Leadership can be toxic (catch all)

[Rifleman]

Moderator's Note

Five threads merged today. There maybe others but I only searched using toxic.(ends)


The CO of 2/508 and his CSM have been relieved in Afghanistan. And the former CO is asking for a lawyer.

Link: http://www.fayobserver.com/Articles/2010/01/22/970220

I feel for the soldiers in the unit most of all.

[Schmedlap]

I was trying to figure out what this is about, so I browsed the comments at the link. I'm now dumber for doing so.

Any idea what this is about?

Just the BC and CSM relieved? No CO or 1SG? Odd.

[Ken White]

No way to tell from that article. Could be a deserved relief, could be totally flaky. Interesting that they hit both the CO and the CSM; I'm not at all sure that treating those two as a package as the Army seems to intend is really very smart. A good CSM gets paid to keep his Boss out of trouble; pack 'em together and the incentive to do that is diluted.

Maybe it's just me but that 'Army Values' foolishness is suspicious... :confused: :rolleyes:

Take a while for the real story to come out. :(

[William F. Owen]

Any idea what this is about?


Just going by the article, it's about "values." It would logically imply that the values of the former CO and CSM were not compatible with those of thier COC or those of the Unit.

I have a nastly feeling you may see this one pick up speed the further it rolls down hill.... :(

[davidbfpo]

For the non-military members, without reading the press report, this quote gives some context from a different unit, with my emphasis:
Yesterday, we had about a third of the battalion return home on two different flights. Seeing four people on those two flights really impacted me. First, our Battalion's Command Sergeant Major returned. He and I had a great working relationship, and probably more important, we are friends. Many folks talk about how lonely command is for senior officers and Non-Commissioned Officers, but (at least from my perspective) I always had a friend that I could talk to about anything, share anything with, and ask for advice from. Working with our Command Sergeant Major has been the highlight of my professional career. He is a great man, a selfless and caring leader, and a great friend.

From:http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/timkarcher (Col. Tim Karcher's latest post injury letter).

Hope that helps.

[jkm_101_fso]

I seriously doubt it's anything tactical...that would be the last thing the CoC command would care about.

My guess: Drinking.

[pjmunson]

I seriously doubt it's anything tactical...that would be the last thing the CoC command would care about.

Tragic and true. How can we fix the CoC's disconnect with what matters?

[jcustis]

Rumors on another board that I frequent point to sexist and racist material popping up on briefing slides. No idea about the validity of that, but the overall tone seemed to be that command climate had become an issue.

Many were quick to decry the toxic EO environment that has cropped up in the Army, but standards are standards. Follow them or spin the wheel I suppose.

[wm]

DoD announced casualty from 2/508 PIR here (http://www.defense.gov/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=13263)

[jkm_101_fso]

DoD announced casualty from 2/508 PIR here (http://www.defense.gov/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=13263)

Terribly sad...but probably unrelated to the BC/CSM issue.

jcustis is probably on the right track.

[Pete]

Could an Army Times subscriber tell us what the current issue says? Right now the website version available to the general public doesn't say a thing.

[jkm_101_fso]

Talked to a buddy. He said LTC Jenio was Steele's BDE S-3 at 3/101...and McChrystal's XO at JSOC.

[bismark17]

I was trying to figure out what this is about, so I browsed the comments at the link. I'm now dumber for doing so.

Isn't that the truth? Another 3 minutes of my life I can't have back....

[NF6]

Lots of speculation out there but we'll all know in the days ahead. I for onr simply hope that the CoC got this one right, and its not something that we'll be hearing about a year from now

[Entropy]

There are a lot of links and analysis on this over at Ink Spots (http://tachesdhuile.blogspot.com/2010/01/what-hell-is-going-on-in-arghandab.html). Interesting stuff.

[former-19Z5OC5]

Maybe it's just me but that 'Army Values' foolishness is suspicious... :confused: :rolleyes:

One thing I found interesting was that apparently an early official statement said the decision had been made "at the highest levels of the Army" but after that comment drew questions about exactly who made the decision, the statement was revised.

I also note that the relief came shortly after LTC Jenio (and presumably his command group and staff) had given a briefing to some visiting congressmen.

Perhaps someone forgot to be politically correct??

[Fuchs]

Not good: CO and CSM relieved

"Not good" is -given the performance of high-ranking officers in recent warfare and procurement- that NATO forces didn't total more than 1,000 sacked colonels and generals since 2002.


