An Officer.......

"Rick Folkers" wrote in message
news:AKx_b.1212$Ri6.512@lakeread04...
Art, that is just BS. There are times and ways to complain. And
there
are times and ways to explain to subordinates. Anybody who thinks
they are above explanations was a sorry excuse for an officer. That
was
what I used to call an "Imperial Officer", one who was more aware of
the
privileges of being an officer than of the responsibilities.

There are several styles of leadership, and the style Art was taught was
identified at OCS as 'Autocratic'.

We were also taught that a good officer should be able to adapt his
leadership style
to the circumstances he was in. There are times when it *is* very
necessary to be autocratic
and there are times when its better to be rather less so. A good
officer should be able to alter
his style according to need without comprising his integrity, authority
or effectiveness.

Times change and so do the philosphies of leadership. It's worth noting
that the autocratic type of
officer historically came about when the OR's were uneducated and mostly
illiterate, ie dumb grunts.
(I'm not talking recent history here).

Consequently leaderships styles have had to become both more flexible
and less autocratic, as we
are dealing with rankers that are far better educated than many officers
were a hundred years ago.
It hard to drive such people, but they can be *led*.

The CO

Subject: An Officer.......
From: nt (Krztalizer)
Date: 2/23/04 10:13 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: 20040223131354.20632.0000025

o you know what
his MOS was; pilot, bombardier or gunner? The search goes on.

Pilot, got his B-26 start at Lake Charles, then went over to the same
locations
you did, apparently.

Yup. So did we.

The photos he showed me of the "Flak Hotel" were at
Southport, I think.

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR


OK that meant we were all flying out of Stansted at the time. One of my
favorite towns in the whole world.We must have flown an awful lot of missions
together.That helps. I'll check with my pilot Paul Shorts to see if he knew
Biggs. I'll get back to you when I get more info.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Subject: An Officer.......
From: "The CO"
Date: 2/23/04 6:30 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


"Rick Folkers" wrote in message
news:AKx_b.1212$Ri6.512@lakeread04...
Art, that is just BS. There are times and ways to complain. And
there
are times and ways to explain to subordinates. Anybody who thinks
they are above explanations was a sorry excuse for an officer. That
was
what I used to call an "Imperial Officer", one who was more aware of
the
privileges of being an officer than of the responsibilities.

There are several styles of leadership, and the style Art was taught was
identified at OCS as 'Autocratic'.

We were also taught that a good officer should be able to adapt his
leadership style
to the circumstances he was in. There are times when it *is* very
necessary to be autocratic
and there are times when its better to be rather less so. A good
officer should be able to alter
his style according to need without comprising his integrity, authority
or effectiveness.

Times change and so do the philosphies of leadership. It's worth noting
that the autocratic type of
officer historically came about when the OR's were uneducated and mostly
illiterate, ie dumb grunts.
(I'm not talking recent history here).

Consequently leaderships styles have had to become both more flexible
and less autocratic, as we
are dealing with rankers that are far better educated than many officers
were a hundred years ago.
It hard to drive such people, but they can be *led*.

The CO



Here are some more caveats from my training. When you issue and order to a
subordinate there are only three answers allowed. They a
1. YES SIR
2. NO SIR
3. NO EXCUSE SIR

But when you are issued an order from a superior officer there are three
answers allowed. They a
1.YES SIR
2. NO SIR
3. NO EXCUSE SIR

Remember that I wasn't in the Air Force. I was in the Army Air Corps, emphasis
on ARMY and went through a full schedule of combat infantry training as well as
flight school and as an officer as well.. Good thing too because during the
Battle of the Bulge we were all issued M-1 Carbines and thrown into the line
along with the XXX Corps. And I never ever heard any long discussions
involving diverse opinions on what we should do. Orders were issued and were
followed without question. We knew what we should do and we did it. And
remember we won that war so maybe we knew something back then that the military
has forgotten since.




Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Note that I said there are times and places for explanations.
But read what you want, the units I was in were damn good
and I will fight with them and lead them again any day of the week.


"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
Subject: An Officer.......
From: "The CO"
Date: 2/23/04 6:30 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


"Rick Folkers" wrote in message
news:AKx_b.1212$Ri6.512@lakeread04...
Art, that is just BS. There are times and ways to complain. And
there
are times and ways to explain to subordinates. Anybody who thinks
they are above explanations was a sorry excuse for an officer. That
was
what I used to call an "Imperial Officer", one who was more aware of
the
privileges of being an officer than of the responsibilities.

There are several styles of leadership, and the style Art was taught was
identified at OCS as 'Autocratic'.

We were also taught that a good officer should be able to adapt his
leadership style
to the circumstances he was in. There are times when it *is* very
necessary to be autocratic
and there are times when its better to be rather less so. A good
officer should be able to alter
his style according to need without comprising his integrity, authority
or effectiveness.

Times change and so do the philosphies of leadership. It's worth noting
that the autocratic type of
officer historically came about when the OR's were uneducated and mostly
illiterate, ie dumb grunts.
(I'm not talking recent history here).

