Carefully review the Grading Rubric (Links to an external site.) for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment.

STRENGTHENING OUR NAVAL PROFESSION THROUGH A CULTURE OF LEADER DEVELOPMENT

Furthering our advantage as the world's finest Navy requires developing

leaders who personify their moral obligation to the naval profession by

upholding Navy Core Values and Navy Ethos; fulfill their obligations as

leaders of character and integrity; and confidently exercise their author-

ity and responsibility with a strong and abiding sense of accountability

for their actions throughout a career of selfless service.

NAVY LEADER DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY, JANUARY 2013

ho are the leaders in our Navy?

If "four star admirals" is the response, that is the wrong answer.* The

right answer is: every Sailor, insofar as he or she is responsible for other Sailors, is

a leader in our great Navy.̂ From the most junior enlisted personnel to the most

senior officers, all are a part of the leadership equation. Junior enlisted personnel

need to be recognized as prospective leaders who have the potential for strategic

impact through their performance—not as folks "who just follow orders"—just as

senior officers are called on to be bold and decisive leaders with the responsibili-

ties of promoting and safeguarding the morale of those under their command.

Indeed, all Sailors must understand that we—individually and collectively as the

Navy Team—are accountable for the welfare of our shipmates, no matter our

respective ranks.

Leadership is not just about what we do, it is about who we are. Being an ef-

fective leader requires more than mastering a checklist of skills. At its core, being

effective leaders is about who we are as members of the nsvú profession. First and

foremost, the naval profession exists to serve our country, to help accomplish our

* The epigraph is from U.S. Navy Dept., The Navy Leader Development Strategy (Washington, D.C.: n.d. [January 2013]), available at www.usnwc.edu/navyleader. I would like to thank Dr. Olenda Johnson and Dr. Carnes Lord, in particular, and my Leadership & Ethics team in the College of Operational and Strategic Leadership in general, for their invaluable contributions to this article.

t i n this article, the term "Sailors" represents both the enlisted members of the U.S. Navy and the officer corps, at all ranks and grades, E-1 to O-IO.

NAVAL WAR COLLEGE REVIEW

nation's purposes and objectives, and to protect our way of life. Every Sailor, then,

as a member of the naval profession is called to selfless service, to live by a set of

core values, and to exhibit the ethos the Navy espouses. As members of the naval

profession we possess specialized knowledge, skills, and expertise that enable us

continually to achieve mission success. We are warfighters. At the same time,

the naval profession has the responsibility of ensuring that our members uphold

Navy standards and are developed as effective Navy leaders. Ship—Shipmate

—Se//applies here: The "ship" is the naval profession and the Navy's global mis-

sion set; our shipmates are the members of our team whom we look after and

who look after us, always; and "self" is every Sailor—the warfighting member of

the naval profession dedicated to a life of selfless service to our nation and Navy.

So, where do we stand today in terms of how we set out to develop our leaders?

Let us state the obvious: the Navy makes good leaders. Just look through the

annals of history or the lens of today to witness the extraordinary leadership

that Sailors of all ranks have exhibited in times of both peace and war. For the

most part. Navy culture dictates that leadership derives from command at sea—

which, many will agree, is a unique and challenging experience that demands

self-reliance, independence, sound judgment, and confidence. Within the Navy

culture, however, there is an expectation that leadership "just happens," or that

effective leadership is achieved through what Admiral James Stavridis, recently

retired, has described as "transference"—"just do what I do and you will be a

good leader."* We may couple this with robust just-in-time training that ensures

technical and tactical competence, and occasionally we augment our experiences

with leadership training that focuses on a prescribed set of skills. In the end,

though, we have a Navy culture in which leaders are forged primarily by experi-

ence and independent operation at sea.

What this reflects is that as a Navy we have not deliberately attended to de-

veloping the person as a leader (with "leader" being about the individual, "lead-

ership" being about skills). What is lacking is an intentional process aimed at

growing our Sailors. Instead we tend to leave development of the Sailor to chance

or opportunistic events based on career timing or availability. Nor have we em-

phasized the significance of being members of i^e naval profession as we should.

We seem to identify most closely with our individual communities first ("I am

an aviator") and our Navy second. Consequently, the way we tend to think about

"leadership" development has excluded (perhaps unintentionally) a purposeful

focus on cultivating leaders of character who embody Navy core values—honor,

courage, commitment—and the Navy ethos.

* Adm. James Stavridis, then Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, comments during a briefing on the Navy Leader Development Continuum, Naval War College, Newport, R.I., 24 October 2012.