I am serious.

[tequila]

This thread over at Tom Ricks' blog is filled with some sordid backbiting (http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/01/25/82nd_airborne_battalion_commander_fired)between representatives of what appears to be the wives of the officers involved. Who knows if this had anything to do with it, but it may be that personality conflicts from back home made their way into theater for some of this.

[Schmedlap]

I've seen speculation / RUMINT in a few locations now that suggest this had something to do with some presentation(s).

You live by the slide, you die by the slide.

[patmc]

Early Bird this morning had this from the Fayetteville Observer: http://www.fayobserver.com/Articles/2010/01/30/972239

Sat Jan 30, 2010
Racial image led to removal of 82nd commanders
By John Ramsey


"A racially offensive PowerPoint slide meant as a joke led to the removal of two 82nd Airborne Division leaders from their positions in Afghanistan this month, an Army official has confirmed."


"The slide - a parody of ubiquitous motivational posters - shows a picture of Michigan State University basketball coach Tom Izzo with his arm wrapped around point guard Mateen Cleaves. Izzo is white; Cleaves is black. The text below the photos reads, "Slavery Reinstated," with smaller letters adding, "Catch yourself a strong one.""

Not sure how I feel about this, if this is the real reason. I sat through enough staff meetings, briefings, and presentations with stupid humor slides that I'm not phased any more. I've included them in briefs I've given, though I wouldn't have put that particular type of slide (which was racist). It was apparently placed by a black soldier in the unit, and the leaders didn't see it until it came up in a briefing. I guess they set the "command climate" allowing crude humor, but this may be over-reacting by the Chain of Command. The Army promoted MAJ Hassan, but is firing 2 senior leaders over a slide they didn't create? Unless they sat in the briefing and clapped and said, "Damn straight, bring slavery back!" or something to that effect, it looks like over-reaction. I hope there is more to the story.

Leaders are responsible for the climate, but they can't prevent the actions of every Soldier in their command. In my S2 shop, my analyst put up a series of military "De-motivation" posters on the wall by his desk. Most were a mix of anti-terrorist or WW2 humor (ie: MAJ Richard Winters, Better than you. Period."} One slide was political, calling out a particular political party, so I told him take that one down. He protested but did, and we left the others, which were funny but not offensive (unless you were a terrorist or in the Navy). MY NCOIC later threw them all out because he thought they were stupid, and the issue was resolved. If the LTC and CSM promoted racist or bigotted views, then removing would be appropriate, but if something offensive came up and they corrected it, move on. I'm sure more info will follow.

[Entropy]

Here's the poster:

http://myspace.roflposters.com/images/rofl/myspace/1210417729344.jpg.%5Broflposters.com%5D.myspace.jp g

There are hundreds of funny spoof motivational posters out there. This is not one of them.

[Schmedlap]

Context isn't everything, but it is very important, imo.

I know of a case that could have appeared similarly offensive if the context were not understood. A Mech Inf CO, who was white, had a gunner who was black. Being the CO's gunner is a demanding job. He frequently joked about the demands of his job, stating more than once that "the CO thinks I'm the damn Hotel November." By that, he meant "HN" which apparently is an acronym for "house nigger" meaning "house slave." After hearing this a few times, one of the guys in the CP who had some artistic skills drew a caricature of the gunner in 18th century slave attire and chains, and a caricature of the CO whipping him (along with the obligatory S&M overtones, since everything in the Army needs to have some sexual innuendo added to it). The gunner found this to be hilarious. The CO was mortified - likely envisioning his career going up in smoke like LTC Jenio's apparently has. I wonder what would have happened if that had been photographed and emailed to BN and put into the Cmd & Staff slides. Without understanding the context, I suspect there would have been an overreaction.

[Ken White]

obviously, the poster maker printed it and knowing what passes for humor in airborne infantry units, I suspect the allegedly black soldier who inserted it in the slide packet though it was off the wall funny -- or, conversely, he could've wanted to get someone in trouble by doing exactly what 'they' told him to do (that, too is an old airborne attribute... :wry: ).

If what apparently occurred is the case -- and we still do not really know for sure -- the message is "Screw up tactically and you may get a bad OER; screw up politically and you WILL be relieved." That's not a message that should be sent.

