Since the Revolutionary War, the U.S. military’s comparative advantage has been its highly flexible and decentralized command structure, delegating decision-making and providing autonomy to relatively low-ranking members.1 Exemplary performance of noncommissioned officers (NCOs)—both sergeants and petty officers—across the field has furthered the near-mythic notion that U.S. NCOs are beyond compare.2 As adversary militaries continue to develop and improve, however, a review of Coast Guard petty officer training reveals a practicum hyperfocused on developing technical acumen but woefully unconcerned with the cultivation of leadership skills.
In 2019, Command Sergeant Major John Wayne Troxell—the senior enlisted advisor to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—explained that “NCOs are the doers. They provide inspiration, purpose, motivation, direction, and discipline to the troops they lead, and they are also responsible for the individual training of those in their charge.”3
Coast Guard petty officers are expected to mature into first-line supervisors by the rank of second class (E-5), with “responsibility for the accomplishment of specific tasks or processes.” This includes, for example, second class boatswain’s mates acting as deck officer in-charge during 270-foot cutter mooring evolutions, damage controlmen leading their shops through Command Assessment of Readiness and Training checklist completions, or machinery technicians driving critical preventative maintenance.4
Entrusted with teams of 4–10 subordinates, petty officers—perhaps more than any other rank—are expected to execute missions through face-to-face encounters with the agents with whom they will be operating daily. Yet, the Coast Guard’s most active first-line supervisors lack the necessary leadership training prior to assuming their critical responsibilities.
Rebalance Training
This blindspot in the Coast Guard’s leadership practicum stems from traditional military thinking that lower enlisted members operate at the tactical level, engaging in grunt work, while senior enlisted members and officers operate at the strategic level, engaging in leadership and delegation. As a result, the Coast Guard has a training imbalance that places more importance on developing technical acumen within its junior enlisted ranks rather than providing them with sufficient leadership training. Such a rigid dichotomy fails to appreciate the breadth of management and interpersonal skills required at the deckplate level. While senior leaders continue to own what needs to be accomplished, petty officers must navigate the who and how, and that requires training.
The number of C Schools enlisted members are required to attend throughout their careers is dizzying, often including extensive “pipeline” training prior to filling a specific billet. For example, an electrician’s mate first class reporting on board a national security cutter is required to attend schools specializing in glide slope indicators, programmable logic controllers, advanced analog electronics, advanced digital electronics, fiber optics maintenance, and electronic fuel control, or otherwise have them waived by demonstrating existing competency.5 Comparably rigorous technical training is required across rates as service members progress through their careers, allowing them to become subject-matter experts while simultaneously communicating the organization’s values.
Compared with the robust, well-codified, and highly technical C-School gauntlet, the attention dedicated to formal leadership training is disproportionately focused on senior enlisted service members. Four courses are the extent of the enlisted leadership training practicum: the Apprentice Leadership Program (ALP), Leadership and Management School (LAMS), Chief Petty Officer Academy (CPOA), and Senior Enlisted Leadership Course (SELC).
The ALP is a three-day leadership continuum course, delivered during A-School and required prior to advancing to E-4. It targets leadership framework competencies specific to leading self and leading others “through facilitated group discussion, exercises and role play scenarios.”6 LAMS is a one-week course “updated to address current leadership challenges and expectations of the USCG’s first line supervisors” required to advance to E-6.7 Reviewing topics similar to ALP, such as hazing and bullying, management and performance, and effective communication, LAMS is commonly described as a curriculum in conflict management, including lessons devoted to values and ethics, behavioral awareness, and mentorship.8
It is not until the E-7 level that there is a more concerted effort toward enlisted leadership training through CPOA and later SELC. The CPOA homepage states that “the Commandant and MCPOCG have both identified the transition from E-6 to E-7 as the most critical in the USCG enlisted career,” and, accordingly, CPOA is a six-week (formerly eight-week) deep dive into organizational leadership. Totaling 12 college credit hours, it rivals the workload of a full-time college student’s semester.9 CPOA is followed by SELC, a course reserved for senior and master chief petty officers that comprise the lion’s share of enlisted leadership training. Therefore, Coast Guard enlisted leaders reach the rank of chief petty officer with just eight days of formal leadership training, often accumulating more than ten years of service before attending the comprehensive leadership course.
Train Leaders Earlier
The principal deficiency of the enlisted leadership training continuum is not the quality of the existing programs, but the infrequency of the training.
The Coast Guard’s current practice of infrequent and short leadership development training for petty officers does not align with burgeoning research emphasizing the importance of frequent contemplation and self-assessment to optimize performance. The Norwegian Military Academy conducted research and concluded that an exemplary leader is “able to reflect on his or her own efforts and influence other people to perform at their absolute best in difficult situations. Leadership is something that has to be learned.”10 This focus on reflection and awareness implies a perpetual mental occupation and recognition of one’s role as a leader. Another study by the U.S. Department of Education similarly cites “the need for . . . non-critical assistance with personal reflection, engagement in professional dialogue and a feeling of personal responsibility for learning” as key components for professional development.11
Perpetual leadership focus is already captured in the Commandant’s Leadership Development Framework, which states: “Good leadership develops through a never-ending process of self-study, education, training, experience, observation, and emulation.”12
The Coast Guard cannot continue to wait until LAMS, as members approach E-6, to empower them as leaders. It instead should shift the LAMS course immediately after members advance to E-5. By doing this, the service would not only provide more appropriately timed and effective leadership training, but it would also signal to members that they have reached the taking-off point in their leadership progression.
