Leadership Debate

[STANDTO]

On the back of the stirring speech on Royal Irish thread, I read with interest the criticism of Air Force Officers and what they could learn from Army leadership.

Is any perceived lack of leadership skills in the higher echelons of the RAF borne from the fact that all the top jobs are invariably filled by pilots, who might be very good at commanding aircraft, planning sorties and having the clarity of thought to sort spontaneous problems out, they perhaps do not have the exposure to building command skills via the platoon, division, regiment, brigade route as a 2nd Lt would. They also remain more detached by virtue of their primary role (flying planes)

Again, the RN have a similar advantage to the army, in that everyone is esconced in boats of varying sizes and they have very real and dare I use the term, intimate contact with each other on a 24 hour basis. This obviously develops a different style of leadership, especially when one considers a warship is an integrated fighting system.

So, the question bears out, do officers of say, the RAF Regt, have a better grounding for the rigours of higher leadership positions than those with wings.

Light touch paper, and retire to safe distance :hmm: :hmm: :hmm:

[Mach the Knife]

Well they would have if they were not all as thick as two short planks.

[fatjockslim]

I would have to say that there are some very good leaders in all branches of the RAF. However, those with real qualities, ie inspire the troops, put others before themselves etc tend to get disilusioned with the system and leave for greener pastures. The few that are left can then aspire to great things.
Whilst it is certainly true that those with wings can have little experience of man-management, and this frequently displays itself, the more fundamental point that should be asked is; why we (to use an analogy) always have the bus driver in charge of the national bus company.
If we were to promote leaders, not self-interested, second-rate managers/paper pushers/politicians etc in all branches, we might all be in a healthier position.


I'll get off the fence now. :D

[Low Ball]

I'm reminded of the War in Iraq programme (this week or last can't remember which) where bold CO of Tornado squadron was interviewed washing his 'smalls' outside air conditioned portakabin and said without a hint of embarrassment that he didn't much like killing people. What on earth is he doing in the job? Further what a cracking example to the rest of his men!

LB

[newswatcher]

That could be a dangerous view you appear to be taking LB.

Are you suggesting that only homicidal maniacs should be promoted to senior officer?:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[DamienB]

I rather thought Low Ball was referring to the public washing of underwear, when senior officers should have somebody to do that sort of thing for them? :E

[ORAC]

Absolutely. Everyone knows you shoudn't wash dirty linen in public. :E

[Phoney Tony]

Under going one of the many leadership/ management/ staff training periods I have undergone during my time in the services (Note the lack of the word career) I was asked what was the most important quality of a leader.

After much discussion I came to the conclusion that telling the truth was the most important quality of a true leader.

Recent events (WMD etc etc), uncertainty about TOS, pensions etc etc demonstrate my point. Do we believe our leaders Military or Political?

Your sincerely PHONEY TONY

I was once told that once an officer could fake sincerity he had the job hacked!

[KPax]

'Deliverance' next you will be telling me you have to have a comission to be a pilot, oops silly me. Maybe someone should tell the Army and Marines that they can't have pilots who are NCO's, and who are unable to lead men.

[fatjockslim]

I suppose on that logic, the best aircraft engineering officers would have to be pilots and to be a good air traffic controller you would also have to be a pilot......:rolleyes:

[2 TWU]

Fatjockslim, if you have any knowledge of the RAF in the not too distant past, then you will know that Engineers were trained as pilots and given a flying tour, Air Traffic had a percentage of aircrew on gound tours and indeed Docs were flight trained and given a flying tour. Maybe we can't afford it now but the reasons for doing that must still be valid.

And, I forgot to put in my last post, I've seen an OC Admin Wing with wings.

[fatjockslim]

Can't recall any of them (or navigators) becoming CAS!

[Firestreak]

OC ADMIN with wings----Gutersloh early 70s? Magic days.

[Flatus Veteranus]

Stand To et al.

My experience of working closely with the army was that "leadership" at the sharp end was exercised by the NCOs. The "wuperts" were there mainly to learn how to become Majors and Lt Cols, which amounted largely to bullsh*t and bluster.

