrees to commission? My original statement seems in-line with BG Frost's statement. To build a diverse force is going to take time. I would be willing to bet by 2050 this will largely be a non-issue. In the meantime I find promoting on any basis other than the best qualified individual problematic. Our Soldiers deserve the best leadership available, regardless of gender/ethnicity/orientation etc.
MAJ (Join to see)
1. You're probably right on the point of differing experiences. I've seen a number of Soldiers on the enlisted side make E7 in under 10 years. Likewise I've met a number of MAJs, LTCs, and COLs who were below the zone promotions. My wife's former Battalion Commander made COL in a little over 20 years. I was given a command as a 1LT over a number of 1LTs senior to me, as well as a number of CPTs. Like I said in my original post, our system is far from perfect. But seniority seems to at least play less of a role than what she's describing.
3. I found these excerpts from your article relevant to the discussion:
"Among the issues confronting the Army: channeling young black officers into combat fields when many have traditionally favored fields such as logistics."
"'This is a long term effort for the Army," Frost said. "Progress cannot be accurately measured in one year.'"
At MCCC we had a similar discussion about underrepresentation of black enlisted Soldiers in Combat Arms. Perhaps we should be asking why Soldiers of certain ethnic groups are drawn to one career field over another? Especially since it is well known that progression to our senior ranks typically requires a specific career path.
I think it is also important to look at the demographics in a historical context. We like to compare our leadership demographics to our current population, when in fact it takes 20-30 years to progress to our senior ranks. A more accurate comparison would be our leadership demographics v. the population demographics of 1985. In a time where college was much less common, how many ethnic minorities even held the requisite degrees to commission? My original statement seems in-line with BG Frost's statement. To build a diverse force is going to take time. I would be willing to bet by 2050 this will largely be a non-issue. In the meantime I find promoting on any basis other than the best qualified individual problematic. Our Soldiers deserve the best leadership available, regardless of gender/ethnicity/orientation etc.
MAJ (Join to see)
(1)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
MAJ (Join to see) Thanks for the comment. I also find promoting based on anything other than merit to be problematic. Your comments on the demographic issues the Army faces appear well-informed and well-reasoned. As BG Frost and you both assert, this is a long-term problem. 2050 seems a long way off, but when one considers that the CJCS in 2050 is probably currently just about to commission or recently commissioned, maybe 2050 isn't that far off.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
While her reasons are just that, they do bring up an interesting topic that needs addressing. One book I have found that takes a good look at the issue of why the military is losing so many good leaders is Tim Kane's Bleeding Talent. It dispels a lot of the myths, and while it doesn't have all the answers, it is a good starting place for a discussion and has some interesting proposals that are doomed because they make too much sense.
(3)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
LTC (Join to see) Agreed. Kane's book and the article in The Atlantic based on the book seem to have opened up this discussion, and four or so years later, we're finally starting to see senior leaders (in the Army, by the CSA and HRC leaders) and SECDEF and others address the broken talent management system in the DoD. I also agree--ideas like Kane proposes are doomed, not only because they make too much sense, but because the system is strong, and senior leaders completely buy-in to the system.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
In the end, I wish her the best. I had to separate nearly 100 Soldiers from Army AIT in only one and a half years and I shook every one of their hands and wished them the most life had to give. With time comes experience and with experience comes wisdom.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I am going to go against the grain here...
I read her write up as "here are a few things I noticed about the Navy, and have decided to try something else..." If the Navy wants to make changes, it will, or, as indicated here, can tell her to pound sand...
1. These are HER reasons...I find it funny that you dont like her reasons, or..that you dont like HER for her reasons.
2. If she wants to have her own life and make her own career and life decisions, who can argue with that?? Some people get tired of the lifestyle.
3. Groupthink - how many times are we told something along the lines of "dont question regulations/policies, just follow them?? Was the black beret or the ACU a good idea??
I read her write up as "here are a few things I noticed about the Navy, and have decided to try something else..." If the Navy wants to make changes, it will, or, as indicated here, can tell her to pound sand...
1. These are HER reasons...I find it funny that you dont like her reasons, or..that you dont like HER for her reasons.
2. If she wants to have her own life and make her own career and life decisions, who can argue with that?? Some people get tired of the lifestyle.
3. Groupthink - how many times are we told something along the lines of "dont question regulations/policies, just follow them?? Was the black beret or the ACU a good idea??
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google