Summary
A brief explanation of how the US Coast Guard uses on the job training to quickly empower junior members to fill mission critical leadership roles, in order to increase the organization's flexibility and ability to respond to its variety of essential mission sets.
Until recently (with the creation of Space Force), the United States Coast Guard (USCG) could boast that not only has it maintained its fleet longer than the U.S. Navy, but that it was the smallest branch of the U.S. Military. Despite this, the service has a diverse and expansive mission set ranging from “Ports, Waterways & Coastal Security,” “Search and Rescue,” “Maritime Environmental Protection,” and maintaining the nations entire “Aid to Navigation” system (United States Coast Guard, n.d.). The Coast Guards success at these endeavors happens because of a cultural approach to leadership that adheres to an extremely flexible chain of command, which grants young service members with extraordinary “positional power” (Northouse, 2021, p. 55) not often found in the larger branches of the military.
Northouse (2021) defines position power as “the power a person derives from a particular office or rank in a formal organizational system” (p. 55). In the military, this is reflected in the normal chain of command. Officers have more authority over enlisted service members, and even amongst the enlisted and officer core, those that have served longer than others and have attend ranks of higher position have more authority than those of lower positions. This military hierarchy is traditionally extremely strict and authoritarian out of a historically proven necessity. In times of conflict and emergencies decisions, actions are accomplished quicker and with less reservation, if there is one person in charge giving orders that subordinates can conduct quickly and with little confusion. In a service as large as the Navy, this is manageable because there are enough leadership positions to manage a large base of subordinates. In a service that has less than 50,000 service members like the Coast Guard, the branch would be unable to meet the large and varied mission set Congress charges it with.
To address this reality, the USCG allows junior members to hold positions of authority necessary for mission execution, provided they have completed on the job training, received the recommendation by oral board of peers, and finally certification from their unit’s Commander to do so. For instance, Search and Rescue missions are usually executed by crewmembers onboard a Coast Guard small boat. These crews usually consist of a Coxswain (boat driver/ mission commander), a boat engineer (special crew member with knowledge of the boat’s mechanical systems), and a certified crewmember (the most basic small boat qualification). On a Coast Guard small boat, the Coxswain is granted by their unit commander, the final authority on all things that happened on the boat. The Coxswain decides how to safely navigate and operate the boat, will give helm and crew commands to his crewmembers, and are often the on scene commander for missions in which they have multiple assets from multiple agencies during Search and Rescue missions, regardless of the rank of any other member on their own small boat.
This is an extraordinary amount of power and authority for a position that can be held by someone who possibly may be less than a year old to the organization. By allowing junior members to prove themselves through the qualification process and hold these sorts of positional power, the Coast Guard is able to extend the versatility of its work force. Additionally, members like me who turn their service into a 20 year career, gain valuable experience that they are expected to use not only in the rest of the career, but to pass down to junior members joining the service, creating a culture of mentorship, nurturing the next generation of Coast Guard leaders.
References
Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory & Practice (9 ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
United States Coast Guard. (n.d.). Missions. Retrieved from www.history.uscg.mil: https://www.history.uscg.mil/Home/Missions/
Hi Nathan!
I really enjoyed reading your post, it was interesting to see how this information we are learning is implemented in the real world. Leadership in the military is a unique and complex topic but I can imagine that leadership in the Coast Guard is even more unique because of its size. I never realized how much the Coast Guard handles and I learned more about the branch through reading your post.
I actually was thinking about the same things Arushi commented on. I never really thought about leadership in the military and I wonder how closely it matches other organizations both in the military and not. As you mentioned, power in the military is very strictly and formally categorized. I think because of this at first, I thought that it would be simple but I am realizing all that goes into it.
The thing I was most interested in is how leadership or power is different depending on the environment and situation. In this case, someone is being forced to make fast but sound decisions during emergencies that may potentially be dangerous. I would imagine that being a leader in a crisis or emergency is a large and stressful task. So it is interesting how leadership styles can be different based on the situation one is in.
I know you mentioned that poor leadership decisions occur even in a smaller branch, do you think that this is caused by the person themself or more because they are in a stressful situation?
This post was very detailed and you explained everything very well! Thank you for serving.
-Colton
I’m glad to hear that you enjoyed the Post Arushi!
When I say “power” it is synonymous with the term “influence,” the alliterative double “p” sounds helps it stick I suppose.
To answer you questions, any abuse of “power” or “influence” can have huge negative effects on those involved or the target of said abuse or mismanagement. Frankly it happens quite often in even a branch as small as mine, because people are people. We are all subject to emotions, selfishness, jealousy, and thoughtlessness from time to time. Add to this a large base of personnel that enter the organization still too young really be “mature” adults and it can be a real problem.
Thankfully, for every poor leader, there is a better one to counteract the negative. Also, people normally begin to mature by the time they usually achieve positional power as a leader within the organization. In fact, most often the professional journey towards advancement or qualification within the organization is a catalyst for this maturation, due in large part to the amount of work and professional mentoring that is necessary for success.
As for “aspect of coercion that might exist within position power” there are plenty and the higher a rank someone has attained the more severe these measures can be. Regardless of the leadership nuances that exist within the military, its still an authoritarian organization. I have to do what my superior tells me to due, with VERY few exceptions. Administratively, there are lots of ways that I could be held accountable for not following “lawfully given orders” from a superior, up to and including being incarcerated in a military prison.
People don’t often realize that members of the military not only have to operate within the confines of federal, state, and local laws, they are also subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I can get into some very serious military legal issues that regular civilians don’t contend with.
Thank you for the questions!
I really enjoyed reading your post and how you were able to relate these ideas of leadership to the military. I had never really thought about the ways that position power in specific is relevant to the military. It brings up an interesting point about how power, something that can often have a negative connotation with it, is an important aspect of many organizations and institutions. I think the military is such an interesting place to view power from because as you mentioned there is a lot that goes into the different ranks and overall systems that take place there.
I wonder if there are any negative associations or impacts that position power has within the military? Also thinking about how different types of power could be implemented? Are there any aspects of coercion that might exist within position power in the military, and how are these implemented within the military structure? I think it would be interesting to examine how these different aspects of power connect within the military and how changes can be made to reduce some of the issues that arise with these different power structure.