The eve-of-battle speech by OC Royal Irish read very well. But I noted in the press accounts that it was received in silence by the men. Could this have been because the rhetoric was over their heads? Or perhaps they were just plain embarassed?

If any staish got up in a RAF briefing room and tried that sort of stunt, I imagine that the assembled crews would have tried to hide their embarassment either by falling about laughing or by barracking him. Light blue culture is (or was) very different from brown or dark blue - much less defferential, thank God! Take a look at the I Gp Reunion thread again.

[KPax]

I believe the the 'premier rotary flying school' based in Shropshire has a Gp Capt Air Trafficker as Staish. Maybe someone up there is beginning to see sense. All right he wears a flying suit some of the time but he is a 'non flyer'.

[RubiC Cube]

LB

OC 9 Sqn said "he wasn't comfortable with the situation" which I think was in reference to the justification for the war and his having to kill innocent people on such a flimsy justification. Having spoken to many who have been in similar situations since Kosovo, Afghahanistan and now the Gulf, I have found a surprisingly high number of people who have become increasingly uncomfortable with being sent to war on Bliar's whims. Their main question has been "what has this got to do with the defence of the realm?"

[Blacksheep]

Throughout my (non-flying) aviation career, first in the RAF then in civilian life, I have encountered many excellent leaders and not a few 'oxygen thieves'. I consider that Leadership has nothing to do with occupation and little to do with everyday management skills. Leadership is a state of mind.

The very nature of the pilot's working environment causes a problem in developing leadership skills. Flying an aircraft more often than not places a pilot in isolation, focussed on the mission. Even in multi-crew aircraft or multi-ship formations, the enclosed world of the aircraft creates isolation. Among many other essential skills and character traits, Leadership calls for the ability to appreciate the broad picture and the cockpit is not an ideal training ground in this area. I find many of the pilots with whom I regularly work, unable to appreciate the logistical and financial implications of the actions they propose. They see things only from a direct operational point of view, ignore or cannot see inevitable consequences and do not instinctively consider all aspects of an issue. So, perhaps the fact that senior RAF officers are produced exclusively from the pilot community really is a factor in any perceived lack of leadership.

While pilots may or may not be good at combining aeroplane flying with leadership, consider this: Lord Trenchard, without whom the RAF probably wouldn't exist, was rated as a very mediocre pilot. Yet he commanded the RFC's CFS, went on to command the Corps in France during the difficult days of 1917 and although initially opposed to its formation, finally rose to command the fledgling RAF as the first CAS.

Was this in spite of, or because of his handicap of starting his career as a mediocre pilot? There was certainly nothing wrong with his Leadership.

**************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

[AceRimmer]

There can be no better style of leadership than that shown by Lloyd Bridges 'Admiral' character in 'Hot Shots'
After discovering that contractors have tried to sabotage aircraft he utters the immortal line
"You risked the lives of some damn fine pilots because of this. thats my job!"
Punch himdown the stairs, into a dentists chair who enquires 'Is it safe?' before applying the drill!
Absolute Class
The previous statement about 'those that can lead, leave. Those that can't, stay.' is becoming more true.
Sad really

There can be no better style of leadership than that shown by Lloyd Bridges 'Admiral' character in 'Hot Shots'
After discovering that contractors have tried to sabotage aircraft he utters the immortal line
"You risked the lives of some damn fine pilots because of this. Thats my job!"
Punch him down the stairs, into a dentists chair who enquires 'Is it safe?' before applying the drill!
Absolute Class
The previous statement about 'those that can lead, leave. Those that can't, stay.' is becoming more true.
Sad really

[STANDTO]

some interesting stuff here. In my current occupation, even those destines for greatness by way of the High Potential Development Scheme and graduate entry, still have to do their time on the shop floor. QUite often, the 'great' (and I use the term very loosely) leaders come from a CID background, which is clearly very specialised, but doesn't always provide the officer with the big picture of our core business, which is still FIBUA with drunk and belligerent people on a friday and saturday night.

