Limitations on Administrative Roles

[Kastrenzo Benelli]

Don't flame me if you blantantly disagree with me as I'm just thinking aloud and voicing my own opinion here. But latley I've been noticing that many individuals hold Administrative or otherwise command roles in more than one department at once. I think this is unfair to others as it puts a choke on and limits people in taking up responsibilities.

Example.

John Bob who is an E6 Has been for some time wanting to take on a larger responsibility, A opening for the A-V's Squad's XO appears and he applies. A week later Fred Flinstone who is E8 Is given the XO position, John bob feels annoyed because Fred is also the Head of Schola in IEA, and feels it was unfair to give the position to Fred, even if it was given to another person it wouldnt have been a problem. but the fact the person who was awarded the position already held one frustrated John bob

You can change X and Y to whatever you desire, the point is that there is a number of positions in which the CO, XO, whatever is also in charge of something else, this both limits that persons concentration on the said responsibility as they are constantly bumping from PRF here, to Holding a meeting there. And also doesnt let other people get the chance to take a responsibility in a command role at all.

I really didnt want to have to use this word, but this all seems like a form of Greed

[Mark Karlfeldt]

John Bob who is an E6 Has been for some time wanting to take on a larger responsibility, A opening for the A-V's Squad's XO appears and he applies. A week later Fred Flinstone who is E8 Is given the XO position, John bob feels annoyed because Fred is also the Head of Schola in IEA, and feels it was unfair to give the position to Fred, even if it was given to another person it wouldnt have been a problem. but the fact the person who was awarded the position already held one frustrated John bob

Could you rephrase this in some form of English.

[Nakita]

Could you rephrase this in some form of English.

Kaz is referring to the people who have titles like "Head of Squad AB, Schola, IEA, Derpsquad" etc. Holding leadership roles in many different sections of the groups, instead of taking one, and letting someone else have a shot at leadership elsewhere. Saturation of power as opposed to spreading it among many.

[Marcus Tinamou]

I agree, to a certain extent. I think it should be a case by case basis. I mean if for say, the IEA Director is a good match for being in a Divisional level command position, then I should think that person would get it. In a military based setting, fair is not always equal. Experience and job performance go a long way also.

With that being said, if someone is just taking up the positions to take them and there are other candidates who want a shot and they are qualified - then I believe the person who meets the qualifications, is able to preform the job and has no other command level obligations - those are the folks who should take priority over being given a leadership spot. Everyone is entitled to thrive in this organization if they try and people will get as much rank and as much leadership opportunity as they want....or as little as they want.

But yeah, unless there is some reason why a current leadership holder would kick aside someone who isn't, then there should be some sort of limit. But, being a leader is not always about commanding or being in charge or having your name next to something. People will always be able to tell a real leader from a 'positional' leader.

The harsh reality of leadership is; your men may listen to you because you have the rank and the position, but the real leader is the one your men trust and they respect. That is not always the person with the rank.

[Lilium Supermarine]

Marcus, that was glorious sir.

[Agares Tretiak]

In many cases, officers fill multiple roles due to a lack of individuals willing to step up and take charge, or a lack of other qualified, experienced leadership. This does tend to generate higher rates of "burnout" syndrome in a lot of officers.

Simply being willing to do the job is great and a large step, but we also need people who we're assured can and will do the job properly and within the constraints the Ordo and Imperator expect individuals to operate under. This latter part generally requires someone who is experienced and has been trained and exposed to officer level expectations. That takes time and finding the right personnel. I'm fairly sure if you asked a lot of officers if they wanted to have simpler jobs, they'd immediately agree... provided that someone was found who would fill the position that was capable of getting the job done right.

If any of you believe you have these traits, I'd urge you to look into applying for a commissioned officership when you're able to do so.

[Ron Bleac]

But.

But I like being the judge, jury and the executioner.

:(

[Agares Tretiak]

Shhh. Praetorians are speshul <3

[Kellervo]

Contrary to popular belief, being an officer is not all fun and games - we tend to avoid taking on additional roles unless it's absolutely necessary. Generally when an officer takes on an additional role, it is due to necessity, but furthermore often with the intention of mentoring someone below them to eventually take the role for themselves. Willingness to do the job is but one factor when it comes to making a good officer, other things need to be taught or otherwise engrained. Case in point, when I was first chosen for the Invictus XO role, I was more then willing - but I honestly didn't know what the hell I was doing, and Invictus suffered for a few weeks as a result.