If used, the slide was wrong and the result will be more wrongs due to the Chain of Command's massive overreaction:

1. The desire to micromanage will be enhanced and slide sets will be checked by five people including at least one Field grade. Co/By/Trp will submit slides to S3 two days prior...

2. Commanders at Bn level, already significantly over managed and showing it, will become even more gun shy...

3. Already unnecessary and overlong briefings will become even more boring.

4. All Staffs will be authorized one additional SFC for slide checking and certification. Accordingly, the senior Scout Squad Leader will serve as Scout Platoon Sergeant and the SFC space formerly allocated will be used to resource the new position on the Staff for Infantry Bns as the pressing need obviously is in that branch. Bns from all other branches will have a space identified for transfer in due course...

5. The rumor that a panel similar to the West - Clark panel which 'investigated' the Nidal Hasan incident at Ft Hood will investigate the use of any 'humor' slides in professional briefings is false (we hope...).

6. Anti-Virus Software maker SlammNTech will announce availability of 'PP Chekist,' their new product that uses data mining to search slide sets for offensive words and phrases. The new software will sell initially in AAFES Exchanges worldwide. :eek:

The first three are real. :mad:

P.S

Tequila is right -- those Commenters are sordid. Embarrassing, too...:rolleyes:

[Rex Brynen]

obviously, the poster maker printed it and knowing what passes for humor in airborne infantry units, I suspect the allegedly black soldier who inserted it in the slide packet though it was off the wall funny -- or, conversely, he could've wanted to get someone in trouble by doing exactly what 'they' told him to do (that, too is an old airborne attribute... :wry: ).

If what apparently occurred is the case -- and we still do not really know for sure -- the message is "Screw up tactically and you may get a bad OER; screw up politically and you WILL be relieved." That's not a message that should be sent.

It occurs to me (with absolutely no evidence at all), however, that the slides might simply have been the powerpoint straw that broke the camel's back--and that there could have been a range of other issues also at play in the decision to relieve them.

[Ken White]

It occurs to me (with absolutely no evidence at all), however, that the slides might simply have been the powerpoint straw that broke the camel's back--and that there could have been a range of other issues also at play in the decision to relieve them.The military justice system is often slammed for giving excessive sentences for minor offenses. That is usually the result of a long term miscreant who has successfully evaded punishment for months or years finally being nailed for something, no matter how petty, in order to make him or her pay for those other crimes... :cool:

Same principle here as you suggest. Could be little more than Boss X being annoyed or even harassed by Subordinate Y and finally being "rid of a meddlesome priest." ;)

Could be a few more serious issues -- but I'd bet not, else there'd likely be a Court Martial... :eek:

Early days. We'll see.

[jkm_101_fso]

I knew it was nothing tactical/combat command related. That would be the last thing anyone cared about.

The sad part is that if this was a unit that performed well, they are sans leadership because of an un-PC foul-up. Will the new CO be PC? You can bet your ass he will. Will he be tactically proficient in this conflict?

I sure hope so.

[Brett Patron]

The military justice system is often slammed for giving excessive sentences for minor offenses. <...snip...> Could be a few more serious issues -- but I'd bet not, else there'd likely be a Court Martial... :eek:

Early days. We'll see.


Unless they actually prefer charges, there is very little LTC Jenio and the CSM can really do. They have to defend a negative, i.e. prove that something that didn't really happen didn't happen (or didn't happen as it was portrayed by a hasty investigation). The only real hope Jenio has is if they bring charges under Court Martial.

I hope they get attorneys well schooled on administrative law. Criminal law experts are great, and are successful in a court-martial situation, but have limited success when their client is being attacked by an OER.

[William F. Owen]

It occurs to me (with absolutely no evidence at all), however, that the slides might simply have been the powerpoint straw that broke the camel's back--and that there could have been a range of other issues also at play in the decision to relieve them.
Likewise knowing nothing, I strongly concur. A popular CO, well liked and supported by his officers should be almost fire-proof, while the reverse is obviously true. It's a stupid slide, but it's not a sacking offence. IMO, it's a coffee-free stand up with the formation commander.

[Infanteer]

Well, between the random scuttlebut on the web and the wives club fighting amongst themselves with pitchforks on Ricks' blog, this is undoubtably something that has been stewing for a while....

[Ken White]

Axe murderers are really sad...

[JarodParker]

Unrelated to the 101st story is A-Stan...

