How are we doing as a Cryptologic community?

[COMEVIL]

Shamelessly stolen from Mike Lambert's blog here -- http://navycaptain-therealnavy.blogspot ... logic.html

Thought this was worth sharing/maybe a bit easier to discuss via Information Warriors.

How are we doing as a cryptologic community?

Some of the key concepts in workforce engagement that are included in the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence include:

How do our senior leaders communicate with and engage the entire community? How do they encourage frank, two-way conversation? When did you receive the last community-wide message from the leadership?
How do you determine key elements that affect community engagement for different community groups and segments?
How do you ensure that your organizational culture benefits from the diverse ideas, cultures, and thinking of our community?
How does your learning and development system support the organization’s needs and the personal development of our community members?
How do you manage effective career progression for our community members?
How do you analyze key command performance results to identify opportunities for improvement in both community engagement and command mission accomplishment?

[COMEVIL]

I'll start..

How do our senior leaders communicate with and engage the entire community? How do they encourage frank, two-way conversation? When did you receive the last community-wide message from the leadership?

Short answer, they don't. While I see communiques from the IDC leadership, or community-wide emails from other leaders within the IDC, I have yet to see anything sort of communication from our Cryptologic leadership. Sadly, it has never been easier to reach so many at once. So why does this matter? Because frankly I don't know what our community leadership values, what their goals are, what roadblocks are ahead and how they intend to overcome them, or where the see the community going in 5, 10, or 15 years. Does this mean they have no strategic vision? I don't know. But if they do, they don't seem to want to share it with the rest of us. To answer the second question, this lack of strategic communication certainly doesn't encourage frank, two-way conversation.

v/r

Comevil

[yoshi]

Wow! I read the other blog and some of the responses. Quite a bit of vitriol. Sad, if those folks are part of our same community, too. I found it especially odd too, given the obvious shortcomings in community communication. With respect to the original questions, it is difficult to gauage, as everyone's estimation is derived from a different origin. My impressions are:
How do our senior leaders communicate with and engage the entire community? How do they encourage frank, two-way conversation?
A: Doesn't happen. Senior IW CAPTs try to guide, but it is painfully obvious they have no better an idea than the rest of us who can also read what little is provided (usually by the detailer or OCM).
How do you determine key elements that affect community engagement for different community groups and segments?
A: In today's culture, what is key is determined by the number and name of Flag Officers in the address lines. Who is far more important than what.
How do you ensure that your organizational culture benefits from the diverse ideas, cultures, and thinking of our community?
A: We aren't a diverse wardroom, and we are becoming less diverse. Less latitude for what constitutes a useful degree or experiential background, small chance to screen for Command, 50 milestone billets at the O4 level for several hundred O4s (with larger zones), and the same problem at O5. How can we benefit from "diverse" cultures and ideas when we build like experiences into those who will be around the longest?? We aren't making our community better, we are making it in the image of our Flag officers. We have discovered the difference between community improvement and refinement. Oh, I'm sorry, you didn't mean diverse skills or experiences, did you?? Maybe my color or belief system, huh?? Are the CNO and IW Commmunity ideas of diversity based on my gender, race, or economic standing as a child? Kind of bigoted, perjorative view isn't it? Bottom line: You can't keep picking officers with the same non-diverse background/experiences and expect a diverse ability to achieve solutions. With less varied educational backgrounds, tighter wickets through O6, less Fleet involvement/integration, and generally less inclusive behaviors (coupled with no communication), the community culture inherently becomes less tolerant and less aware of things and people unlike itself. Current approach is not beneficial for long term community viability, as it produces an increasingly insular community inside of the Navy.
How does your learning and development system support the organization’s needs and the personal development of our community members?
A: We don't have a learning and development system.
How do you manage effective career progression for our community members?
A: Damn good question. I think its personal opinion and PRD.
Answering the last two later.

[Arkad]

Yoshi - You are an experienced FGO with some unique access to seniors. What are you doing to inform your perspective to our seniors? How are you exemplifying the behaviors you wish to see in your seniors? Not attacking you in the least, just curious as to how so many feel so powerless. We've had this conversation before...speaking "anonymously" in a forum like this is very different than putting our reputation on the line and publicly representing the change we want to see. Where is your letter to Community Leadership? How are you controlling what you can? Ask yourself the same questions that we posed in the original post in this thread, but replace "You" or "senior leadership" with "I"? Are you answers any different? The more ownership each of us takes individually, the better we will become as a collective. I have gone through this very drill and am pretty satisfied with my answers. Are you satisfied with yours? How bet the rest of you reading this thread? There is on "They" only "We" and "Us".

