I recently came across a senior member who believes in using the "12 O'Clock High" style of leadership with cadets. After reading the slides on national and reading discussions on this subject, I am not sure that this is a style of leadership we should be using with cadets nor teaching to them. People thoughts and comments?
Only using that style and none others is a problem not necessarily the style itself. A leadership style can't really be a bad thing only how it's used. It's essential to teach many styles and teach when each of them is appropriate. The "12 O'clock High" style is useful in certain situations but not in others. Leadership styles must change and adapt to the situation. I've found this area to be one of the hardest to teach and generally learned by the cadets through trail and error. Unfortunately seniors since they don't really get the benefit of the cadet program are sometimes even harder to train in this area.
US Officer's are taught through formal and informal (cultural) methods. 12 O'Clock High represented the highest stakes and most desperate of times for the USAAF. WW2 was in the balance. Civilization was moments away from changing forever. Feelings, personal values, family time were all sacrificed for good purposes.
So I suppose you are asking "does the yelling justify the circumstance in your case?" Teaching used to be accomplished by writing 10,000 times on a chalk board, spanking, and humiliation. These things actually do achieve their intended use. These things can increase focus and mass learning if in limited scope but it also increase dependence upon authorized approval. I'm not suggesting that CAP adopt the extreme versions of this of this kind of thing because ultimately it infantalizes the subject. Right, left, forward march, etc. What that heavy handed kind of thing can't teach you is how to analyze, interpret, create, and achieve more than is expected. The Soviet's used to break everything down in a few simple steps... then they'd look to their leader who would approve and they would then accomplish the next thing in the series. We learned to take out the Soviet's (styled) leader, or break off their communications, and watch the impetus fall apart. It was a game that paid-off in Vietnam and really worked to perfection on the Soviets in Afghanistan.
The American Military works both sides of the discipline street... a little stick and little carrot, so to speak.
From your message it is tough to know if the commander is going too far and is doing something forbidden under cadet protection or if it is a thing that offends your personal sensibility... my suggestion is that you learn how these elements work and then be armed
with good information before you take it to the next level... unless of course you are witnessing utter abuse... then take it to the next level NOW! You can find examples on the web of the current approved commands and addressing recruit issues. I've seen some examples on YouTube. I'll try and post an URL address soon.
With regards;
ED OBRIEN
PS --Exercising discipline is good. Exercising mentoring is important.
The balance between the 2 is a difficult thing indeed define perfectly.
Besides -- it is a moving target as civilian society changes.
Using 12OH as a leadership training curriculum is an excellent idea - we just did it at Spring Encampment because it literally showcases just about every type of leadership style there is, however to say someone favors the "12OH" style is incomplete, because you have to specify which one.
Now, if they are saying that the style and behavior of Brigadier General Frank Savage should be emulated, I would have an issue with that, especially in a civilian volunteer environment.
To a certain extent he was a successful commander and a good leader, but he ran himself into the ground to the point of becoming useless.
For those of you who want to see the curriculum materials for this, see attached zip:
here (.zip, 1.34 MB) (http://jcolgan004.googlepages.com/12oclockhigh.zip)
Which style of leadership are you talking about? The movie itself has various styles used throughout the movie (one reason for making it a good case study for the cadets.
Are you talking about the authoritarian style he uses on the gate guard when he just gets waived through?
Are you talking about when he's smoking the cigarette with Ernie?
I suppose I would need more information as to what you are regarding as "12 O'Clock High" style leadership.
I never watched 12 O'clock high. Is it worth it?? Should I download it today at work.......I have about a week of doing nothing now that the Cadets are gone.
Colgan......thanks for the leadership junk, I stole some and will use it.
12O'Clock High is a remarkable movie for many reasons. If for no other reason, it was the first movie that I know of to deal with PTS Syndrome. Great acting, legit on a militaria basis, ambiguities in characters that are tightly reconciled at the end, yeah this is a good one. Give it a go... see what you think.