Gates Tries to Get F-35 Program Back on Course
Story (http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/108749/gates-tries-to-get-f35-program-back-on-course)


That study found that the development of the plane could be delayed by two and a half years and cost an extra $16.6 billion if no changes were made. Mr. Gates has also said that he replaced the head of the program, Maj. Gen. David R. Heinz of the Marine Corps, to show that officials would be held accountable “when things go wrong.”

[Infanteer]

Yes - seems to be a popular topic these days....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/02/AR2010020203534.html


A military investigation into an ambush that left nine Americans dead recommends that the Army consider taking disciplinary action against three U.S. commanders who oversaw the 2008 mission to send troops to the remote Afghan outpost, defense officials said Tuesday.

[Steve the Planner]

Wilf:

My Brit Pol/Mil colleague from Baghdad told me that the proper term was: Meeting without Coffee.

Has that changed?

Steve

[William F. Owen]

Wilf:

My Brit Pol/Mil colleague from Baghdad told me that the proper term was: Meeting without Coffee.

Has that changed?


He's right mate. "Without coffee" is correct. I obviously need to re-zero my jargon! :eek:

[Schmedlap]

He's right mate. "Without coffee" is correct. I obviously need to re-zero my jargon! :eek:

Is that what we Americans call an "ass chewing"?

[Infanteer]

In Canada it is called "getting jacked up" or getting a "jacking".

[Kiwigrunt]

We call it performing the hat-less dance. Had to do it once. Lost my cadence. Nearly stepped on the CSM's toes. What a silly performance that was.:wry:

[William F. Owen]

Is that what we Americans call an "ass chewing"?
Indeed, except with the major proviso that we try not to put our mouths or teeth anywhere close to another man's bottom!

[oblong]

http://fayobserver.com/articles/2010/06/11/1003278?sac=Home



Col. Drinkwine wrote in his sworn statement that he never let personal issues creep into his professional evaluations of soldiers.

But two battalion commanders - Lt. Col Frank Jenio and Lt. Col. David Oclander - told Spillman they believe disputes with Dr. Drinkwine were an unstated cause for professional retaliation.

Jenio, who was in charge of 800 troops operating just outside Kandahar, was relieved of command in Afghanistan along with his top enlisted adviser, Cmd. Sgt. Maj. Bert Puckett, on Jan. 13. They were sent home to Fort Bragg for "using poor judgment" that "fostered a command climate that was not consistent with our Army values," an 82nd Airborne Division spokesman said at the time.

The Observer later discovered that racially and sexually offensive PowerPoint slides shown during briefings led to their removal.

Jenio, who declined an interview request, paints a different picture in his sworn statement.

Dr. Drinkwine and Jenio's wife, Sherri, were often at odds, according to multiple statements

Frank Jenio said in his statement that during one heated phone conversation last year, Dr. Drinkwine threatened to have him fired.

Jenio said Col. Drinkwine failed to address the problems his wife was causing and stayed isolated from his subordinates. Dr. Drinkwine would often use the threat of "telling Brian" when she had a disagreement with a family member or soldier, he said, and Col. Drinkwine made matters worse by giving the impression that she had influence over him.

Jenio said in his statement that the need to deal with the FRG challenges nearly every other day took away valuable time he could have been using to focus on the war.

[Infanteer]

http://fayobserver.com/articles/2010/06/11/1003278?sac=Home

I wonder what every soldier and their spouse between the ranks of Private and Major in that Brigade must be thinking as this unfolds.....:wry:

[Ken White]

on their comments and attitudes, mostly involving the Bde Cdr but they are not repeatable on a Family Board. :D

[Uboat509]

In my experience, FRG has always been a hit or miss thing. I have known some that were awesome and others that were nonfunctional or even counter-productive and the reason for either good or bad was always based on the personalities of the wives involved. There Army has created classes and lectures and killed a lot of trees to try to make FRGs into universally functional organizations but none of that matters if the right people are not involved or if the wrong people are. Expecting the commander's wife to always be the head of the FRG is a huge mistake that I have seen over and over. I have seen too many who thought that they wore their husband's rank or didn't have time to run the FRG because of their own career or family or simply just weren't cut out to lead any organization. I have also seen FRGs that had good leaders but were so poorly supported by the other spouses as to be useless. A well functioning FRG is an absolute asset to any unit but a dysfunctional one creates nothing but drama and more problems than it solves.

