Enlisted Essay Contest 1st Prize
On top of the myriad programs already in place in the Navy, it appears we are about to embrace yet another: a new mentorship program that mandates everyone to have a mentor, and everyone to be a mentor. I have trouble buying into another this-is-here-to-stay leadership program. In a Utopian society, programmed mentorship might reap great rewards. In an environment of warfare, however, it is profoundly naive to think that something so intensely personal as the mentor-protégé relationship can occur merely by making it a requirement. Perhaps just as improbable is any expectation that all leaders will privately accept it.
As I consider this new Navy program, I cannot help but get that familiar uneasy feeling in the pit of my stomach. Those who have served for any length of time will recall how it normally works: A promising new program appears on a flaming chariot to the sound of trumpets, gets us talking a new language, then quietly becomes obsolete. It disappears because it becomes too burdensome or too expensive to continue. It leaves in its wake disillusionment and confusion. The most recent experience was the cult-like total quality leadership push of the 1990s. Fortunately, the leadership training continuum is alive and well, but even that program has endured some major overhauls and name changes through the years. Remarkably, despite the money spent on research and sales-pitch efforts, many of the same leadership challenges remain.
There is no doubt that earnest energy went into the creation of the mentorship program. Conclusions were formulated and plans were generated based on demographic data, surveys, charts, graphs, laser pointers, and psychological assessments of the "unique needs" of our contemporary youth—and then a cleverly persuasive
Another concern I have about programmed mentorship is that it may encourage some in key positions to depend on a paper drill to "meet" a sailor's professional needs, and yet remain detached from the person. Of course, one may argue that this program will be different, that it will produce better mentor/leaders if managed properly. True enough, but those results likely will come from superior leaders who are insightful enough to do the right thing no matter what programs we confirm. The vast majority, however, will perceive mandated mentorship as perfunctory, disingenuous, and lacking spontaneity. Worse yet, the assigned mentor will find it difficult to convince the protégé that he is sincerely interested in his welfare. Primarily because program participation has always been moored to evaluations or fitness reports one way or another, no one wants to become a mere "check in the block" that advances another person's career.
What Can We Do?
If we want to produce leaders and mentors with substance, we need not look any further than our core values; specifically, commitment. True leaders are committed to knowing their jobs and unit mission completely, focusing on mission readiness without distraction. Those who obsess over promotions and awards need to snap out of their self-serving malaise and wake up to the serious nature of our business. If we really want leaders to pay attention to what is important, let's find a way to evaluate sailors based on individual and divisional readiness. Many leaders are so preoccupied with what selection boards may be looking for that they have become myopic and dull to the needs of their unfulfilled and disenchanted juniors.
As I came up through the hawsehole, I was blessed to have worked among great sailors who modeled unspoiled leadership for me. Although it has been a privilege and honor to wear these fouled anchors on my collar for 17 years, I do not take credit for it all. In large part, any success I enjoy is the result of serious-minded chiefs and officers who understood the real purpose of leadership. They cared for my development and corrected my misconceptions about what it meant to lead; they still do. My sea daddies mentored me because it was the right thing to do, not because of a directive. If a mentor program had been foisted on them, or had anyone attempted to reward them with high marks or recognition for my mentorship, I believe they would have been deeply insulted.
I learned many lessons from my mentors. Their sage wisdom comes down to one thing: the mission of the leader. A number of years ago I distilled their wisdom into a personal mission statement that has been my guide. It goes like this: My mission as a chief petty officer is to win wars one battle at a time by teaching my sailors to do their jobs to the best of their abilities, by leading them courageously while in harm's way, by recognizing their efforts, and by bringing them home safely to a grateful nation.
Beyond this, everything else in the Navy is peripheral—especially decorations and promotions. The harsh reality is this: if we fail, sailors die.
Leader/mentors must leave the rancor of politics, bureaucracy, and tactics to those in Washington. Our main objective at the tip of the spear is to develop sailors who can perform effectively in battle. Although some programs are necessary, even desirable, there are no programs that can substitute for genuine leadership. We must awaken to the fact that we are not operating a day care for adults, nor are we a societal correction facility. We are just sailors who must prepare those who follow us to be victorious in war. To do that requires real leadership, not another new program.
Master Chief Harrison has more than 27 years of naval service. He has been a crewmember in six ships and four shore stations, including leading quartermaster of the Enterprise (CVN-65) and command master chief of Naval Leader Training Unit, Little Creek, Virginia.