Consequently leaderships styles have had to become both more flexible
and less autocratic, as we
are dealing with rankers that are far better educated than many officers
were a hundred years ago.
It hard to drive such people, but they can be *led*.

The CO



Here are some more caveats from my training. When you issue and order to a
subordinate there are only three answers allowed. They a
1. YES SIR
2. NO SIR
3. NO EXCUSE SIR

But when you are issued an order from a superior officer there are three
answers allowed. They a
1.YES SIR
2. NO SIR
3. NO EXCUSE SIR

Remember that I wasn't in the Air Force. I was in the Army Air Corps,
emphasis
on ARMY and went through a full schedule of combat infantry training as
well as
flight school and as an officer as well.. Good thing too because during
the
Battle of the Bulge we were all issued M-1 Carbines and thrown into the
line
along with the XXX Corps. And I never ever heard any long discussions
involving diverse opinions on what we should do. Orders were issued and
were
followed without question. We knew what we should do and we did it. And
remember we won that war so maybe we knew something back then that the
military
has forgotten since.




Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

OK that meant we were all flying out of Stansted at the time. One of my
favorite towns in the whole world.We must have flown an awful lot of missions
together.That helps. I'll check with my pilot Paul Shorts to see if he knew
Biggs. I'll get back to you when I get more info.

Al Briggs - thanks for checking for me, Art.

v/r
Gordon
PS one of my next projects is to make a B-26 display for the museum; something
like a compact kiosk that would have displays on four sides. Our WWII area is
really dominated by the carrier display, to the point that there is very little
room left for other theatres or aircraft types. With space at a premium, I
figure I can probably get away with this sort of display, if I do it well. I
am going to have enlargements of my images (Midnight Marauder after its snowy
crash with a full bomb load, crew photos from Lake Charles, etc.) mounted on
foam and laminated for the kiosk, then I have some other items that would fit
in. What do you think?

Here are some more caveats from my training. When you issue and order to a
subordinate there are only three answers allowed. They a
1. YES SIR
2. NO SIR
3. NO EXCUSE SIR

But when you are issued an order from a superior officer there are three
answers allowed. They a
1.YES SIR
2. NO SIR
3. NO EXCUSE SIR

Modern-day similarities: 5 responses in Air Force ROTC training
1.Yes Sir/Ma'am
2.No Sir/Ma'am
3.I do not know but will find out, sir/ma'am
4. May I ask a question, sir/ma'am?
5.May I make a statement, sir/ma'am?


And I never ever heard any long discussions
involving diverse opinions on what we should do. Orders were issued and were
followed without question. We knew what we should do and we did it.

Just because you are willing to discuss your plans with your troops
does not mean that it undermines your authority. Often the troops an
officer is commanding are more experienced than them. As cadets, we
are taught by our officers that our NCOs will know more than us, and
we would be stupid to ignore their advice. But the fact that you are
intelligent enough to use the experience available to you will often
improve confidence in you as a leader. The only real way to lose that
confidence is care more about yourself or "discipline" than getting
the mission done. You act with conviction and intelligence and your
men will follow you to the end. You act like a "candyass butterbar"
(one of the first sergeants at McGuire AFB told me this), you will be
having every problem in the book.

And
remember we won that war so maybe we knew something back then that the military
has forgotten since.
Sir, I respect you for your past accomplishments, but this is a
little over the line. It is not the military's management styles that
make a difference, it is the political leadership that has decided the
outcome of the past 50 years of military conflicts.

In article ,
says...
An officer never complains.

Show me a group that isn't griping, and I'll show you a group with a
morale problem.


Soviet soldiers in WW2 did not complain. According to the Russian
authorities they had few if any morale problems.




--
On the free trade agreement between Australia and the US there is a big
difference between the heading of the agreement and the body states.

Observations of Bernard - No 47

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 21:33:36 +1100, Bernardz wrote:

In article ,
says...
An officer never complains.

Show me a group that isn't griping, and I'll show you a group with a
morale problem.


Soviet soldiers in WW2 did not complain. According to the Russian
authorities they had few if any morale problems.

I remember reading a report right before the Soviet Union broke up. A
delegation lead by a Soviet general was visiting American bases in Germany.
A US Army general was leading the tour and pointed out enlisted barracks on
one base. After pointing them out he also noted to the Soviet that the
majority of the enlisted personnel actually lived off-post renting their
own apartments and houses. The Soviet general thought about that for a few
seconds before asking, "How do you get them to come back?"

-Jeff B.
yeff at erols dot com

"Bernardz" wrote in message
news:MPG.1aa5d38fc0183f9f98992b@news...
In article ,
says...
An officer never complains.

Show me a group that isn't griping, and I'll show you a group with a
morale problem.


Soviet soldiers in WW2 did not complain. According to the Russian
authorities they had few if any morale problems.


Given that the Soviet Authorities had a a habit of sending anyone
found complaining to a Gulag this is scarcely surprising.

Keith

"Bernardz" wrote

Soviet soldiers in WW2 did not complain. According to the Russian
authorities they had few if any morale problems.

Hilarious! The reason so many Russians died in WW#2, was their
officers kept shooting them.