The past fifteen years of service as a Navy chaplain have made me acutely conscious of the part leadership plays in morale. I have come to believe that only good leadership can produce high morale and that while other factors and circumstances influence morale for better or for worse, in the last analysis it is leadership that counts most heavily. The Matthean dictum, “By their fruits ye shall know them,” finds explicit and practical application here.
Parenthetically, a Navy chaplain is always a “man in the middle.” That is to say, he is one who is in an excellent position to understand and to appreciate the demands of leadership and the desires of those who are led. Being more free than others to cross the barrier which separates commissioned officers and enlisted men, he is able often to interpret each group to the other.
Technically a commissioned officer, the chaplain actually is a minister in uniform whose parishioners are found in the wardroom and in the crew’s quarters. To use another figure, the chaplain shares the concerns and, to some extent, the responsibilities of management (in the person of the Commander), while at the same time he also shares the concerns and obligations of labor, (in this case, the crew). When conflict of purpose, plan, or desire takes place between them, the chaplain is indeed a “man in the middle.” This is both the glory and the dismay of his task. Whatever else it does to him, this tends to make a chaplain highly sensitive concerning leadership.
One of the best ways to learn about leadership is to look for its personification and then to study the leader when one finds him. Textbooks on the art of leadership are numerous and helpful even as also are historical biographies of great naval leaders. But these aids in learning this art of leadership are not comparable to studying the leader himself. What does he do? What does he say? What kind of man is he? All good leaders are not cut from the same bolt of cloth. All do not have the same traits of character. Some are easy-going and familiar with their subordinates while others are reserved. Some are most effective under combat conditions, others wear well in peace or war. The lessons one learns from association with Captain A are similar to but not identical with those learned from Admiral B. The course on leadership has many chapters. Here are several out of my years in the Navy.
It was my good fortune to serve in the USS Savannah (C.L-42) during 1943-1945, including the operations off Salerno during the invasion of Italy. The ship had not had much of an opportunity to achieve an impressive combat record when Captain X took command early in 1943. Under his superb leadership she became one of the finest of her type until disabled by a German radio-controlled glider bomb on September 11, 1943. When the ship reached the safety of Valetta harbor, Malta, two days later, with more than two hundred of her complement dead in the wreckage below decks, there occurred the finest example of high morale I ever expect to see. When the crew was called upon to work day and night to find and remove the bodies of their shipmates from the shambles below and to remove, in addition, hundreds of rounds of all types of ammunition from blasted handling rooms, hoists, and magazines, not a single growl or complaint was heard. All hands worked with a will, even to the point of manning the dockyard cranes after the Maltese workers went on strike. The fatigue and emotional strain were terrific, as I can testify from my own recollection, but the spirit of the ship’s company will ever remain one of the grand experiences of my life. Much of the credit belongs to Captain X. In eight months he had so built up the ship’s confidence in him and in the “Savannah team” that aggressiveness in combat, readiness in emergency, and positive action under great stress were accepted as the order of the day. What did he do to accomplish this?
Basically these few things, simple in themselves, but apparently of profound importance. First, he always informed us, as soon as naval security allowed, what our mission was and where we were bound. He did this by the most effective use of the ship’s P.A. system I have ever observed. He could say more in three minutes than most people can say in thirty, and his words struck home. Secondly, he was a strong disciplinarian but fair in his treatment of subordinates. Also, he was a big enough person to modify his decision to punish if satisfied that justice so required. Third, he was in touch with his people, chiefly by getting down on the forecastle and walking back and forth, pipe in mouth, stopping occasionally to speak to an officer or man. This professional naval officer had the knack of making his men feel that he was in command of the situation, interested in them, and ready to go to hell and back if necessary to insure that the ship did her job. We were behind him to a man. The ship’s fine combat record and even finer record of achievement while in drydock at Malta after being hit, vividly reflected his extraordinary leadership. Typically, when he received his third Legion of Merit award from ComCruDiv Eight, the Captain said, “I wear this for the team.” I shall never forget him, nor will anyone else who served in the Savannah during 1943.