[Infanteer]

Judging from the above, your comment could be amended as follows:


There Army has created classes and lectures and killed a lot of trees to try to make Units into universally functional organizations but none of that matters if the right people are not involved or if the wrong people are.

[Cavguy]

In my experience, FRG has always been a hit or miss thing. I have known some that were awesome and others that were nonfunctional or even counter-productive and the reason for either good or bad was always based on the personalities of the wives involved. There Army has created classes and lectures and killed a lot of trees to try to make FRGs into universally functional organizations but none of that matters if the right people are not involved or if the wrong people are. Expecting the commander's wife to always be the head of the FRG is a huge mistake that I have seen over and over. I have seen too many who thought that they wore their husband's rank or didn't have time to run the FRG because of their own career or family or simply just weren't cut out to lead any organization. I have also seen FRGs that had good leaders but were so poorly supported by the other spouses as to be useless. A well functioning FRG is an absolute asset to any unit but a dysfunctional one creates nothing but drama and more problems than it solves.

Great points. However, there is a major cultural hurdle to overcome in the officer corps. There is huge informal pressure for the CO's wife to head the FRG. If she doesn't, it is often seen as a "ding" on her husband. You won't find that stated anywhere in print. But it is clearly expected in most cases. My wife refused to head the FRG in my company during its second deployment for several practical and personal reasons. Ultimately it didn't hurt me, but I felt the pressure, and so did she.

Funny thing is she got very involved at our next assignment in spouse activities, and even received TRADOC's highest spouse award. When the pressure wasn't on it was much more "fun".

Bottom line is that it is still "expected", especially as a field grade, that a spouse will head the local FRG. If she does not, the husband usually has to be outstanding in every other respect to compensate.

I think many bad FRGs stem from spouses who grudgingly accept the role, but their heart isn't in it. They do it out of duty/loyalty/guilt, and it reflects in their performance. Pure volunteerism by the "right" sort of people makes a difference.

[Uboat509]

Great points. However, there is a major cultural hurdle to overcome in the officer corps. There is huge informal pressure for the CO's wife to head the FRG. If she doesn't, it is often seen as a "ding" on her husband. You won't find that stated anywhere in print. But it is clearly expected in most cases. My wife refused to head the FRG in my company during its second deployment for several practical and personal reasons. Ultimately it didn't hurt me, but I felt the pressure, and so did she.

Funny thing is she got very involved at our next assignment in spouse activities, and even received TRADOC's highest spouse award. When the pressure wasn't on it was much more "fun".

Bottom line is that it is still "expected", especially as a field grade, that a spouse will head the local FRG. If she does not, the husband usually has to be outstanding in every other respect to compensate.

I think many bad FRGs stem from spouses who grudgingly accept the role, but their heart isn't in it. They do it out of duty/loyalty/guilt, and it reflects in their performance. Pure volunteerism by the "right" sort of people makes a difference.

I had a BC once who wasn't a bad BC as they go. He wasn't the most well liked but he did a lot of good things for the battalion but I doubt that a lot of that was remembered when it came to be OER time. You see, his wife, an Italian national, got nailed in a sting by CID buying alcohol for underage soldiers. She also was just about useless to the FRG. And so it goes...

[Rifleman]

LTG Frank Helmick has barred COL Drinkwine's wife from brigade functions:

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/06/ap_drinkwine_wife_bragg_bct_061110/

http://fayobserver.com/articles/2010/06/11/1006135?sac=Home

Sounds like she was an estrogen bomb in a constant state of explosion. :wry:

So, I'm guessing this doesn't help COL Drinkwine's chances at getting a star? :rolleyes:

[SJPONeill]

Based on the two media reports, regardless of which side one might take, it remains the Colonel's obligation to act upon ANY influences within the Brigade which are detrimentally affecting morale amongst soldiers and/or dependents...

[J Wolfsberger]

Based on the two media reports, regardless of which side one might take, it remains the Colonel's obligation to act upon ANY influences within the Brigade which are detrimentally affecting morale amongst soldiers and/or dependents...

And this from the articles: "Brian Drinkwine dismissed their complaints and told them that the relationship between his wife and their wives was a senior-to-subordinate relationship. Drinkwine repeated that his wife speaks for him." I'd add emphasis, but the whole thing is toxic.

Why hasn't he been relieved?

