Why are you Leaving?

[Pags]

Apologize for the delay in responding -- great questions.

I don't think there was a feeling of bait and switch. The biggest challenge was the cruise extensions halfway through deployment, but I think we all realized that was our job, and at least for me, I came in the service with eyes wide open. Of course, you never really know what a deployment is like until you experience one. My two deployments both took place when I was single and had no family or even a significant other. I really didnt like being disconnected from the world.

I knew from the beginning of my service I probably wasn't a lifer, although I kept all paths open, and pushed myself to hit the wickets as if I were.

I've done a lot of reflection about why I really am leaving, and while I still think deployments are a big part of it, the bigger factor for me is that when I look at my bosses all the way up the chain, I'm not sure I want their jobs. Not because they have too many admin requirements, etc, but simply because I don't want to do the same thing for my whole life. Personally, I thrive on the thrill of doing new things, putting myself out there, and seeing how far I can push the boundaries. A military career is very "safe" and predictable, which is why I think a lot of people are comfortable with it - and that works for them. My soul dies a little when I can predict that in 20 years I will be an O-6 in the Pentagon. I also realized I'm a just an interchangable widget in the Navy -- I may have unique talents, as do we all, but if I leave, the service won't suffer. Someone will always fill that jet. I want to be part of an organization where I am indispensable to the mission, and where my unique skillsets are well matched to the organization. Finally, I'm ready to start building enduring things instead of destroying them. Our F/A-18 mission is to kill people and mess stuff up -- it is much needed, and critical to our national security -- and I loved destroying enemy targets in Afghanistan. But that's just not me anymore.

Most millennial post ever. (But -1 for not using the word "disruptive")

 

[ben4prez]

Most millennial post ever. (But -1 for not using the word "disruptive")

I assume you are aware I started a group called "Disruptive Thinkers", right ;-)

 

[Pags]

I assume you are aware I started a group called "Disruptive Thinkers", right ;-)

Accurate jokes are funnier.

 

[Spekkio]

And reasons like yours are why we have no trust in senior leadership, amongst others. The overall perspective of, well, you don't know if you want to be a skipper, so fuck you and your URL dreams is incredibly pervasive.

You took my post the entirely wrong way.

The fact is that the military is an up-or-out system. It just is what it is. Everyone knows that (or should know that) going in. So if you don't aspire to be a CO at sea, there is little reason for you to stay past the point where your career stops being interesting to you. The Navy will eventually replace your job doing NFO things with another JO, and you'll be given a job somewhere until you retire or are separated if you don't make O-4. There are just things that aren't an option, like keeping an operational JO/DH job that you love from now until retirement.

I wasn't judging Ben4Prez negatively for not wanting to be a CO at sea. I responsed to him because his post had a tone of 'I could cure world hunger if I got out of the Navy' - maybe it's not the most realistic goal, but it was refreshing to see such optimism in someone who has been around a bit. No one is telling him 'fuck you' to his dreams and I don't appreciate you putting words in my mouth. I am also far removed from any position where I could effect or advise politicians on such policy. Command at sea is just generally where the Navy wants URL officers to go, and if that's not your cup of tea then there's not much use sticking around in an organization that wants to make you into one and will pass you over for promotion if you start taking jobs that are not on the proper track.

I think the system has its merits and its flaws. If you want to change that system, then get out of the Navy, run for President, and coerce Congress into changing the way officers are promoted.

 

[ssnspoon]

I appreciate your observations.

To counter, it seems like all of the reasons why you think I shouldn't leave involve worst case planning: I have no value to bring to a non-military organization, no one will pay me more than I could make in the military, and I will not be able to make any impact on any organization. In fact, you might be right. But I don't think so. I'd rather dare great things trying to somehow get in the 1 percent and utterly fail than to never try at all. I may be delusional, but I'm gonna give it a shot. If and when it fails, I'll still be in the reserves -- and have a broad civlian network to draw from to find new opportuities!

As i mentioned before, I have no bitterness, and in fact, am forever and deeply grateful for the opportunities I've been given in the service. It was the absolute right thing for me to do with the past 10 years of my life. I've been able to mentor sailors, defend our country, fly fighters, work for incredible bosses, and build multiple military innovation organization from scratch that are thriving and growing. It's simply time to do something else!

On the contrary...I assumed you were that 1% that IF he had the opportunity to be let loose, could probably help usher in some great change, but in all reality, you are probably smart enough to know that staying would not allow you that opportunity while getting out gives you the chance at greatness that you sound like you are searching for.

 

[ssnspoon]

Sure, we can drop it (at our own peril). Leadership, to me, is mostly about serving your people and you can't serve your people without understanding their motivations. To be fair, every generation is a new thing to deal with. But Millenials and younger are much more likely to be vocal about their desires and frustrations than earlier generations who were more likely to grin and bear their crosses. And they also have access to and mastery of media. This is something we need to understand and adapt to if we want to keep them and motivate even a fraction of them to suck it up long enough to command ships, squadrons, and fleets.

Exactly. What I meant by that comment was this...I have been that #1 guy, and WAS demoralized to get promoted in line with that mouth breather...but I am being a little bitch who just takes it because I am close to 20 and want to stick around for that. On the other hand I have worked with a few #1 millennials who are much more willing to say screw it and get out for that pie-in-the-sky idea...one that NEEDS to be followed. My one problem with many millennials is that some (not all) are quick to assume that label is always intended as a derogatory connotation. I just use it like Phrog said, you want to lead your guys, you need to know them and what drives them.

