Arrogance and Leadership

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Someone commented on my arrogance in another thread. I've been waiting for that one.

Arrogant is defined in Webster's as "over convinced of one's own importance." It also uses words like, haughty, cavalier, disdainful, presumptuous, proud, and superior.

If, as leaders, we have placed ourselves in a position to make decisions for others which will effect their lives and well-being, is that not arrogant?

Who are we to say that our concepts of right/wrong, correct/incorrect should supercede those of the people which we supervise-manage-lead? I do!

Yes, I am arrogant. And, my concepts of right/wrong, correct/incorrect supercede yours because I have elected to take on the responsibility of making those decisions. If things go well, my arrogance was a good thing. If things go badly, it's my fault.

If you don't like it, then step up to the plate and take your own swings at that ball of responsibility. Of course, it would be pretty arrogant of you to think that you could...

[ETCS David Kroll]

OK Dennis, I can't refuse to chime in on this one you arrogant *&^%$#.

As your definition states, your over convinced of your importance! And why the heck do YOU feel your so important? Wasn't someone the OIC of your cutter before you got there? And when you retire, isn't someone going to be able to run the boat? Or am I saying that every OIC should be arrogant. Come on Dennis, give me a break, you are important, yes. Even critical to the success of the boat, yes. That doesn't mean your not replacable, because you are, we all are. I bet SCPO Pupo is doing a fine job at Montauk, does that mean he should be arrogant? No it doesn't.

We all do great things for our units and our people. That makes us leaders and we shouldn't be arrogant for that. We should be proud and maybe even humble for what we do. For without the great crews we all have, we wouldn't be leaders.

Now get off that high horse and come back to reality!
Your buddy, ;)
Dave

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Dennis,

My Merriam-Webster disctionary has a slighlty different definition. I like it better because I think it more accurately defines the word. It says "Offensively exaggerating one's own importance".

Making decisions, no matter what they pertain to, doesn't make someone arrogant. Believing that you are the only one who can make that decision is what makes someone arrogant.

[BMC Kerry Wagoner]

Interesting topic. Arrogance, used correctly, is a good thing. Just today I had a cause to use "arrogance" with dealing with those higher up than me. Had a issue of tasking which did not involve the approval of my immediate supervisor. When I dealt with the orginator of the tasking, he stated that I was arrogant with the way I handled the situation. Who cares, as the Chief, sometimes you have to step of a few toes and just say no. But use it in moderation. :D

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Moderately arrogant? Is that like jumbo shrimp?

[BMC Kerry Wagoner]

:D Don't know, do not like seafood. :D

[PACS Steve Carleton]

Arrogance is an absolutely essential trait of the CHIEF! I think that might be a quote in my Charge Book!

The key is how we handle this arrogance, situational and like everything else, moderation is key. Again, it is simply a tool that we can use.

I had a recent example where I was called an arrogant CPO by an O3 and and O1 in a series of e-mails back and forth and then copied to my supervisor.
They were asking my supervisor if they should discuss the situation with me themselves or should he take care of it.

His decision was for him to take care of it -- He did by showing me the e-mails, hearing my side of the story, sharing a few laughs and commenting that if we sit around waiting for a couple of USCGA graduates to take care of something it will never get done. But if you irritate a Chief bad enough, he will take matters into his own hands and deliver the goods.

Then he replied to the two O's, blind copying me that they should learn a thing or two from a Chief and could start by being a Sea Lawyer for one during CCTI.

[BMC Ken Gouge]

Steve, I agree but I think "Arrogance" is just the wrong choice of words. Instead of definitions lets look at some synonyms for it:

conceit, haughtiness, egotism, superiority, overconfidence, self-importance, condescension.

Those are not words you would compliment someone with or strive to achieve.

On the other hand the main Antonym listed is Humility. Isn't that one of the things we learn from CCTI?

Dennis, your concept is on the money. We must be definitive, decisive, unwaivering and influential. If we can be those things without arrogance we can be great leaders. Add arrogance and we become dictators and tyrants.