[Ken White]

Why hasn't he been relieved?Possibly better and perhaps far more important question:

How did he get where he is?

[Entropy]

his wife and their wives was a senior-to-subordinate relationship

Yeah, that guy should be fired. This kind of attitude explains why so few participate in base "wives clubs" anymore.

[J Wolfsberger]

Possibly better and perhaps far more important question:

How did he get where he is?

Agreed.

[Steve Blair]

Possibly better and perhaps far more important question:

How did he get where he is?

I think we know the answer to this one, Ken. Our pet rock of the personnel system strikes again.....:(

[GI Zhou]

No surprises here really and has been going since the dawn of time. From a retired troop's perspective who did his fair share of guard duty at the front gate, many of the officers' wives thought they carried their husband's rank on their shoulders. I have seen the same in Canberra amongst public service wives in Canberra and would expect the State Department and other departments in DC to see similar. It also goes on on private industry. , as well as in large corporations.

The is the (in) famous quote by a base commander at an all ranks base ball who started his speech with 'Officers and their ladies, Senior Non-Commissioned Officers and ther wives and Airmen and their women'. It was safe to say that it was not a happy base.

A lot of this gradually ceased in my time in the Royal Australian Air Force as airmen became mored educated as did their wives. I woked on an operational a front line base where the base training officer was a Corporal who had been to an Ivy League School and ton another wheer the Base Information Technology officer was a Sergeant. Both were highly qualified for their positions with degrees that were higher than most of the officers. At the blunt end in the support bases, politics ruled, and this is where many resignations occured because of the need to save face.

Another case was when a Corporal was mis-diagnosed with a serious fracture of an arm and sent home with some Panadol. The ####e hit the fan the next day when his wife came into the base medical section, threatening to have the nurse concerned reprimanded by the state nursing board, as she was a senior matron in a top local hospital. Fun days in the class ridden military.

[AdamG]

GRAFENWÖHR, Germany — The Army has relieved the commander of the 172nd Infantry Brigade, shortly before the unit intensifies its training for an Afghanistan deployment this summer.

Acting V Corps commander Brig. Gen. Allen W. Batschelet said Tuesday that Col. Frank Zachar was relieved of command on Monday, “… due to loss of confidence in his ability to command.”

Batschelet said there was no specific incident that led the Army to relieve Zachar.

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/outside-the-wire/2011/01/05/ousted-172nd-infantry-brigade-commander-not-liked/

http://www.stripes.com/news/europe/germany/army-relieves-172nd-infantry-brigade-commander-1.130605#disqus_thread

[M.L.]

COL Frank Zachar was relieved of Command of the 172nd Infantry Brigade after just over seven months in command. The reason given by the Acting V Corps commander, BG Allen Batschelet, was:
Loss of confidence in his ability to command... (Curiously, BG Batschelet added)..There weren’t any illegal, immoral or unethical activities.....His (Zachar’s) leadership style wasn’t really effective and over time the command here lost confidence in his ability to command

It very well may be that COL Zachar was relieved for toxic leadership. An article at Military Times asserts that Zachar was not exactly a popular commander with the troops. Some Soldiers, writing anonymously, were very critical of COL Zachar:


He was a monster to work for, unless you were one of his favorites.”

“He took a perverse joy in making life absolutely miserable. It was disgusting and disheartening to experience.”

“Zachar ran his troops into the ground, every morning I would wake up saying to myself ‘today is going to suck’ ”

“I never seen the number of AWOLS, drunk driving incidents, suicides and homicides, and domestic issues in any command as much as I had in his.

There is evidence that toxic leaders not only work, but thrive in the Army. A study entitled TOXIC LEADERSHIP IN THE U.S. ARMY by Colonel Denise F. William from the US Army War College concluded:


]Toxic leadership exists in the U.S. Army, and the Army seems to tolerate it.

Perhaps the most obvious reason, albeit disturbing, is that toxic leaders seem to get the job done, at least in the short-term. The harsher toxic leaders who bear traits the Army values, such as rigid, controlling, enforcing, and confident, but take them to the extreme will find more success. Their superiors are either oblivious to the toxic behavior or, more likely, are so satisfied with the results in terms of mission accomplishment that they choose to overlook the human cost of getting the job done.

