Question about the politics in CAP

[flyguy06]

Ok, First I am NOT trying to reopen the Pineda issue.  iwish it would go away. Secondly, i am not a big supporter of Pineda. I didnt agree wit a lot of his changes. Thisis aquestion in General about CAP and he just happens to be the focus. SO here it goes.......

Why do you suppose its so political at the upper levels of CAP? I mean these are all volunteers. In a way I think its wrong what they did to Pineda (Not that I ever agreede with the man in the first place) but he gave of his own time to travel around the country. He was probably 100 times more busier with CAP stuff than I ever was. And they treat him this way. Its wrong. Its not like he is some high leevl paid politician caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He is a volunteer for goodness sakes. he didnt have to do any of this stuff.

[Bluelakes 13]

As long as you have a group of people, you will have politics.  Period.  Every organization I have been a part of has poltics invoved at some level. Do not presume politics in CAP is exclusive to the National level.  Spend more time in Region or Wing staff.  Oy vey!

I will not respond to the rest...

[Major Carrales]

Those "in power" like to stay so, and those "out of power" want to remedy that.  Those with "ideal visions" that want to do the right thing will be suspected by both sides...then dismissed as "hokey."

If I say, "I live to SERVE..." you'd think I was crazy. 

I really have very IDEAL visions about what CAP should be...it sometimes runs up against the cynics here.

Thus, the struggle...the AGENDISM and the petty politics.  Sometimes, like this occasion and in Salem Village in 1692, time when  the "religion" becomes more important that the "GOD."

By that I mean, the politics outweighes the need to serve and accomplish the mission.  Are there to be witchhunts?  McCarthy-like hearing and the like over this?

And the beat goes on...my friend...the beat goes on.

After Tuesday, I will likely not even open threads on that subject.

[SDF_Specialist]

It's not just the National Level. I don't know if you've ever been to a Wing or Region Staff meeting, but the politics there are enough to drive you crazy. A suggestion that works for me is to just ignore it if it doesn't pertain to you. You will save yourself a lot of headaches down the road by not getting involved. Attend the meetings, do your duty, and everything will be great.

I'm with Major Carrales on the second issue. Not touching that one.

[ZigZag911]

Fluguy06, two points:

1) Ego....that's why there is so much back-stabbing and jockeying for "power" in CAP, generally beginning at wing level on up....petty people shoring up their minimal self-esteem by throwing their weight around and attempting to make others do their bidding!

2) Granted that the former national CC gave a loot of time to CAP, the simple fact of the matter is that the evidence suggested he violated both CAP & USAF regulations....integrity demanded that the BOG take appropriate action since no one is above the law.

[Skyray]

It has been a seriously long time since I studied human psychology, and I might get this wrong.  Maslow has a hierarchy of human needs, and in my day number four was approval by others.  Number five was self actualization, where you marched to your own drum.  Most of the climbers are in Level Four and they seek position power so that people will admire them.  Your last National Commander was very much in Level Four in my opinion.  I have known him personally for a very long time, and one day in his Wing Commander phase I made the mistake of calling him "Tony."  He very quickly corrected me "That's Colonel Pineda."  So the position power of Wing Commander was very important to him.  I suggest to you that this need for approval was his ultimate undoing.  There is absolutely no reason in the world that he needed a diploma from ACSC other than to impress people.

[Ned]

"Politics" in an organization that elects all of the senior leadership is not really very surprising.

It's a little like looking at Congress and being surprised that it is full of "politicians."   

Seriously, the intrigues and manuevering serve a genuine function:  they tend to resolve differing interests and desires for control.

Obviously, any politcal body can suffer from "political overload" that becomes detrimental to the organization.  It sounds like most folks here would agree that that has happened in CAP in recent years.

And we can all agree that politics should not be spiteful or petty.

Sunlight and air are the best remedy for such things.

But "politics" are necessary and even a good thing in every organization that elects the leadership.

Ned Lee
Recovering political scientist

[Skyray]

Well said, Ned.

In the interest of trying to figure out how right I was in what I was talking about, I went to Wikipedia and found this on Maslow's Level Four:

Esteem needs
All humans have a need to be respected, to have self-esteem, self-respect, and to respect others. People need to engage themselves to gain recognition and have an activity or activities that give the person a sense of contribution,to feel accepted and self-valued, be it in a profession or hobby. Imbalances at this level can result in low self-esteem,inferiority complexes. People with low esteem need respect from others. They may seek fame or glory, which again are dependent on others. However confidence, competence and achievement only need one person and everyone else is inconsequential to one's own success. It may be noted, however, that many people with low self-esteem will not be able to improve their view of themselves simply by receiving fame, respect, and glory externally, but must first accept themselves internally. Psychological imbalances such as depression can also prevent one from obtaining self-esteem on both levels.