Some have posted the view that you have to be able to fly and deliver to understand the core business of the Air Force. I could suppose also that it would be unreaonable to expect someone to do something you hadn't done yourself? That said though, if the art of war,whether land, sea or air based is studied at the right level, each asset (aircraft, ship or platoon) is simply a pawn on a board. When one rises to that strategic level I wonder if something a little bit more than just a drivers permit is required?

[FishHead]

From Low Ball:

... where bold CO of Tornado squadron was interviewed washing his 'smalls' outside air conditioned portakabin and said without a hint of embarrassment that he didn't much like killing people. What on earth is he doing in the job? Further what a cracking example to the rest of his men!


So the alternative then is a CO who turns to the camera and says "Actually, I quite like killing people" ?

Surely the point of the job is to achieve a mission (which may invovle some fatalities), but in the end, we don't go killing people just because we can - otherwise we would never have to worry about POWs - we could just shoot them all as they arrive for processing.

I find the statement by that CO to be quite appropriate... an setting a fine example to his men

[Frosty Hoar]

The issue of leadership is highly subjective and depends on the individual concerned, the armed forces as a whole are littered with good and bad "leaders".

At high level in the armed forces I would wager that "management" skills are more relevant than "leadership" ability and by the nature of their tasks successful pilots are normally successful managers.:hmm:

[Samuel]

There was a CAS of the RNZAF who was a Nav, and he was ex-RAF!

Bloody good golf handicap too!:ok:

[FishHead]

Samuel,

And look where having a Nav in charge got them in the end!

[Obs cop]

Leadership in the forces is fundamentally spilt into 3 broad sections.

The most focused on section through this thread is the interaction between managers and staff. The leaders ability to motivate and inspire their staff.

The other 2 factors which leaders must combine with this is the need to operate in a tactical sphere and for some the need to operate in a strategic sphere.

With regards to the Army and the Royal Navy, both operate in cohesive units where each individuals survival is dependant on the person next to them. They are reliant on their tacticians to keep them alive. Their leaders are in the field with them and in many respects are equally as vulnerable as them. This drives the leaders to operate as part of the much larger team. The powers that be are thus afforded the tools of staff management skills, tactical know how and knowledge of the strategy.

The light blues have a major difference in the way they deploy to war. In the vast majority of cases, the people in the direct line of fire are aircrew and aircrew alone. They are the minority who receive and employ the tactics and are the unfortunates should those tactics be amiss. Some have said in the past the there are 2 tiers within the Royal Air Force: Those with wings and those without. The separation that this brings means 2 things. Pilots may be better tacticians, but have less inter-personal skills for dealing with staff. Non-flying managers will generally have better inter-personal skills for dealing with their staff but far less tactical clout. So who do you promote into posts to lead the force into war? There is no easy answer.

All 3 organisations have good and bad leaders. Not all of the attributes of leadership come from external sources, for some it is their innate ability. Tim Collins was the right man in the right place at the right time. I believe his type is becoming a rarity and that more and more leaders are developing into mini politicians. Tim Collins got it right in his actions as he believed in being in the thick of it and not leading from the back. A lesson for all leaders I believe.


All IMHO. Hmmmm.........awaiting incomming.

Obs cop

[Blacksheep]

There is an 'easy' answer Obs cop, but it isn't all that easy to achieve. Despite Deliverance's comment about my earlier post I do recognise that the top men have to come from the operations side of the force - i.e. pilots. I do consider though, that since this occupation tends not to develop strong interpersonal and leadership skills, the pilot's career path must be constructed to include leadership situations. Too many ground tours are meaningless paper pushing desk jobs, but useful practical experiences - a ground tour as officer i/c an apprentice entry for example - are a rarity now. Nevertheless, in a service such as the RAF there must be plenty of ways to provide meaningful personal development opportunities. Sadly, it seems that poor leadership is, like a virus, self-replicating.