[yoshi]

@Arkad:
Sorry about the delay in responding, I certainly didn't want to stall the discussion. Most of my perspectives arrive to my superiors in the form of white papers. However, they have admittedly been limited to "work": proposals to improve processes, training initiatives, Fleet LOEs, proposed pilot programs. Some have met with "success" (POM-16, new courses/curriculum, improved FRTP results, etc), most have not (didn't get past the internal organization here, or didn't get any traction through the first level of staffing beyond my organization). I have no problem putting my reputation on the line (if the impact is sufficiently positive), and co-workers past and present would confirm that. However, I have not produced a white paper which focuses on the IW community/IDC corps. Truthfully, I don’t believe I have enough information about the direction of the Corps or community to be able to produce a letter or white paper which would be helpful. I don't hold enough specifics regarding our direction for my "insight" to be of value. I know what we are doing now - building CNMTs, getting "healthy" (separate discussion), doing "operations", but what are the criteria which should/will define the IW community (as successful) in 3-4 years? What are the metrics? What is the long term plan for our utilization which will be effective no matter how the military's cyber efforts changes (cyber service, sub-unified to unified, new community, etc)? How are we going to be/should we be utilized OUTSIDE of FCC/C10F? In this regard, inertia cannot pilot us where we need to go, I don't think. I think an active hand in (the community) shaping our utilization throughout the Navy is the best course, and perhaps I'll give this more thoughtful consideration when the time comes to write a community related white paper/letter.

In support of above, if I am looking to improve effectiveness of my community's efforts, say, in CPF, to whom do I appeal? It feels like CPF to me. Notwithstanding the fact organizational structures and processes are controlled by the organization, shouldn't there be involvement (from perhaps the IDC or community level) which assists shaping CPF/USFF utilization of IDC folks and associated codes (say, an N2/N6 which can drive "operations" (better defined as readiness production at those places), thereby ensuring the best, most efficient processes are in place? We can and should be more assertive at the fleet level in this regard. I think future success and agility require it. But, I'm not sure what the community/corps plan with this is or even to whom I should address my thoughts. Thus, other topics are a better choice for the time required for a white paper. Additionally, the unknown of C2 for military cyber and IDC in the future (new service, etc) makes any discussion/proposal of future community/corps trajectory less likely to be of value (relative to "work" related items) and therefore highly speculative. And, I suspect the same unknown probably is the reason our community leadership is so quiet - they simply don't know what is coming from the politicians, either, and can't reliably communicate. Telling leadership they don't sufficiently communicate with the wardroom, while maybe true from my perspective, doesn't bring value, it just adds animosity toward JO (an anonymous forum could too, but who has the time and energy to grind an axe over this stuff?). With respect to the diversity aspect, misunderstanding diversity, as the Navy continues to do, will not be corrected by a white paper or letter. We value varied experiences, backgrounds, and education - so long as they are those experiences, backgrounds, and education deemed important by the system. A thought: are we selecting our best leaders or are we making the best leaders the system wants?! (Does anyone else wonder if this is connected to the struggle with long term problems - relief of COs, culture issues, etc?) By the time an officer does what they need to for major command, they look an awful lot like all the other officers competitive for major command, don't they? Opportunity for introduction of diverse thought (which would move us forward) doesn't seem to be very large. We don't engage in group think, we manufacture it. That's great at the squad level - very important to be on the same page. Not sure of its value at the strategic level, however, as some problems of tomorrow require revolutionary leadership in thought and the ability to adapt processes and organizations to things completely unrecognizeable and not at all understood in a way never before executed. I suspect this is one of the reasons CEOs of major corporations are often hired from OUTSIDE – they aren’t a product of the system, but capable of bringing something the system doesn’t have.

I hope I answered the questions related to letters to leadership, doing what I can. I understand they are not precisely what we would like to see, right now. As far as exemplifying the behavior I’d like to see in my superiors (increased communication), I do my utmost to keep anyone interested informed (and some who probably aren’t). Thanks for your post, I sincerely appreciate the dialogue. If you don’t mind, I’d like to run a couple of related items by you via PM. Thanks.