Ken

[GMC Thomas Hogge]

There is a fine line between arrogance and confidence. As leaders and mentors, we must keep on the correct side of this line and try to teach our junior enlisted/junior officers to do so also.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Time for me to chime in as well. I am not conceded.... I am convinced. As an Officer in Charge, I am always right, at work. As a married man, I am never right, at home. At work all I have to do is follow and enforce the COMDT policy for the task or situation at hand and I will always be right. It is that simple. In the entire history of enlisted command , no one has ever been relieved for cause for following COMDT policy. No one has ever gone to mast, courts martial, or the the brig for following the policies set forth by COMDT. The COMDT sets the policy, advances the members, and puts them in positions of great responsibility, to do his bidding. The people who think that they got to those positions on their own are not arrogant, they're ignorant. You can have an IQ of 275, rewrite the coats and colors manual from memory and write 150 on the SWE, but until the COMDT advances you.......you are stuck in your paygrade. Certify across the board, but until the COMDT sends you to your own unit.........your passing out basketballs at the gym. We like to feel important in the fact that we write the policies and procedures for our unit, but if you ever need to know your true station in this system, write a policy that directly conflicts with COMDT policy and send it up the chain promising to implement it and arrogantly refusing to be told otherwise and see how long you stay in that position of responsibility. Reality check.......we are advanced by our knowledge of COMDT policies and procedure (SWE) and our ability to follow them (EER). The smartest person in the room is the one who can show the COMDT policy that shows why they did what they did and why then and only then, it was the right thing to do.
The policies in the marriage change every minute, and the sooner you realize that you're the one who is always wrong, the happier you with be.

[BMCS Shawn Vredenburg]

Stuart said "At work all I have to do is follow and enforce the COMDT policy for the task or situation at hand and I will always be right. It is that simple. In the entire history of enlisted command , no one has ever been relieved for cause for following COMDT policy. No one has ever gone to mast, courts martial, or the the brig for following the policies set forth by COMDT."

I disagree with your premise.

I think units have commanders, whether they be a BM1 OIC of an ANT, a BMCM OIC of a Station, an O-2 CO of a WPB, or a O-6 CO of a WHEC, to determine when to deviate from policies. It's our job to follow policy. But when that policy gets in the way of safety, or prevents us from doing something that NEEDS to be done (save lives), then we are the ones who must use the judgement (risk assessment?) to determine whether it is the right thing to do or not.

Other than that, I agree with you. I'm arrogant as hell. Ask anyone :cool:

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

I'm not saying that everyone needs to agree with me..........somebody has to be wrong. But I'm not aware of any COMDT policy that gets in the way of safety or prevents you from saving lives, unless you are unduely risking CG lives to do so. Also I believe that the risk assessment tool that you are using to determine those tasks, is also derived from a COMDT policy. I could be wrong........but what are the odds on that.

[ETCS David Kroll]

This is just something I noticed.

The majority of people responding to this thread are BM's!! Does that tell you anything? I've had to deal with arrogant BM's most of my career and one thing being arrogant does is it makes you loss the respected by of some of your peers. Sometimes it just gets old and you tend to get tuned out. Something to consider. :rolleyes:

[BMC Ken Gouge]

Yeah Senior, but we love you guys that can fix the stuff we break! :rolleyes:

The BM's are the reason that Commandant invented grey areas in the really cool policies.

[OSC Bill Putnam]

The character trait being described in this thread that I would want to see in people of leadership positions is assurance , not arrogance . Assurance inspires confidence in those you are leading that as a team you will not fail. Arrogance breeds among those you lead, a hope that you will fail.

my 2 cents... Bill

[BMCS Bill Gheen]

My opinion here is not a bashing, but merely a reflection of my perspective regarding arrogance.

Being confident is a good quality, but being arrogant is not, particularly when you are leading others and have responsibility for units/crews within our organization.

When we come to the table, knowing all the answers, we show how arrogant we are. When we come to the table to help our colleagues and followers seek the answers, then we are humble learners.

"Three things prize above all: gentleness, frugality, and humility. For the gentle can be bold, the frugal can be liberal, and the humble can become leaders of men."
-- LAO TZU

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Maybe, Bill.

What are you when you come to the table expected to give the answer, whether you know you are right or not?

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Ive never met this Loa Tzu guy but I don't think that we travel in the same circles either. Where I've been leaders CAN be humble, the bold Can be gentle and the liberal Can be frugal....not the other way around. And if they can be, they choice not to be. We have fewer and fewer people coming to the table every year, and most that show up don't want to impart their wisdom. If you disagree with the arrogance or attitude of the people willing to stand up and make their views know, advance yourself to a position above theirs and impose your point of view on them. The meek may inherit the earth, but the guy calling the detailer is going to get his assignment preference. If arrogance does nothing else, it can still motivate others to change the things that they disagree with and strive for something not to become. People may want to see the man with all the answers fail, but who do they go to when they have a problem that need to be fixed. The world is waiting for that guy on Jeopardy to lose and I don't see him as arrogant.

[OSCS Janet Ferritto]

Arrogance. It seems that there is an argument about whether or not arrogance is or can be a positive attribute.