**************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

PS Before anyone pounces on me for the desk job comment, I realise that plenty of desk jobs are useful for developing managerial skills. However, it is Leadership that is under discussion.

[Flatus Veteranus]

The RAF's problems in developing "interpersonal and leadership skills" among junior GD officers started with the usurpation of command of the ground trades by the engineers. During my service this reached its nadir in the V Force, where the squadrons withered into aircrew training management organisations.

On a fighter squadron in the Middle East in the 1950s when the Sqn Eng O had a small squad of specialists and all the first line servicing was done in the flights, commanded by GD Pilots, there was no problem with "interpersonal skills". Within the flights, each junior pilot was made responsible for the welfare and (to some extent) discipline of a small number of airmen - rather like the RN divisional officer.

Can you really imagine a plumber, caterer or equipper, when the chips are down, doing the job of a Guy Gibson, Leonard Cheshire, or Douglas Bader? Have another look at "Twelve O'clock High" and try to imagine an administrator filling Gary Cooper's role!

IMHO one of the greatest leaders ever, in any of the services, who imposed appalling casulaties on his command and yet was revered by them was (not Earl Haigh - you guessed right) but "Bomber" Harris.

[Obs cop]

Quite right Blacksheep.

I am not particularly pro-army, but there does appear to be a lot of logic in their approach.

The first appointment of any young Army Air Corps officer is 6 months commanding an infantry platoon. Or so I understood when I was considering transfering from the Royal Navy!

Likewise, the Royal Navy do 6 months fleet time in which their young officers command working parties on the decks of warships.

Such is the integration of these forces that anyone chasing their aspirations to command must first learn how to be part of the team. Most of my experience is from the Navy so I can say that their potential leaders are groomed by ensuring they undertake the right jobs. Virtually all will serve a lot of time in the working guts of an operational warship, but many complete tours at the Naval Colledge at Dartmouth training and developing young officers, or as staff at Raleigh in charge of Ratings training.

It takes a large team to fight a warship and no individual can achieve it. The same occurs within the ground fighting of the Army.

The only way that the light blues will compete in leadership terms wil be to drag aviators out of their aircraft and to put them in people management roles.

[BEagle]

Ah - but FV, we now have the benefits of 'Management by Objectives', 'Executive Responsibility Budgets', 'Investment in People', etc, etc:yuk: :yuk: Not to forget 'Equal Opportunities Training'.........and the political correctness which followed Pink Wednesday:ooh:

For a true vision of hell, forget the joys of Penguin Palaces such as PMA, try the Bull$hit Pavilions at Wyton where the Paperwork Plumbers practice their trade of shuffling paper about - very, very slowly!

Do you remember those little stickers which used to appear around the bazaars in the 1970s - "The purpose of the Air Force is to fly and fight; the purpose of those who don't is to support those who do"? Few do, 'twould seem.

But I didn't personally worry about station wheels being non-pilots - only because they couldn't pinch my trips!


Heard a tale about a Harrier mate who was stuck behind some desk at Wyton in the days before the aerodrome re-opened. Apparently he arranged a little visit from a chum up the road at Wittering to coincide with the start of some meeting or other. As the plumbers were chattering about whatever plumbers talk about, there was a shattering roar precisely at the second the meeting was due to start. The plumbers jumped out of their skins, after which said mate continued "Good morning. THAT, gentleman, is what the RAF is all about........" :ok: :ok:

[Blacksheep]

So tell me, how did plumbers become paper shufflers? :confused:

In the old hair farce, plumbers were big muscular chaps who heaved bombs about and looked after all the bits that make loud satisfying explosions. They were good leaders too. Just follow a plumber and they'd always lead you to the nearest bar.

**************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

[Incipient Sinner]

I wholeheartedly agree with all the above, our future leaders should be operationally focussed and air minded.

It is the fault of the system and not the individual that the first man management our winged brethren partake in is detachment or squadron command with decidedly mixed results.

Bring in Station Adjutant tours for man management experience for those destined for greater things.

:8