Conference repair::reserve_forces

    Re .0:
    
    Given that my exposure to the seagoing side of the Navy is limited
    and also given that my US Army background may color the following
    opinions, I thought I'd offer my 2 cents.
    
    Just to amplify a little bit on my comments in another note about
    my last Reserve unit, I was one of those Chiefs who liked to leave
    my people alone to solve problems, both on ACDUTRA or during drills. If
    they needed me I tried to be available but if I was in the way I
    took the hint and got the heck out of there.
    
    I did it on purpose for practical reasons. On deployments, our
    equipment was usually not adjacent to our berthing area, often with
    a not-so-terrific telephonic link between the two sites (in one
    case the berthing area was 20 miles away). This meant that when the
    day-workers secured (the USN OIC/AOIC and their reserve counterparts),
    the watch supervisor, usually a 2nd Class, had it *all*. If a problem
    arose that required an instant response, that 2nd Class had to be
    ready, in front of the whole "world", to make a decision - good,
    bad, or indifferent - but a decision nonetheless.
    
    Did my approach work? Well, I never got a chance to give it a real
    test (i.e., combat) but I feel given our circumstances and the way
    we operated it was the only possible solution. Would it have worked
    in combat? I can only speculate but again I have to believe it was
    probably as good an approach as any. It certainly gave us 2nd Class
    PO's who had absolutely no reticence about answering questions posed
    to them by senior officers (including Admirals).
    
    Mark
    RMC USNR

    One of the Flight Sergeants in my units maintains that if he is
    firm, fair and friendly, depending on the circumstances, he will
    earn the respect of others.
    He is also a regular with 17 years experience.
    
    The reaction he gets from others indicates some degree of success.
    When he casts his beady eye in anyones' direction and says something,
    he seems to be saying, "Don't mess about, you can do better than
    that"
    
    As they say, you wear your rank but must earn respect.
    
    If I'm to follow someone into battle, in my experience, I'd opt
    for a senior NCO over an officer.
    
    Dave 

    Seems like a little bit of both elements (natural ability and 
    training) are needed to make a good leader.
    
    You can't make a leader out of somebody with no leadership attributes,
    no matter what courses, leadership schools, etc. he or she has been to.
    What are these attributes?  You could make a big list, but I think
    common sense, inner-strength, self discipline, a single minded sense 
    of purpose, self confidence, a moral outlook on one's self and others, 
    honesty and the will to stand up for what's 'right' and back it up with 
    actions would be high on my list.  How do you develop that?
    
    Seems to me that you can take somebody, however, with basic leadership
    attributes like those above and develop this person into a well rounded
    leader through various courses/training AND the old fashion school of
    'hard knocks'.  When it comes down to it, nothing seasons a leader more
    than experience and the great tutor 'Miss Takes' makes.  It tends to
    reinforce positive attributes while weeding out bad habits--or leaders!
    
    Rodger
    NHANG  
    
    

    I've given this a little more thought. It seems to me that the
    full-time military leaders concentrate more on getting the job done
    than worrying about the people doing it. Whereas Civilian leaders
    try to get the job done by looking after the people doing it.
    Maybe this has something to do with the greater freedom felt in
    a civilian job;it's easier to resign from a civvy job than the forces
    from what I've seen.
    However, a good military leader can create a better attitude within
    his/her group than an equivalent civilian leader and group.
    
    Does all this make sense?
    

    I hear that a good First Officer on a ship can make a hell of a
    difference to the morale. Now the First Officer is responsible for
    discipline and, again from what I've heard, the harsher the discipline
    the more respect is earned, or so it seems. 
    Now, prospective First Officers must learn something from their
    training about leading, it can't all be down to talent. 
    
    So what do they learn?

    Re .5:
    
    By "First Officer", I think you mean what we call an XO (Executive
    Officer). I don't have that much sea time under my belt but I have
    seen plenty of XO's ashore. The good ones are usually excellent
    administrators - they have to be because the skipper normally assigns
    them much of the paperwork so he can be free for skipper-type stuff.
    They also provide continuity when the skipper is absent by running
    the unit.
    
    In the US Navy, XO's can be any officer from O-1 (Ensign) to whatever
    depending on the size of the ship/unit. Most of the XO's I saw in
    the Reserves were O-3's or O-4's (Lieutenant or Lieutenant Commander).
    
    FWIW,
    
    Mark
    RMC USNR

    RE:  ;6
    
    In an Aviation Squadron, the XO is more than an Administrator - they
    are the CO designate.  At least that's the way it used to be.
    
    	Bill Tarmey

    
    From my humbled experience aboard ship...A good XO can make a
    difference..The CO has total authority..but depends greatly upon the XO
    to ensure that the policies that the CO puts out are adhered to..
    
    I've always thought that XO's are put into positions of almost a no win
    situation. I've seen XO's that make Capt Queeg of the Caine Mutiny look
    like altar boys. They are second in command and make sure everyone damn
    well knows it.
    
    I've also seen XO's that ensure the Captains orders are followed but do
    not alienate the crew in doing so. They are expected to follow orders..
    but will not "dump" on the crew to satisfy the "ole man".. The XO's
    that in the course of the day will stop and talk to the troops and
    listen are the ones that gain the respect of the crew and though the
    crew may not like or appreciate the orders...will follow them out to
    the best of their ability.
    
    Those that alienate the crew, will ultimately get the job done...But
    have a morale and a half problem. 
    
    I've seen XO's that I felt wanted the crew to be afraid of them..They
    wanted to assert complete authority...It doesn't make for a happy
    crew.. especially on a long cruise. 
    
    The XO is an extention of the Captain...He is his right hand man. He
    carries many responsibilities..But as with a CO...He can be a tyrant or 
    a leader...