 

[Spekkio]

My one problem with many millennials is that some (not all) are quick to assume that label is always intended as a derogatory connotation. I just use it like Phrog said, you want to lead your guys, you need to know them and what drives them.

I think that it's important for military officers to stay current with changing technology, regardless of generation.

I also think that stereotyping everyone who was born between 1980-2000 and looking for confirmation bias is contrary to the type of leadership that Phrog is preaching. The label is derogatory in that you are using it to assign a set of pre-conceived characteristics to a group solely based on their age, and those characteristics are 'not like you.' But I'm just a 31 year old millenial so what do I know?

 

[ssnspoon]

The label is derogatory in that you are using it to assign a set of pre-conceived characteristics to a group solely based on their age, and those characteristics are 'not like you.' But I'm just a 31 year old millenial so what do I know?

In my opinion...some butthurt assumption that proves my point. It is INTENDED as a label to describe OBSERVED (through discussion with said people) characteristics based on observation of said characteristics with no regard to age...but what do I know, I am one too! Maybe we should both go ask mommy for a hug, suck on that teat and wait for a "I am the 23rd highest poster on air warrior" trophy!

This has turned into a ridiculous thread drift, I'm out!

 

[Spekkio]

Not butt hurt at all. Stereotyping an entire group of people leads to making policy like CAPT Jarrett's.

Here's a metric one would be wise to use: if you can't substitute the words black, hispanic, or women for millenials and stay out of hot water, then what you are saying is derogatory.

 

[Steve Wilkins]

Here's a metric one would be wise to use: if you can't substitute the words black, hispanic, or women for millenials and stay out of hot water, then what you are saying is derogatory.

Did you really just take the name we've given to label a certain generation and make it racist and/or sexist? Are you serious?

 

[webmaster]

Did you really just take the name we've given to label a certain generation and make it racist and/or sexist? Are you serious?

I keep shaking my head at this too. In two of my management and marketing classes discussing consumer segmentation, baby boomers, GEN X/GEN Y, millennials etc are well defined and discussed extensively. It is an aggregate term with a basic definition on time period born, social outlooks, buying patterns and spending ability. It's the same as if you make segmentation by saying someone is a VOLUNTEER, GATOR, or NOLE... etc... Psychologically humans are predisposed to categorize and associate. I think its reaching pretty damn far to say that millennial of baby boomer is a racist term and derogatory.

 

[Steve Wilkins]

While I agree that you generally know when your statutory and admin boards are, you don't exactly know if you will screen. Additionally, even if you do screen you still don't know what assignment you will get. The duties, responsibilities, and missions vary significantly between coasts, platforms, etc.

Which is EXACTLY why I used the word "generally".

I think that you are over-stating the moving thing in the civilian sector. The vast majority of private sector civilian jobs will not require their employees to relocate. Most people who do relocate are people who are between jobs, not within jobs. Even then, a recent survey found that just 20% of people laid off in 2011 relocated to find work.

I didn't overstate anything. I said that folks can move the same or even more in a civilian job and that most people don't realize this. Contrary to the military, these moves are usually not mandatory, but they tend to be closely tied to promotions and changing positions within the company. People need to be aware of this possibility, especially those that are getting out because they are tired of moving.

Again, outside a select few professions, most of which are emergency workers or well compensated executives, you won't be ordered to come in on your weekend and holiday days off, even if you do have to work 10, 12 hour days.

You are being naive.

There are also companies, like Apple, that are moving in the opposite direction - you set your own schedule as long as the work gets done. Once in a while that leads to longer days or weekends because a deadline is approaching, but more often than not it leads to sub 8 hour days... This is a guy who is heading a programming dept.

And then there's the real world. Not saying what you're referring to here doesn't happen, but it is definitely not the norm.

 

[Steve Wilkins]

I keep shaking my head at this too. In two of my management and marketing classes discussing consumer segmentation, baby boomers, GEN X/GEN Y, millennials etc are well defined and discussed extensively. It is an aggregate term with a basic definition on time period born, social outlooks, buying patterns and spending ability.

Yep. I can tell you we research and market voraciously to millennials. Most of our workforce is also comprised of millennials and as such, there are strategies in place to recruit and retain them. Millennials are discussed at conferences in respect to how they interact with the world much more differently than any previous generation. The psychological and behavioral patterns associated with millennials, in general terms, are unlike those of any other generation. Folks who dismiss these differences as being derogatory do so at their own peril. And those that have to lead and manage millenials need to be aware of these differences as well.

 

[Steve Wilkins]

No, I am not trying to convince you to stay, and certainly not by 'worst case planning.' If I were to convince anyone to stay, it would be for the possibility of command at sea. If that's not something that you want, then being a Naval URL officer isn't for you.

I've never understood why people make command at see into being the end all be all of a naval officer's career. To suggest that those not wanting command at sea aren't fit to be a Naval URL officer is extremely prejudiced and short sighted, IMO. I can tell you that command at sea was never my goal as a SWO. I was more focused at doing my job the best I could. I always looked at it from the perspective that if command at sea was in the cards for me, great. If it wasn't, that's great too. Command at sea is 1) a priviledge and 2) not for everyone.

 

[LET73]

I hear that sometimes in the civilian world, people sometimes need to go ahead and come in on weekends...