Back to the topic. There are legitimate reasons to have 4 gang up screaming Sgt's pile into the face of a frightened boot camp recruit. IN THIS I'M NOT SPEAKING ABOUT CAP BUT THE MILITARY IN GENERAL AND MARINE CORPS SPECIFICALLY> It is an abstract way to simulate combat. It is part of a process in which you can learn to face fear and quietly push through your fear to perform the mission. It is a route to becoming a warrior. I used to get yelled at and more when I played football. When I got into the military I found it not near so unpleasant as many of my fellow recruits. It is a way to train one's mind to accommodate, modify, use, and persist when the flight or fight response kicks in and the adrenalin kicks up to high. What you eventually do is ignore the fight or flight response and go into the "think and fight" mode. It's good training for life. There used to be slapping, punching and kicking involved in the 60s. That is now illegal. I understand the reasons. Some where in everyones life we must learn to handle tremendous and overwhelming fear. I'd rather do it in basic training than in combat. Just a thought on the topic.
With regards;
ED OBRIEN
Each person has a preferred style of leadership. That is fine. However, the leadership style you use should always be situationally driven. You can't treat a unit with a slack attitude towards everything the same as a unit that is fully up to speed.
Quote from: Short Field on May 06, 2008, 05:45:20 PM
Each person has a preferred style of leadership. That is fine. However, the leadership style you use should always be situationally driven. You can't treat a unit with a slack attitude towards everything the same as a unit that is fully up to speed.
I would go so far as to say that you use a different style for different people, not just different units. Different people respond better to different styles. As you say, it all depends on the situation.
Some people respond best with constant feedback. Others work best if you give them the task, then leave them alone. And there all all manner of levels in between.
My experience with leadership is that you have to be consistent. You can't waffle from one way to another. The people that are following you have to know who you are in order to trust you. You can't tweak it according to each individual, you just have to do what you do and what you know works best for you personally.
Read a few of the books on Meyers-Briggs personality types. Different types of people respond differently to the same leadership style. What makes one person really like you makes another person think you are an idiot. The consistent part has to be that you treat eveyone fairly and honestly.
Just saw this quote come across my RSS feeds:
"I've got to follow them, I'm their leader" — Alexandre Ledru-Rollin
Quote from: JC004 on May 12, 2008, 12:26:24 AM
Just saw this quote come across my RSS feeds:
"I've got to follow them, I'm their leader" — Alexandre Ledru-Rollin
If I'm not mistaken, the original quote was "I must catch up with them, I am their leader."
GC
Not sure...I didn't do any research on it, other than seeing it in my feeds. There are probably variations because of the translation, too.
To clarify my concerns, let me give the following examples.
1. A Cadet NCO berating a cadet during an inspection while another one, stand glaring at him next to his\her shoulder. The cadet being inspected screws up and repeatedly addresses the C\1Sgt as Sgt. A third C\NCO then jumps all over screaming at the cadet until he begins to cry for the mistake. C\NCO state it is their job to get the cadets ready for joining the military.
2. New cadet to unit, (C\Msgt transferee) is invited to observe the cadet staff by other cadet staff members. Is not there next week (spring break). Comes back the next week is confronted by the DCC while observing the flights. Is later "brought" in to "review board" and raked over the coals by the DCC in front of cadet staff members and threatened with being busted to airman. DCC has never met the cadet before that night as it is only her second time to attend. When confronted, DCC says he wanted to shock her using the 12'O methods to get her attention.
Do either of these two events show good leadership. Before we get into the mereits of leadership in the military and why the military does things a certain way, I am prior service and understand why the military does thinks a certain way. CAP is different however, our cadets are not expected to go into harm's way.
No, they show the immaturity and lack of training that is going on with those specific members.
Quote from: wawgcap on May 12, 2008, 06:03:27 PM
[SNIP]
Do either of these two events show good leadership?
Based on your description, obviously not. They show a Cadet NCO Corps that has forgotten that
Respect is one of CAP's core values. From your description they also have a poor understanding of the role of the Cadet NCO
support channel. And it reveals a DCC that does not understand the purpose or function of a review board, nor even the position limitations of a DCC. Only a unit commander has the authority to reduce a cadet in grade. It has to be done formally, and only for "exceptional circumstances". Missing one meeting during spring break isn't sufficient cause. Even if it was, there's no legal way to bust a cadet all the way back from C/MSGT to C/Amn. If I recall CAPR 52-16 correctly, three achievements (or two achievements and a milestone award) is the max reduction allowed.
What's the rest of the composition of this unit like? How's the long term retention rate? Where are the cadet officers while these wannabe C/NCOs are playing at being R. Lee Ermey? The 12 O'clock High leadership example by General Savage is all about setting and enforcing standards. Standards are necessary and good for unit morale. C/NCOs help enforce standards. "Shock and awe" as a form of discipline without accompanying standards is pointless.