Figuratively speaking, I guess someone could stretch the word arrogance into something positive, although I have never in my life heard anyone remark, "You know, I really respect the arrogance of that person". If we do not command respect, we command nothing.

Literally speaking, there is no other connotation involved with the word arrogance. Arrogance is a negative attrribute. Arrogance never solicits positive reactions or respect from those it is imposed upon, most especially other arrogant people. Arrogance should never be strived for or modeled.

Better words for people that come to the table and report the unvarnished truth are persuasive, principled, righteous or bold --- never arrogant, if I may be so bold.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Some of the best Coasties I've known were/are arrogant. Although, it wasn't always their finest quality, it went hand-in-hand with a tenacity to succeed and an enviable track record.

[MCPO Bob Brayman]

Instead of using the term arrogance--meaning in very general terms, to put off others by your self importance...

Use assertive(ness) instead--meaning to act boldly or forcefully, especially in defending one's rights or stating an opinion.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

No I think arrogant is the word. The people, like the ones Dennis is describing, are arrogant. To call them anything thing else is candi-coating it.
They are arrogant, and because of their track record, have every right to be. Some people will always be put off by the guy who is always right. Some people like to wait around to watch the mighty fall. If you're right, and you know it, and your record has proven it, why hid it? Flaunt it. If people don't like that quality in you, tell them to advancement themselves to a position where they don't have to listen to it. Cliche time......you can't argue with success.

[MCPO Bob Brayman]

Still don't buy it, especially in our society...including the military society we live in. The world is full of arrogant leaders...usually in places where folks aren't educated enough to know that there are choices. I don't think arrogant isn't the proper usage of the points made in this thread. Someone who is always right shows proficiency, skill and knowledge. Yes there are those who think they are mightier than those around them and tell them so...that is arrogant. To me it also is a cover for a weakness that they try to hide...history is full of those such as Stalin, Hitler and even a few of our own figures. To state that I am always right, especially when following policy to a finite end has its flaws. Policy is built around the premise that we make choices and sometimes we do have to deviate in the classic "right versus right" scenarios. Policy is meant for those who have a hard time deciding what the right thing to do and give guidance. Okay, I've gone off on a tangent because there are several points to this thread...being arrogant is a dangerous tool in the leadership toolbox and is the equivelant to a sledge hammer and I personally won't be impressed nor be likely to come to someone who reeks of arrogance. Now if you are assertive and even cocky I can use you, however arrogance and its products are useful only in historical contexts on what not to do.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

I'm still not seeing the same policies that you people are discussing. I don't consider myself to be arrogant. I know my station in the system. I have been advanced, certified, and qualified based on my knowledge of polices and procedures. I qualify people at my unit based on their knowledge and understanding of the policies that I set down. I don't like arrogant people...don't know many people that say "Man, I really respect that guy...he's so... arrogant." They might respect many qualities that you possess but I doubt arrogance is one of them. But there are many arrogant people out there that are extremely successful and subject matter specialists in their chosen field. Many arrogant people never hurt anyone other than themselves, through their arrogance.

Find me a situation where you did the right thing, and I'll show you a COMDT policy that backs you up.

Find me a situation where you did the wrong thing, and , you guessed it, I'll show you a COMDT policy that shows you where you went wrong.

And I think, if you think otherwise, you might just be a little arrogant.

And Master Chief, in the "classic" right-vs-right scenerio ? it doesn't matter which right choice you make, neither one is wrong.

[MCPO Bob Brayman]

Okay, I think we all are on the same track but using the definition of a word differently. Stuart, if I'm reading your stuff right...you are a good chief, darn good at what you do and people respect you for it. Additionally you aren't afraid to show it or speak up when someone or something is wrong....that ain't arrogant....that is being on top of your game and assertive AND being "the chief".

However, if you go around letting folks know that your crap don't stink and your the best thing since BM's in a loud and boisterous way....then you are arrogant. If you go around and misuse your knowledge, power and all those chiefly things...then you are arrogant. Back a few years when the differences between the officer and enlisted corp were MUCH more pronounced...we would have thought that person to be a ring knocker.

Back to right vs right...both answers are right--however one right answer may take you outside policy.

[BMC Richard Cheyney]

This is my first post here, but I had to pipe up. So....if a young person E6 or Chief sits at an OIC board attempting to certify and exudes "arrogance", this would be acceptable? I bet not. I don't think at the conclusion of the board the Captain of the board would say..."Boats, you did a fine job, you have great knowledge, and we really liked your arrogance."