[Major Lord]

"Politics" is a Latin word, derived from "poly" meaning many, and "ticks" , meaning blood sucking leeches. 

Major Lord

[isuhawkeye]

CAP is not alone in the political issues at a national level. 

Any time an individual develops "An Unhealthy ownership in a public trust" problems arise. 

This happens in organizations as large as CAP, or as small as teh local fire department

[Dragoon]

"Politics" seems to be the catchall phrase for "folks doing stuff for self serving reasons."

And yet it's not always so simple.  Sometimes what looks like politics is really one guy trying his best to do the right thing.

For example.

"The Wing CC gave the job to his friend and not to me - he's just playing politics."

When the truth might be, the Wing CC knows his friend and trust him to support him.  You on the other hand, are an unknown quantity at best.  You're a risk, the other guy is a sure thing.

If you're a manager you engage in politics every day - each decision has to take into account other human beings, and their feelings.

There's perhaps more ofthis in CAP because, frankly, most members are here for reasons related to feelings.  Some want the respect of a position or a title, some want to feel like they are a part of the military, some want to feel like heroes, some want to feel like wise old mentor/teachers, some want to live out fighter pilot fantasies (that would be me  ), etc. etc.

The only thing that is certain - no one is here for the paycheck.

So.....working through the minefield of feelings - all of them different - is bound to upset at least people.

I truly do not believe that all, or even most of our Wing Commanders are petty people with low self esteem, just interested in self aggrandizement.

I think the vast majority of them are trying hard to do the right thing, but they make an above average number of mistakes.  Some of them probably aren't cut out for the job (most of us aren't).  Some get no staff support.  Some can't make heads or tails out of which missions should take priority. 

I'd say it Tony's problem wasn't that he played too much politics - but that he wasn't any GOOD at it.  He pushed his agenda while upsetting way too many people.  He didn't communicate or sell his vision.  He didn't cut deals.  He made enemies.  In politics, that kills you.  In the end, he stood alone.  That's just bad politics.

Often folks who complain about politics are folks who aren't any good at it.

[SDF_Specialist]

CAP is not alone in the political issues at a national level. 

Any time an individual develops "An Unhealthy ownership in a public trust" problems arise. 

This happens in organizations as large as CAP, or as small as teh local fire department

Either way, it has a negative effect on the members. Some are worse than others.

[Skyray]

Lots of information there, Dragoon.  First, let me join you in the fighter pilot fantasy.  Second, I think the vast majority of Wing Commanders and above are stellar people.  Lots and lots of the problems I have seen are created by people who aspire to and never make Wing Commander and who either deliberately or incompetently mess up the pipeline.  As for Wing Commanders, the ones I have seen come to grief have come to grief because of the Bill Clinton problem.  Apparently the power of command is an aphodisiac, and that is enough said about that.  I don't even believe that they make an above average number of mistakes.  There is a balance that is very difficult to maintain.  In my area there are an inordinate number of terminations, and a goodly number of the "mistakes" made by Wing Commanders are offending those higher up the food chain by relieving or terminating proteges of the  more powerful.

[SDF_Specialist]

Doug, you make some great points. Here's what I'm thinking though. Maybe there are too many commanders in CAP. Unit, Group, Wing, Region, National. There's bound to be a conflict of interest somewhere along the way. What is the point of some many commanders? I don't see a point in having Group Commanders because all they seem to do is interfere with unit operations, which has a tendancy to cause the unit commander to complain to the Wing Commander. Then you get the effective Region Commander who happens to actually know what's going on in the field, and he/she gets involved. By the end of the day, you have big Charlie Foxtrot all because of one thing said by a Group Commander. Maybe if there weren't so many echelons in the chain of commander, there'd be less drama, and things could run a bit more smoothly at all echelons. I commend the efforts of my unit, group, wing and region commanders because they all seem to have their heads on their shoulders rather than up a southern region of another member. But I just don't see the point of so many commanders.

[Cadet Tillett]

It has been a seriously long time since I studied human psychology, and I might get this wrong.  Maslow has a hierarchy of human needs, and in my day number four was approval by others.  Number five was self actualization, where you marched to your own drum.  Most of the climbers are in Level Four and they seek position power so that people will admire them.

L2K chapter 6 - Maslow takes up a couple of pages.

[Skyray]

Maybe we should send everyone who aspires to wing command back to complete the cadet program.

Truth be told, some of the best wing commanders I have seen have been former cadets.