From my own experience, I was once told that when students at the Army Command and General Staff College were given an assignment to write on a difficult leadership experience (called the “Crucible” paper), more than 70% wrote on toxic leadership. This would be remarkable in and of itself. What makes it extraordinary is that nearly 100% of the officers in that CGSC class had combat experience. When toxic leadership is a more defining leadership experience than combat, you know you have issues.

Perhaps COL Zachar owed his stellar resume to a long list of previous leaders who were too oblivious to notice that he was a toxic leader, or more likely, deluded themselves into believing that he was a good leader with a “strong” leadership style. The fact that he was relieved is an embarrassment to the colonel. The fact that he made it as far as he did is an indictment of the officer management and leader development system.

The fact that BG Batschelet took a stand and fired the guy – well, that shows that maybe there are good leaders out there after all.

[TAH]

What I read stated that in addition to relieving the Bde Cdr, the Bde Command Sergeant Major was also removed....:confused:

me thinks there is more here that just a "bad" Commander.

[selil]

I believe Col Zacher is on the council but figure he won't comment. I just noticed in all of the linked articles people with self admitted drinking problems, article 15s and other disciplinary hearings were unhappy with the form or method of punishment they received. Well, I'm not to surprised by that. Actually I'm kind of surprised by the number of people who claimed he "drove them to drink". Stress is an input, but what you do with that stress is a choice. I know that there are bad leaders. I'm just kind of surprised to see the kind of comments that are "supporting" the armies decision.

[SWJ Blog]

Army Worries about ‘Toxic Leaders’ in Ranks (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2011/06/army-worries-about-toxic-leade/)

Entry Excerpt:

Army Worries about ‘Toxic Leaders’ in Ranks (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/national-security/army-worries-about-toxic-leaders-in-ranks/2011/06/25/AGThw4kH_story.html?hpid=z1) by Greg Jaffe, Washington Post. BLUF: "A major U.S. Army survey of leadership and morale found that more than 80 percent of Army officers and sergeants had directly observed a “toxic” leader in the last year and that about 20 percent of the respondents said that they had worked directly for one... The survey also found that 97 percent of officers and sergeants had observed an “exceptional leader” within the Army in the past year." The Army defines "toxic leaders" as "commanders who put their own needs first, micro-managed subordinates, behaved in a mean-spirited manner or displayed poor decision making."



--------
Read the full post (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2011/06/army-worries-about-toxic-leade/) and make any comments at the SWJ Blog (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog).
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

[SWJ Blog]

Rooting Out Toxic Leaders (360 Degree Army Evaluations) (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/rooting-out-toxic-leaders-360-degree-army-evaluations)

Entry Excerpt:



--------
Read the full post (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/rooting-out-toxic-leaders-360-degree-army-evaluations) and make any comments at the SWJ Blog (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog).
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

[SFAT]

Interesting article on leadership, discipline, and the morale of fighting men.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2012/08/19/army_survey_finds_only_one_in_four_soldiers_confid ent_in_branchs_future/?s_campaign=MobAppShare_EM


Can some it up in a few of my own words from recent experience:

10 years ago Leaders were punished and reprimanded for looking the other way when deficiencies were observed; Today, leaders or more likely to be punished for doing just the opposite.

In the “Toxic leadership” age, leaders are constantly having to look over their shoulders and in continuous fear of subordinates ganging up on them with threats of IG complaints and pulling the “toxic” card. It’s a damn shame leaders worry more about what an underachieving subordinate will do after an ass chewing, rather than how said subordinate will adapt and overcome.

Leaders young and old have forgotten the witchery of small unit leadership. This, I think, directly contributes to the downfall of discipline and morale.

[Commando Spirit]

Interesting article on leadership, discipline, and the morale of fighting men.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2012/08/19/army_survey_finds_only_one_in_four_soldiers_confid ent_in_branchs_future/?s_campaign=MobAppShare_EM


Can some it up in a few of my own words from recent experience:

10 years ago Leaders were punished and reprimanded for looking the other way when deficiencies were observed; Today, leaders or more likely to be punished for doing just the opposite.

In the “Toxic leadership” age, leaders are constantly having to look over their shoulders and in continuous fear of subordinates ganging up on them with threats of IG complaints and pulling the “toxic” card. It’s a damn shame leaders worry more about what an underachieving subordinate will do after an ass chewing, rather than how said subordinate will adapt and overcome.

Leaders young and old have forgotten the witchery of small unit leadership. This, I think, directly contributes to the downfall of discipline and morale.


