In your opinion, what would be the best way to teach effective leadership skills at an advanced pace while avoiding some of the common pitfalls of trial and error? How can identifiable leadership traits be developed while common practices that impair rapport are trained away?
I'm not sure "an advanced pace" is required though I'm also not certain what the majority would consider is a normal pace to teach leadership. That said, USMMA like the other Academies has 4 full years actually 47 months if the Midshipman stays on the 4 year track to graduation to teach leadership. Further I believe that period is really more like 43 months as once the First Class starts really "buckling down" and focusing on License Preparation, they really don't have space in their brains to do much else. At least that's how I felt and I suspect little has really changed in that regard in the past 25+ years - frankly the test(s) haven't gotten any easier, etc. However, 43 months is clearly a fair amount of time to do anything - I mean heck Mao basically rebuilt China in 60 month increments so I don't think there needs to be an acceleration in the way the USMMA builds leaders for the Nation and Maritime Industry.
Personally, and I feel the response to noworries' question is pretty much all a matter of conjecture and personal opinion on the majority of our parts, the absolute best way to teach leadership is likely to expose aspiring leaders to good examples and then give them growing opportunities to practice and try it. That's really why I think virtually all of the Maritime Academies have some sort of Regiment/Regimental System to do exactly that. It's certainly why I think the USMMA has such a system today. Of course I could be 100% off the mark on that conjecture but that's my view.
If such is the case, then the current issue that KPMarineOpsDad voiced earlier - the lack of a Superintendent - a visionary leader at the the head of the Academy now - is indeed eroding the number of available potential guiding light examples of leadership that is one thing that needs to and should be changed.
Further, assuming such is the case, one would probably like to see the addition of a more explicit and clearer code of conduct, esprit d'corps, and dare I say both professionalism and consistency required of in some enforceable fashion of everyone on the Commandant's Staff. The reality is the USMS is not a military service and the members of the Commandant's Staff do not behave like, nor are they required to behave like Active Duty Military Officers. However, the Commandant's Staff also is not required to behave like what they are training young men and women to be - licensed mariners sailing under articles. In fact in a fair number of cases members of the Commandant's Staff have never spent a week aboard the Kings Pointer, underway, let alone a "real" merchant ship. I mention this not to single out anybody but to point out that there needs to be something done to fix this, my personal opinion is that some of the Commandant's Staff, in a well intentioned manner, "make some of these things up as they go along" - including rules to to broad a degree. They do so based on their life's experience which in most cases is prior military though not always prior military in a sea-going service nor prior military in a capacity as a Commissioned Officer. As such, the esprit d'corps within the ranks of the Commandant's Staff isn't at the level it probably could be or the level he (the Commandant) would like to see as the example for what one would like to see the First Class display each year at the start of their first class year. I think the first two steps to remedy this is to review the "desired" credentials (the ones in the position descriptions that are over and above the minimum requirements) for positions on the Commandant's Staff as they become open going forward and 2) for clear written code of conduct for these members of the Staff to be put in place and incorporated to their "conditions of employment" such that it is enforceable and repeated failure to embrace, comply and display compliance with it provides the Commandant and Superintendent the ability to fire for cause an individual who fails to do so - Even though they are Federal Employees covered under the Civil Service Acts and Rules.
The other thing I believe needs to be done to "teach leadership" is to clearly state and identify the values and conduct expected of a leader and to require the leadership of the Regiment - particularly the First Class to behave as such. To me this would start immediately Plebe Year with really, really driving home the honor code. For lots of legalistic reasons Honor Codes have been truncated to delete the statement "nor tolerate those who do." As in "A Midshipmen will not lie, cheat, or steal, nor tolerate those who do." In principle I'm okay with that as there are lots of practical reasons and situations where "being a tattletale" isn't what a leader would or should do, IMO. However, the unfortunate truth is that it's removal has created an opening that then gets exploited by sea lawyers, ofter to the detriment of the overall core value - basic integrity - that is the root of so much that is required of a "leader." This is why I say I really think that Captain Bonnadonna and what he does is an under utilized resource that needs to be looked at and further exploited. I don't have specific recommendations in this area but from what I've seen I bet both Capt. Fell and Capt. Bonnadonna have some and I hope they are already working to act on them. I'll sound like what I am here which is a middle aged conservative male (aka "square", "stick in the mud", etc.) but this is an area where I believe USMMA and frankly all the Academies need to do a better job. Not because they don't do an okay job already. However, because this is something that I see less and less of from graduates of "regular colleges", and because it is something that it seems each year the reporting P/Cs are less understanding of what it means and just how high the standard needs to be in order to be a real leader.
I think if we started with these things, a lot of the rest of the items we all think need to be addressed, to effectively teach leadership, would in many ways "take care of themselves".
I also apologize for telling the white lie about leaving this thread to develop before writing more on this topic in post #14 on it...