Man the hoses!

<p>

</p>

<p>From the comments of the few Mids that have weighed in here, this seems to be the most fundamental issue, really the only one that is of any concern to me and that is the notion they expressed in a number of posts in which they felt after following orders with enthusiasm, there does not appear to be any interest in allowing them to question, comment, and critique, through any channels, let alone the appropriate ones. If that feeling is shared by the majority of the brigade then the goals and objectives of the Supt will not be met, unless of course that was his goal all along, to unite the brigade against these changes…
I’ve commanded men and women as an Officer and still lead them as a CEO. There are precious few times outside the insanity of combat when some level of explanation isn’t appropriate or beneficial. You can choose to have people focus on the job at hand once they have at least some understanding of your objectives, even if they don’t agree, or you can say nothing about what you are trying to accomplish, choose not to engage them and allow them to waste time and energy speculating. In the end you will never be successful instilling the value of teamwork without trust and respect and you don’t get there without appropriate levels of communication.</p>

<p>There was a reason, a valid reason.</p>

<p>I’m still waiting to hear what the “valid reason” was for the screw up.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>USNA69… located the article I was referring to. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I have my own opinion (post #4 on this thread)- but am ready to get your “read” as to where the finger is being pointed.</p>

<p>"There are many times that an explanation is neither appropriate or beneficial. I would say that a new Supt., bent on major changes, would consider this one of them. "</p>

<p>But this is one of my fundamental problems with this entire situation…the Supe DID think that some explanation was appropriate as he sent a letter to the parents of current Mids with his reasoning/explanation/theories (call it what you will). Was he just paying lip-service? Why did he send a letter at all if he didn’t think one was necessary? Was he just being polite? I would think that he would have more important things to do than to prepare a meaningless missive to a group that he doesn’t answer to. </p>

<p>At the time I read the letter, now several weeks ago, I was unimpressed with his logic. I continue to be underwhelmed with the decisions that are being made and their connection to what the STATED purpose was for the need for the changes. There are too many contradictions between what is being “said” and what is being done. </p>

<p>Case in point - The Academy is the face of the Navy, but Mids are not to be used for PR? So we just showcase the Yard without showing any Mids? Our grads need to be able to step into a leadership role the day after graduation, making decisions not only for themselves but for the troops under them, but we can’t allow them to make the simplest decisions regarding how to manage their time, even as a Firstie, and have mandatory study time for all?</p>