CornerTopspacerCornerTop
spacer
clockWednesday, May 23, 2012
Search for Magazine Articles
Magazine Articles
01

September 2011 - Navy
By Raymond J. Torp

“All commanding officers and others in authority are required to show in themselves a good example of virtue, honor, patriotism, and subordination.” Title 10 United States Code Section 5947

Today, social media, a 24-hour news cycle and the blending of work and home have put tremendous pressures on those charged with leading.

Recently, several high profile firings have pundits questioning our Navy’s method for selecting those who command. Our Navy has responded. The CNO has renewed emphasis on the responsibilities of those in command. His memorandum for all prospective commanding officers is titled “The Charge of Command” and can be found on the Web site at http:// www.public.navy.mil/bupers-npc/officer/ Detailing/Documents/CNO%20Charge%20 of%20Command%20Letter%20-%20Signed. pdf.

But this really isn’t anything new. More than a generation ago, then CNO, Admiral James D. Watkins, issued a timeless missive in a similar vein which I share in part:

“My thoughts on the direction I will lead the Navy . . . these thoughts included some general comments on the subject of accountability and responsibility . . . a specific key element which must be understood is the concept of command responsibility.

“Command is the cornerstone upon which navies have been built since man first went to sea . . . command is fundamentally a trinity of authority, responsibility, and accountability . . . the great technological advances of our age have not negated the principles embodied in command.

“The old adage states that ‘authority can be delegated – responsibility cannot.’ The lethality of modern weapons makes the idea of delegating responsibility and accountability away from the commanding officer even more inconceivable . . . to the contrary, this has made the responsibility of command more absolute than at any time in naval history.

“To fully understand the standard of accountability these regulations impose, it must first be recognized that I am not discussing a standard for measuring the criminal responsibility of a commanding officer . . . The absolute responsibility mandated by Navy Regulations necessarily imposes a stricter standard of accountability than the lawyer’s ‘reasonable doubt.’ It is sometimes, as it must be, a harsh standard which may jeopardize promotions and careers. Sanctions for deviations from this standard may take the form of documented professional short-comings noted in reports of fitness, and matters thus detailed are taken into account when an individual is considered for assignment or promotion or entrusted with command . . . it may lead to relief for cause because a senior no longer enjoys that special trust and confidence necessary to a relationship with a subordinate commander . . . it may lead to censure, either officially or as a matter of not-of-record for individual and private contemplation . . . what it most certainly will be continually, however, is a test of the strength of character, judgment, and professional ability of every officer in command. The standard remains immutable, guiding all subject to its terms to that final and most satisfying reward of command – knowledge of having measured up to the most demanding of professional disciplines.

“In summary, I have restated an ancient message. A commander’s responsibility remains absolute, and that commander must, and will, be held accountable for the safety, well-being, and efficiency of his command. This accountability may be exacted in various ways. In some cases, commanders may be called to account in a court of law . . . in all cases, they will be judged by their professional peers – those who have been subjected to, and exalted by, the same stringent requirements of command. Our country, and every Navy man and woman serving at sea or ashore, has the absolute right to expect that our commanding officers will be the finest, and the most responsible, we can provide. I intend to make it so.”–– Admiral James D. Watkins, U.S. Navy.

As commanders, we are held to highest standards. Because command responsibility cannot be delegated, commanders are held accountable for mishaps simply because they are not supposed to happen under good leadership – not because of actual “fault.”

To all of you who command, lead and serve, thank you.

I am pleased to join the AUSN team as your new National VP for Officer Affairs. If you have any comments or suggestions please feel free to contact me at ray.torp@ausn.org.

Actions: E-mail | Permalink |

Post Rating


spacer
spacer
spacer
CornerBottom
Copyright ©2000-2012 Association of the United States Navy. All Rights Reserved.
CornerBottom