KELLY

Furthermore, we must acknowledge that as a Navy we tend to undervalue the

contribution of education in developing our Sailors as leaders. We limit the time

Sailors are given to attend schoolhouses, or we seek to waive the requirement

altogether. We mandate the shortest possible course lengths, while structuring

career paths designed to maximize operational experiences. This has created a

culture where going to the schoolhouse or attending war college is considered

"time off"—rather than an uncompromising investment in our people and in

our profession. This must change. Consider the following, from Admiral Arleigh

Burke, in January 1959:

There is one element in the profession of arms that transcends all others in impor- tance; this is the human element. No matter what the weapons of the future may be, no matter how they are to be employed in war or international diplomacy, man will still be the most important factor in Naval operations. This is why it is so important that under the greater pressure of our continuing need to develop the finest aircraft, the most modern submarines, the most far ranging carriers and the whole complex of nuclear weapons, we must keep uppermost in mind that leadership remains our most important task.

Admiral Burke's observation is as relevant today as it was more than fifty years

ago. And this is why the Navy has embarked on extraordinary culture change in

the way we develop our people as leaders—from the time a Sailor voluntarily

joins our great Navy to the time he or she departs.

How do we think more broadly about leader development for our Sailors?

Absent from our current leader development efforts is a continuum of learn-

ing that is systematic, integrated, and comprehensive. What we generally rec-

ognize as "leadership training" is for the most part disjointed and episodic, in

some instances simply hit-or-miss. Therefore, the first step in creating a culture

for Navy leader development is to establish a career-long "Leader Development

Continuum" from E-1 (seaman recruit) to O-IO (admiral, four stars), across all

Navy communities, and from accession to retirement or conclusion of service.

Development of Navy leaders must, of necessity, be a deliberate and progressive

process. Most importantly, this establishment of a career-long Leader Develop-

ment Continuum is driven by the conviction of Navy senior leadership that such

an effort is essential for sustaining and strengthening the naval profession, now

and into the future. Critically, this effort is «oí just another "compliance" program

designed to remedy a set of problems. Rather, it is the start of a long-term and

proactive effort to influence the culture of the Navy and better prepare leaders

for the future—a future characterized by increasing complexity and uncertainty,

a future that brings its own set of new and unique challenges to the character of

each Sailor as a leader.

10 NAVAL WAR COLLEGE REVIEW

So, it is within this context that over the last year and a half a dedicated team

has been working to reshape the way the Navy approaches leader development,

while laying the groundwork for a Leader Development Continuum. The foun-

dation for the continuum is the Navy Leader Development Sfraie^}'—quoted at

the beginning of this article—signed by the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO),

Admiral Jonathan Greenert, in January 2013. Fundamentally, the Navy Leader

Development Strategy establishes expectations for building leaders who will con-

fidently and competently win our wars and meet the peacetime challenges of the

increasingly complex maritime environment, as the scope of Sailors' responsibili-

ties grows. More specifically, the strategy serves as our Navy's overarching guid-

ance and framework for how we align, in a deliberate manner, the multiple ways

by which we develop our people through experience, education, training, and

personal development. The latter element, personal development, entails cultivat-

ing self-reflection, critical thinking, moral growth, and lifelong learning—areas

of leader development that have garnered little, if any, systematic attention in the

Navy writ large.

The Navy Leader Development Strategy further describes the "Leader Devel-

opment Outcomes" (LDOs) that connect education, training, experience, and

personal development, enabling their systematic alignment in order to optimize

Navy leader development. The LDOs are the character attributes, behaviors,

and skills expected of Navy leaders—enlisted and officer—as defined for spe-

cific career-transition points. They set the leader expectations for each of us

at all ranks, and they will be integrated throughout the Leader Development

Continuum. Foundational LDOs are included in the Navy Leader Development

Strategy; expanded LDOs for enlisted personnel, warrant officers, and commis-

sioned officers were approved by the Vice Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral

Mark Ferguson, in August 2013.

The CNO is leading this charge. The Leader Development Continuum Coun-

cil (LDCC)—a body of key stakeholders at the flag and master-chief level, chaired

by the President of the Naval War College—is guiding the principal processes

necessary for establishing a career-long Leader Development Continuum. The

LDCC in turn reports to the Advanced Education Review Board (AERB), chaired

by the Vice Chief of Naval Operations. Navy community leaders (type com-

manders) are charged with tailoring leader development continuums within their

communities that integrate the unifying Leader Development Outcomes while

also recognizing the specific character and unique needs of each community—a

process that is now well under way.

Where do we go from here?