An earlier LAMS could jump-start the leadership reflection process at a time that accords with how the service runs at the deckplate level and could bring the Coast Guard into alignment with other military services. Ideally, the Coast Guard would lengthen and continually strengthen the LAMS curriculum, but a timeline shift is more practical given operational demands and already minimally manned units.
In addition to adjusting the formal enlisted leadership continuum, Coast Guard units must adhere to already existing policy outlined in the Commandant’s Leadership Development Framework.13 The framework asserts that “leadership training, mentoring and member/employee development take place, primarily, at the local command, and local commanders are ultimately responsible for the professional development of their subordinates.”14 In practice, however, many local commands are not assuming responsibility for deliberate leadership development. Demanding operational tempos coupled with workforce shortages have resulted in overworked service members with overcrowded plans of the day. From the cutter perspective, it is difficult for commands to slip in the “soft skills” of leadership amid mission execution, flight/small boat operations, required onboard training team drills, watchstanding, and the normal workday.
One solution could be to leverage the often-underused Leadership and Diversity Advisory Councils (LDACs). The Coast Guard formally established unit LDACs in 2011 to “solicit and evaluate leadership issues that impact command climate, address local issues, and feed issues and best practices with broad applicability up the chain.”15
Charged with championing inclusion and diversity as well as leadership, many LDACs were quickly spread thin, focusing their efforts on pressing race, ethnicity, and gender issues rather than leadership development. While those sociocultural matters require the attention, LDACs have become almost exclusively diversity-focused organizations, in which local leadership training, promulgated reading lists, discussion groups, role-playing exercises, and other methods to encourage leader reflection are not being maximized.
Unit commanders could encourage increased involvement in the LDAC as well as offer LDAC chairmen a seat at training board meetings, thereby empowering LDAC leaders to fulfill the breadth of their responsibilities, including leadership development.16
Maximize LPI 360
Commands also can maximize existing policy and programs such as the Coast Guard Mentoring Program and the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) 360 assessment. In 2021, the service launched an online program to facilitate “one-to-one mentoring tracks that create connections between mentees and mentors to foster learning and development.”17 The Coast Guard has used various avenues to pitch the program, but participation among junior members remains low. To maximize this tool, the service should consider instituting mandatory enrollment during A School or implementing it as an enlisted performance qualification early in the enlisted career progression. Frequent communication with senior members in the organization would evoke self-reflection.
The LPI 360 is used in the private sector as well. It provides a questionnaire to the reported-on member as well as his or her manager(s), peers, direct reports, and others and provides sections for qualitative feedback.18 The ability to factor so many different perspectives into a nonconsequential appraisal of one’s own leadership is significant. As of 2018, all Coast Guard flag officers and senior executive service members are required to complete a biennial 360-degree assessment, and chief petty officers are required to complete an assessment prior to CPOA, but the program could be expanded to reach more petty officers.19 In collaboration with unit LDACs, it could be transformational for paygrades E-5 and above to conduct scheduled LPI 360s and discuss their findings with a group of peers.
Overcome the Blindspot
Despite the historical success of NCOs and petty officers, the Coast Guard cannot become complacent. The war in Ukraine has emphasized the importance of NCOs able to lead and act at all levels, and, over the past two decades, the world also has watched China’s People’s Liberation Army transform “into a capable, modern military.”20 Great power competition demands petty officers who are self-reflective leaders, capable of performing high-risk evolutions with increased autonomy. The Coast Guard must begin championing the leadership development of its petty officers.
1. Russell F. Wegley, The American Way of War: A History of United States Military Strategy and Policy (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1991).
2. Gil Barndollar, “The Best or Worst of Both Worlds?,” Center for Strategic and International Studies, 23 September 2020.
3. Jim Garamone, “Noncommissioned Officers Give Big Advantage to U.S. Military,” U.S. Department of Defense, 7 November 2019.
4. U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant Instruction 5351.3, Leadership Development Framework, 15 June 2022.
5. U.S. Coast Guard, “National Security Cutter Master Training List 2022.”
6. U.S. Coast Guard, Mission Support, “Apprentice Leadership Program (ALP) (502203),” Office of Leadership (CG-12C).
7. LAMS 2018 Introduction PowerPoint presentation.
8. LAMS 2018.
9. U.S. Coast Guard, Forcecom, www.forcecom.uscg.mil/Our-Organization/FORCECOM-UNITS/TraCen-Petaluma/Training/CPOA/.
10. Ole Boe and Torill Holth, “Self-Awareness in Military Officers with a High Degree of Developmental Leadership,” Procedia Economics and Finance 26 (2015): 833–41.
11. Paulina Phillips, “Professional Development as a Critical Component of Continuing Teacher Quality,” Australian Journal of Teacher Education 33, no. 1, (2008).
12. U.S. Coast Guard Guard, Leadership Development Framework.
13. U.S. Coast Guard, Leadership Development Framework.
14. U.S. Coast Guard, Leadership Development Framework.
15. U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant Instruction 5350.9, Leadership and Diversity Advisory Councils, 15 March 2021.
16. U.S. Coast Guard, Leadership and Diversity Advisory Councils.
17. U.S. Coast Guard, “Coast Guard Mentoring Program."
18. U.S. Coast Guard, “Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) 360 Assessment—Personality Tests for Leaders.”
19. U.S. Coast Guard, ALCOAST 330/18, “SEP 2018 Implementation of Leadership Assessments and Development Plans for Executives,” 14 April 2023.
20. RAND Corporation, “An Interactive Look at the U.S.–China Military Scorecard.”