Whilst I agree that the current "toxic leadership" issue is of concern, the article does not concern me overly. I'll expand.

If the leader has evidence that a subordiante (I'll come onto this term in a moment!) is underachieving then the "ass chewing" can be rightly defended should the need arise. This, in my mind, is simply one aspect of good management (not leadership).

The leadership should come into play long before the need for the "ass chewing" in the first instance. A function of command, and therefore leadership, is to develop our subordinates and so when one is found to be wanting in a given area the necessary remedial trainng should be made available. Don't get me wrong, where a subordinate, following remedial training, or coaching, or mentoring, or a misture of all three is found to be below the required standard then said "ass chewing" is well deserved and should not be avoided but delivered with gusto!!! I think we, as leaders, have a duty to develop those we lead first and foremost and save the "ass chewing" for those rare moments when it genuinely is deserved, otherwise who will they go to for advice and guidance when they have a realtime issue?

If the aggrieved individual then chooses to try to throw some dirt, make a claim, or bleat and cry about it then at least the leader can demonstrably prove they did their best to develop the individual in question.

(I am aware that I may be coming across as a slight tree hugger here which is amusing me because I'm far from it!)

The term subordinate is one that causes much discussion in many domains and so, not wishing to ambush or derail this thread, I commend the assembled council members to consdier this definition of leadership which brings into debate the term of followership:

"Leadership is a reciprocal relationship between those who choose
to lead and those who choose to follow." (Kouzes. & Posner, 1993)

Finally (at last I hear you cry!), the article is simply presenting an issue that we have been well aware of for decades; that is the old adage that a soldier is not happy unless they are complaining! These surveys simply give another stage within which to do it; it used to be in the NAAFI, or the crew room or the smokers room/shed/area but now it is via online surveys...

Perhaps it is this that we should be more concerned about; the fact that we feel the need to have such surveys??

[Commando Spirit]

...training...mixture...

Speed typing was never my strong point - please excuse the spelling errors and my current setup (at work) will not allow me to edit!!

[davidbfpo]

A Military Review January 2013 article that appeared today via Twitter, it starts with:
Why would a leader in the Army or in any organization choose to micro-manage subordinates; show a lack of respect for them; choose not to listen to or value their input; or be rude, mean-spirited, and threatening? Most leaders would not. Most people do not choose to act like this. However, it is clearly happening in the uniformed services and in society as a whole. The Army recently released a study reporting that 80 percent of the officers and NCOs polled had observed toxic leaders in action and that 20 percent had worked for a toxic leader. This problem is not new.

Link:http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20130228_art012.pdf

[davidbfpo]

Found when researching an antidote to the thread's theme, from Australia and set in he early 1950's:
I recall as a young Cadet on a night navigation exercise in the Canberra area. After becoming geographically embarrassed, namely lost, a classmate and I decided that a few quiet beers in the private bar at the Ainslie Hotel would be far more to our liking than trying to find navigation markers on a very cold night in the hills of Canberra.

As the hours slipped by very pleasantly, we eventually adjudged it time to return to the College and so we commenced our long walk back. Around about the Russell Offices area we were getting quite weary and thought it best to further conserve our energy by flagging down the next passing car heading in the direction of Duntroon.

Soon the lights of an approaching vehicle loomed large and I stood in the middle of the road and flagged it down. It stopped, and it was not until my classmate and I had made ourselves comfortable in the back seat, that the unpleasant realisation hit us, that there in the driver’s seat was none other than the Director of Military Art, Colonel Hassett.

‘Good morning boys’ he said. ‘Good morning Sir’ we said. ‘What have you been doing?’ he asked. ‘Night navigation exercise’ we squeaked. ‘Umm’ said the DMA, totally unconvinced. He drove us to our company lines without further comment or conversation.

We thought we were gone; 21 days confinement to barracks and 84 days stoppage of leave at least; possible dismissal loomed large in our minds. But nothing happened, nothing at all.

We sweated for weeks on the consequences of that fateful evening, however it never came. Years later as a very junior General, when I asked why we were never reprimanded, Sir Francis replied with a smile ‘I knew that in waiting for the sword to fall, you were punishing yourselves far more than I ever could’. So true and so typical of his leadership style.

Link:http://www.gg.gov.au/speech/eulogy-general-sir-francis-hassett