Another officer who superlatively taught leadership simply by being himself was Vice Admiral Y, a veteran of amphibious operations in the Mediterranean and the Pacific. As Commandant of the Armed Forces Staff College from 1948-1951, Admiral Y made a tremendous impression upon fifteen hundred senior officers of the various services who were with him at the College as students or Staff members. That the Admiral’s gift of leadership was a remarkable one was illustrated repeatedly by the close attention accorded his introductory and closing remarks on each occasion when a prominent guest speaker was at the College. There was a pervasive sense that these were the remarks of a truly great American and one ought not to miss anything he said, despite the fact that the principal speaker frequently was nationally known and a leader in his field. I experienced this again and again. Although it is an intangible thing, it accurately illustrates Admiral Y’s leadership under non-combat circumstances. Readers who shared my experience will, I am confident, know exactly what I mean. The question follows why was this man such an exemplary leader? Personal characteristics provide some elements of the answer beyond any doubt. The Admiral looked like a sailor- man—he was physically large, with the rugged face of one who has sailed the seven seas for years. Yet he was extremely humble, soft-spoken, even to the point of diffidence. He was an out-of-doors man who loved his golf (an immediate bond with many of his students) and who appreciated a good joke. Perhaps most of all he was a leader who believed that his subordinates could be depended upon to carry out their assigned duties without his having to look over their shoulders. As far as I could tell from my relatively obscure post as chaplain, the Staff College ran extremely well under this Commandant’s leadership and attained a reputation which under few others will ever be equalled or surpassed. Beyond any question a representative of top naval leadership, the Admiral made an impression upon students from the other services which could not help but increase the Navy’s prestige in their eyes and genuinely further the cause of real unification.
A third and last “case study” in leadership, taken from the admittedly limited chapters of my experience, is that of an officer with whom I first came in contact in 1946 at Great Lakes and for whose ability I have the utmost regard. Unfortunately, like others mentioned he is retired now, a “tombstone admiral.”
This officer, then a commander with a distinguished record in destroyers, held the billet as Executive Officer of the Service Schools Command at Great Lakes. He had inherited an assignment which, prior to his arrival, had dwindled in importance to the point where a gorgeous blond secretary made most of the decisions (some will say, “Is this bad?”). When Commander Z took over, however, all that changed, even to the assignment of a Navy yeoman to replace the blond (ah, stern call of duty)! Soon life at the Service Schools took on a new tempo. Things began to happen. Accurate answers were forthcoming for those who asked questions. The Exec’s word was not only law, it had a special authority all its own which men accepted as readily as ancient Israel did the word of the prophet, “Thus saith the Lord.” The Commander was Navy, he was sharp, and he was accessible. Indeed, he was, in my judgment, among the few truly outstanding officers with whom I had had the privilege of serving. The change wrought by this officer in the Service Schools Command was characteristic of his leadership ability as I had a chance several years later to observe on board a ship which he commanded. What did he have which many others lack? It is not easy to pin down. Commander Z was short of stature, but entirely devoid of the small man’s self-consciousness or compensatory belligerence. He had, so far as I could determine, every qualification for higher command, being the type of man who grows with responsibility.
Certainly the three professional officers described above are not the only ones whom I might choose to describe as outstanding leaders. In my twenty years of service I have had the good fortune to be shipmates with others both senior and junior in rank. However, positive and creative leadership has seemed to me always to be a commodity in short supply in spite of what appears to be its great importance to the Navy’s fulfillment of its mission. Therefore, for what it may be worth should I like to attempt briefly to review these three case studies in order to point up those qualities of leadership which seem to me to be decisive.
In the case of Captain X there was marked ability to control the emotions and so communicate confidence and stability to others. The Captain also had mastered the art of effective communication with his subordinates. Considerate without ever being indulgent, he always encouraged his officers to do their jobs without a blue print from him. Loyalty was a two-way street he walked together with his officers and men.
With Admiral Y, of distinguished combat record, but now serving as Commandant of the Armed Forces Staff College, the outstanding feature surely was great strength of character. Two special qualities made their impact upon all who came in contact with him; genuine humility, and profound love of country. I classify him as a great American.
Commander Z, with his quick, decisive, and enthusiastic approach, was a man of unquestioned integrity. Very friendly and approachable, yet always “the Commander,” he drew out the best in his people by really knowing them and giving them full measure of freedom to produce. He was quick to praise.
Each of these three officers was completely free from any tendency to demand extra services for himself. I have observed that when this tendency is present it often indicates self- centeredness characteristic of the weak and insecure leader. The dedication of these three officers to their profession, revealed in many ways, was likewise a constant inspiration. Surely here is a basic factor in the development of any officer’s character. Each was quite different in physical appearance, temperament, and personality, the principal attribute shared being the ability to lead men. Each had been seasoned by years at sea, had learned to master himself, and therefore could lead and master others.
The ability to lead men is, I suppose, akin to the skill of the artist or the musician in that one must be born with it. But even if the great leaders are naturally gifted men, it does not follow that others cannot acquire some measure of proficiency in the art of leadership by study, observation, and conscious practice thereof. Certainly it is true that the more complex naval life becomes, the greater will be the need for superior leadership. I believe that no other requirement, including that of advanced research and development, is more important to the Navy’s purpose.