Personally I don't care for the word being used in the same breath as Chief. I think we (collectively) are much more effective being confident. If arrogance is key to any of our relationships are we going to shift CCTI focus from humble and humility to arrogant and cocky.

Like I said, my first post here and just MY opinion.

Ric

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Ric, welcome aboard.......I don't think many people receive praise for their arrogance, but I haven't seen anyone denied OinC certification because of it either. I have however seen numerous people denied certification for the appearance of having little or no confidence, for not exuding a command presence.
I've also never heard of a relief for cause based on arrogance alone, but their arrogance may have been a contributing factor causing the situation for which the relief occurred. The RFC for loss of confidence happens all the time.

[ETCS Robert Kelley]

I've worked with many dedicated Coasties that were referred to as arrogant; I have even been called that myself from time to time. When I reflect back on those occasions it seems to me that in addition to displaying professional confidence and ability (highly desired) there was a measure of disrespect towards those who didn’t posses this same level of insight, confidence or ability (un-necessary). It would seem that as true professionals and CHIEFs we could find a better way and even help to mentor or educate those (junior or senior) who were not up to the high standards.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

"...it seems to me that in addition to displaying professional confidence and ability (highly desired) there was a measure of disrespect towards those who didn’t posses this same level of insight, confidence or ability (un-necessary)."

Robert- Well said. That part of the formula never occured to me. "Disrespect" might be a little too harsh. Maybe "disregard" would be better. And even then, we arrogant ones generally don't display that tendency to subordinates. It has more to do with peers and superiors.

And, just for the record I don't really believe that arrogance is a positive attribute. I do believe that it is the natural result of a Coastie being on top of their game and enjoying a stretch of success. It may have some negative connotations and annoy the hell out of people, but it's generally attached to a pretty successful individual. Maybe we should just smile and let arrogant people (myself included) enjoy their moment. We all know that we're not going to be on top of our game forever.

[BMC John Phillips III]

I'm not saying that everyone needs to agree with me..........somebody has to be wrong.

I can't believe nobody recognized this as an arrogant statement.

Triple S, I don't think you are arrogant. If I didn't know you, I would say you were by that statement though.

I don't believe anyone here will ever convince me arrogance is a good quality. By definition it can't be.

Main Entry: ar·ro·gance
Pronunciation: 'ar-&-g&n(t)s
Function: noun
: a feeling or an impression of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or presumptuous claims.

Overbearing, presumptuous? not good qualities, I am not buying it. I think what we are talking about is perception. How do we see ourselves and how do others see us. As with the quote, perceived as arrogant.

Dennis sees himself as arrogant and believes he deserves to be so based on his performance and knowledge. I see him as someone I don't personally agree with, but not as arrogant. Keep in mind I am only going by what I have read here. I might feel different if we worked together.

I think at times we each do things or say things that may be perceived to others and arrogance or cockiness, but in the long run, if you are that great others will see it. They will recognize that they were wrong to perceive you as arrogant or maybe you are and they will recognize it as your shortcoming.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

JP3,
if someone claims to be arrogant, take them at their word, they know themselves better than you ever will. You can always question those that say that they are not, when their actions indicate otherwise. I think you're right about the perceptions of others and the test of time.

Something I've been noticing.

Dave wrote "The majority of people responding to this thread are BM's!! Does that tell you anything? I've had to deal with arrogant BM's most of my career..... "

I see that the majority of people responding in almost every thread, happen to be BMs. Does this make us more arrogant, or simply more vocal ?

I think that as BMs we have been put into positions throughout our career where we needed to express our opinions. It now comes naturally to many of us.

But in this forum, where anyone has the right to express their view, why is it that the BMs appear to be the most vocal ? In the workplace you sometimes have to suck it up, and listen to the views of those BMs appointed above you. But here, in this forum, you can say "No, you're wrong, you're out of touch, you're mistaken, ....you're arrogant."

Why is it that so few of you do ?

[PACS Steve Carleton]

I believe some of us have called you BMs out on a few occassions. We might not have said straight up, your wrong, but we have phrased things to give you the idea that we disagree with you. You guys have certainly taken itin stride and dished it right back out when it was appropriate.

I would agree that BMs probably more than any other rate are thrust into leadership decision making positions and by the very nature of the work have to dsiplay some arrogance and perhaps a bit of swagger.

Lets face it, you guys are out there as coxswains and at very early stages in your careers have to take on a lot of responsibility for your boat and the crew under your direction. From the leadership side of it from the time you are a leading Seaman at a station or a boat, you have a level of responsibility to the other SAs and SNs.