[Walkman]

Doug, you make some great points. Here's what I'm thinking though. Maybe there are too many commanders in CAP. Unit, Group, Wing, Region, National. There's bound to be a conflict of interest somewhere along the way. What is the point of some many commanders? I don't see a point in having Group Commanders because all they seem to do is interfere with unit operations, which has a tendancy to cause the unit commander to complain to the Wing Commander. Then you get the effective Region Commander who happens to actually know what's going on in the field, and he/she gets involved. By the end of the day, you have big Charlie Foxtrot all because of one thing said by a Group Commander. Maybe if there weren't so many echelons in the chain of commander, there'd be less drama, and things could run a bit more smoothly at all echelons. I commend the efforts of my unit, group, wing and region commanders because they all seem to have their heads on their shoulders rather than up a southern region of another member. But I just don't see the point of so many commanders.

Hmm...Kinda' thinking out loud.

I'm not sure that I agree with you. Any organization (military, church, business) that spans a large geographic area and has a large number of members has to divide responsibilities into sections. The managers at the top focus on the overall direction and major decisions. They don't have time to run the daily details, so you divide the group into as many layers as needed, each successive layer down having a more direct impact on the day-to-day work.

I know that some wings don't have groups because they are compact enough not to need them. If the wing is big enough the layer is necessary.

I think instead is goes the idea of better trained and qualified leaders. The example you give could be fixed if both the Group CC & Unit CC work out the issue like adults and professionals. Group CC shouldn't be a power junky and the Unit CC should humble themselves to someone with greater authority.

Now, I know that there will be times where legitimate things happen and that should be the exception.

Unfortunately, real leadership and followership skills are hard to find and harder to teach.

[SDF_Specialist]

Doug, you make some great points. Here's what I'm thinking though. Maybe there are too many commanders in CAP. Unit, Group, Wing, Region, National. There's bound to be a conflict of interest somewhere along the way. What is the point of some many commanders? I don't see a point in having Group Commanders because all they seem to do is interfere with unit operations, which has a tendancy to cause the unit commander to complain to the Wing Commander. Then you get the effective Region Commander who happens to actually know what's going on in the field, and he/she gets involved. By the end of the day, you have big Charlie Foxtrot all because of one thing said by a Group Commander. Maybe if there weren't so many echelons in the chain of commander, there'd be less drama, and things could run a bit more smoothly at all echelons. I commend the efforts of my unit, group, wing and region commanders because they all seem to have their heads on their shoulders rather than up a southern region of another member. But I just don't see the point of so many commanders.

Hmm...Kinda' thinking out loud.

I'm not sure that I agree with you. Any organization (military, church, business) that spans a large geographic area and has a large number of members has to divide responsibilities into sections. The managers at the top focus on the overall direction and major decisions. They don't have time to run the daily details, so you divide the group into as many layers as needed, each successive layer down having a more direct impact on the day-to-day work.

I know that some wings don't have groups because they are compact enough not to need them. If the wing is big enough the layer is necessary.

I think instead is goes the idea of better trained and qualified leaders. The example you give could be fixed if both the Group CC & Unit CC work out the issue like adults and professionals. Group CC shouldn't be a power junky and the Unit CC should humble themselves to someone with greater authority.

Now, I know that there will be times where legitimate things happen and that should be the exception.

Unfortunately, real leadership and followership skills are hard to find and harder to teach.

That's true to. But anymore, it seems like leaders just want to whine, complain, and be greedy. Where's the leadership crying to the Wing Commander that the Group Commander won't let him run his squadron the way it's been run for 10, 20, 50 years? My focus on the whole commander deal is that they are so wrapped up with competing with each other that they forgot what they are doing which is leading the organization one unit at a time. I do aspire to become a commander some day. I'm just taking everything I witness as a learning experience.

[flyguy06]

I gues I am having a hard time understanding becaus eI havent seen it at this level before in my CAP career. I mean when I was a cadet and a young Senior Member, I dont remember a large amount of Wing and region Commnaders being relieved or replaced. In fact I cant remember a one. In fact, my region Commander (SER) was in his position for 11 years. Thats the CAP I remember.

I guess as I get older and more invovlved in CAP, I am seeing a different side of it. A side I dont neccessarily like. I mean everyone keeps talking about politics. These are not politicians. They are volunteers. But I can kind of understand what you guys are saying. I am a member of a national Fraternity and I see similar fights for power and leaders with big egos. I hope I never get like that.

[Skyray]

That Region Commander was my mentor.  Some will tell you that he started this whole mess.  He ran for National Vice and only got one vote.  Assuming that he voted for himself, that means there were eight wing commanders who didn't vote for him.  Very soon it was eight former Wing Commanders who didn't vote for him.  And the region hasn't been completely well since.