Our first priority in establishing a Leader Development Continuum is to le-

verage existing programs and structures. Within our Navy there are numerous

development opportunities—whether through experience, education, training.

KELLY

or personal development. These opportunities require aligning, synchronizing, and sequencing to enable systematic and progressive leader development. We are also looking to communities to share best practices; we can learn from each other. Additionally, as gaps in leader development are identified we are pursuing ways to address them. Ultimately, we must be imbued with the mind-set—and operate with the conviction—that developing our people as leaders is central to our warfighting ethos. As the CNO notes in his opening letter in the Navy Leader Development Strategy, time associated with rigorous leader development is "complementary" to and "necessary" for the demands of technical and tactical competence. This is the extraordinary culture change we seek.

Realizing this vision for leader development means the Navy must embrace in- stitutional and cultural change. This is a vision that transcends our distinct Navy communities and extends beyond ensuring the mastery of specific technical and tactical skills. Indeed, rethinking the way we approach Navy leader development will filter into everything we do, including career management, evaluation sys- tems, etc. We are preparing the next generation of leaders for three decades into our future. This culture change will take time and effort, but we cannot afford to say that it is too hard or too big, or that there is too much pushback, and not get it done. We have to do what we know is right for our Navy and our Sailors. We have to do the best we can for our people as leaders, or our platforms simply won't mat- ter. Although we know that competence reigns supreme, we also need to focus on developing leaders of character on the basis of our ethos and the unique qualities of naval service to strengthen the naval profession. Character is as much a core competency as technical and tactical prowess.

A final point. At the core of the profession of arms is a sense of service. By improving our leader development practices—and making the positive changes in our personnel and institutional systems that it will certainly engender—we will renew our commitment to the naval profession and the development of our Sail- ors as leaders who exemplify the highest standards of service. The Navy Leader Development Strategy states that "there is no higher priority than to develop effec- tive Navy leaders." We owe it to our Sailors, our service, and our nation to ensure that our actions and our efforts fully reflect that priority.

REAR ADMIRAL JAMES KELLY, USN (RET.)

Rear Admiral Kelly is dean of the College of Operational and Strategic Leadership at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island. A former Naval Flight Officer (at his retirement in 2009 he was the longest-serving Naval Flight Officer on active duty), he commanded Attack Squadron 115, USS Sacramento (AOF 1), USS Con- stellation (CV 62), Carrier Strike Group 5, and Task Force 70.

f;,'

/

Rear Admiral Walter E. "Ted" Carter, Jr., became the

fifty-fourth President of the U.S. Naval War College

on 2 July 2013. A native ofBurrillville, Rhode Island,

he graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1981,

was designated a Naval Flight Officer in 1982, and

graduatedfrom Top Gun in 1985.

His career as an aviator includes sea assignments in

Fighter Squadron (VF) ¡61, on board USS Midway (CV 41); in VF-21, the "Freelancers," on board USS

Independence (CV 62); in Carrier Air Wing Five (CVW 5); in command of the VF-14 "Tophatters";

and as executive officer of USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75), culminating in command of USS Camden (AOE 2) and USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70). Subsequent fleet command assignment includes service as Com-

mander, Enterprise Carrier Strike Croup (CSG 12).

Carter has served in numerous shore assignments,

including VF-124, the "Gunslingers"; in Fighter Wing

Pacific; as executive assistant to the Deputy Com-

mander, U.S. Central Command; as chief of staff

of the Joint Warfighting Center, U.S. Joint Forces

Command; as Commander, Joint Enabling Capabili-

ties Command; and as Director, 21st Century Sailor

Office (N17).

He has led strategic projects, including the dis-

establishment of U.S. Joint Forces Command, and

most recently, was charged with leading Task Force

RESILIENT.

He is the recipient of various personal awards, in-

cluding the Defense Superior Service Medal (two

awards). Legion of Merit (three awards). Distin-

guished Flying Cross with Combat V, Bronze Star,

Air Medal (two with Combat V and five strike/

flight), and Navy and Marine Corps Commendation

Medal (two with Combat V). He was also awarded

the Vice Admiral James Bond Stockdale Leadership

Award and the U.S. Navy League's John Paul Jones

Award for Inspirational Leadership and was ap-

pointed an Honorary Master Chief by the Master

Chief Petty Officer of the Navy.

He has accumulated 6,150 flight hours in F-4, F-14, andF-lS aircraft andhas made 2,016 carrier-arrested landings, the record among all active and retired U.S. naval aviation designators. He has also flown 125 combat missions in support of joint operations.

Copyright of Naval War College Review is the property of Naval War College and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.