Then you add the fact most of us go to the fleet and end up working for a BM as a non-rate, it is just the nature of the system. I remember, my BMC from the Polar Sea, I thought he had a bit of arrogance and swagger, but the way he carried himself, there was no question in my mind, that he earned the right to display it.

In my opinion, if you have a bit of swagger and arrogance, that's OK with me. But remembering when, where and how to display that swagger are the key.

Don't worry, if I think you guys are misguided in your remarks and opinions here, I personally will not hesitate to call you BMs on it.

[MCPO Bob Brayman]

I like that word swagger instead of arrogance....that I can identify with! Looking back over this thread I looked for commonalities and found that we were all talking about the same thing, just calling it something different based upon our usages of the English language. I think the word arrogance is used wrong in this thread...but the word swagger fits the bill. Call it having a certain air about oneself on how OTHERS percieve you. Arrogance on the other hand is the air about oneself on how YOU percieve you. One good...the other bad.

[BMC Mark C. Lewis]

This comment was made earlier and I would like to make a point.

"I have been advanced, certified, and qualified based on my knowledge of polices and procedures. I qualify people at my unit based on their knowledge and understanding of the policies that I set down."

I would believe that you also got advanced, certified, and qualified based on your ability to do the job not just knowing policies and procedures.

I have met people who could spout all day long what the book says but can not apply it.

Mark

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Mark, you get "recommended" for advancement, certification, and qualifications based on your performance.

The SWE questions are all policy. The certification board for OinC is based on your demeanor, command presence, military appearance, and knowledge and application of COMDT policy. Any qualification you recieve in based on your understanding of the command's policy for that position.

The ability to retain those advancements, certifications and qualifications are based soley on your ability to perfom them.

And I would hope that the people that can't apply their knowledge to their job are not rewarded in any way.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Steve,
I didn't want to leave you out....it's good to know that you're going to be there to keep us honest, and I know MCPO Brayman shows no fear when he sees something he doesn't agree with. But where are the other voices, the ones that are fed up with the BMs running their mouths about matters we know nothing about ? Dave couldn't have been the only other one that thinks that arrogance is the expressed domain of the BMs.

[MCPO Bob Brayman]

Could it be that we're all out fixin the crap you all break :D

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

No, I've never broken that much crap. I think it goes back to Dennis' theory that fewer and fewer people want to have confrontation. And honestly, confrontation is the only thing that is going to keep arrogance or ignorance in check. If no one is willing to tell the helmsman that he/she is off course, the ship will eventually run aground, or run in circles going nowhere. Then there'll be a big enough mess for everyone to have something to fix.

Ya just gotta luv those nautical metaphors.......

[MCPO Bob Brayman]

I agree...most people don't have the guts or want to tell the emporer that they are naked AND ugly too.

[PACS Steve Carleton]

I wouldn't say that BMs have a solid lock on the arrogance and running off at the mouth. You guys just have sheer numbers :D

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

But that's just recently, post Qm merger. The MKs have had the biggest rate prior to that. I don't recall people complaining about arrogant MKs all that much. I don't know if we can attibute it to numbers alone.

[PACS Steve Carleton]

OK, if it isn't an issue of numbers, then I return back to my next to last post, when I mentioned that BMs are thrust into positions of leadership from a very early point in thier careers.

I know, there are other rates that are thrust into them as well, but I just don't see MKs, SKs, and PAs having to take on the awesome responsibility of being in charge of a boat and crew and then having to answer to the powers that be when something goes horribly wrong.

[OSC Thomas Jackson]

I do not feel that a certain level of arrogance is a bad thing, however there is an important point that has not been discussed fully. Does your arrogance make you unapproachable to your subordinates? It is our job to assist our subordinates in all aspects of their career. If a subordinate has a problem, he/she must feel that we can be approached and that we care about them. I have seen examples of subordinates feeling that since their supervisors do not care about helping them do better, then why should they put in the extra effort to make that supervisor look good. It is good to be self assured, and it is a must that you have the knowledge to accomplish your job, but it is the direct efforts of your subordinates and their ability to get the job done that makes you look good.

[BMC Ken Gouge]

Since it seems that there are many definitions of arrogance out there, some of which may even be considered complimentary, I enter this for consideration:

Leadership, if forged by arrogance, must be tempered with humility.

Or in other words, there's a time and a place for everything. If arrogance is your "tool" or your personality, it cannot be a constant thing.

No one is entirely self-sufficient, leaders even less than followers. If you could do everything single-handedly there would be no one to lead, and no reason for anyone to follow.

If you are good at what you do, fine. If you are arrogant about it I still think it is wrong. I think the whole issue here is the original choice of words for this thread. Confidence would have been a better one.