[Corsi Mousehold]

Currently I am the IEA 2IC and the Tactica CO. So I hold two positions in the Ordo Imperialis. I was placed into these roles because when I started in the Ordo well over a year ago I took up the roles as Tactica Personnel and Schola instructor. Over the year I was given more and more ability as people came and went from the division. In the IEA I was chosen for the Schola Director / recruiter role as E-7 and at the same time, put into the Tactica XO role under Ron Bleac. Ron had other work he needed to do and stepped out of the CO role putting me into that role. When the time came to assign a 2IC to help get the IEA streamlined, I was asked if I could handle both the CO of Tactica and the XO if the IEA. I took the position offered because Zero felt I was the most able to do the work and very active in the IEA as it was. No one else wanted those two positions and I did. Thus I was placed into both command positions and I continue to lead them.

Like Agares said it's a matter of finding people that want to take command roles not just trying to spread the roles out among many different people. Also Extracurricular positions like Tactica, IEA, Curia and so on are not part of the Terra or Astra chain of command. Even though my current E-8 rank is set, I still take orders from my XO whom outranks me (Burrwolf) because regardless of rank, he is my commander in Terra. If someone wants to and is qualified for multiple roles, they should be able to take them. Especially when at the time no one wants them.

If you want to progress your way up there is no better way to do it than to work within the posts you have already and continue that work hard and diligently. A prime example of this is Kyra Vixen whom started off as a Tactica staff under me. When she showed her willingness to work in Tactica, she was placed in as the Adjutant. A few months after that, Huttser took on the role of Cohors A Adjutant and felt he was spreading himself out too thin and bowed out of the Tactica XO post which then went to Kyra.

As another example of moving up in position is Typhon Perun. Typhon started out as Cohors C CO and later took up the role of Cohors BG Adjutant, holding both positions. He left as the Cohors C CO and now took up the Armatura Director. When Zero and I looked at the list of canidates for the Armatura Director role we only had a couple of people to pick from. Typhon was the most qualified and the most senior person in the IEA at the time. The post was offered to him after weighing in the options of seniority and ability. Typhon had both and at the time the other personnel in the IEA were too green to the group or only slightly active.

In the end, it comes down to activity and ability. If you have the ability but not the activity you won't get the command role. If you have the ability but it is not felt you will be active enough because of other commitments, you would not get the role. If you have the activity but have no experience in command or haven't shown outstanding ability to perform the role you are trying for, you will not get the post.

In the end there really is nothing wrong with one person taking up two roles here and there as long as they are not sacrificing work in one to keep a moderate function in the other.

[Marcus Tinamou]

I am a firm believer that if you have a command role and a well trained, well respected amongst the core units under your command and qualified individual comes along - that that person should be groomed for your second position. Again, let me make it clear: Not just giving it out to make it fair - but that this person is a qualified candidate, a good leader and has the ability, skill and dedication to do the job - it would seem right, that he/she be groomed for that leadership spot or even as an XO/CO.

Does it sound harsh, yes. But are you losing anything by doing it? No, you have a command under your belt and now you furthering someone elses career who at some point will do the same. That concept is not a foreign one in the real military, where it is possible to hold positional ratings over more then one section - but you are in constant 'groom' mode for a replacement so you can focus and perfect your first command responsibility.

[Aryte]

There is no greed in the performance of a duty. Each role is additional responsibility. Decision are made in respect to an individual's time, ability, and their current work load. For example, Consuls are generally forbidden to hold other command roles. However, commanding a reserve unit doesn't necessarily disqualify you for holding another position.

[Agares Tretiak]

Likewise, Praetorian Lord Praefectus' can't assassinate Trinity and then seize control of the AiR. I tried. Aryte grounded me for a week.

[Marcus Tinamou]

Who did you assassinate after you were grounded

[Agares Tretiak]

The Roman Emperor Elagabalus.

[Sosarin Demar]

It is my personal belief that it is best for one to concentrate on one division. Specifically, when it comes to later in one's career.

For an enlisted working within Schola, Curia, etc., it is infinitely helpful in both bolstering those divisions and demonstrating one's character. If that enlisted should one day join the administratio, the responsibility for their officer post in whatever division they reside increases. It is at this point that I like to encourage people to make sure they know their limits, and see whether or not they are truly able to give every position they hold their 100%. Most of the time this is not the case.

In short, concentrating on one division will give a soldier the opportunity to give it their all. I do not like the idea of an individual doing the "bare minimum" for each role they fill because they are concentrating on multiple roles in the group.

[Ethan Schuman]

Coming from someone who has commanded two divisions in Ordo, I will tell you this: Being an officer/commander is not all it's cracked up to be. Being an officer means work and responsibility. You might think to yourself, "Oh, it can't be THAT bad. Being an officer would be really awesome and make me look good," but you would be wrong. You would be VERY wrong.

I could go on to write a massive essay about the importance of priorities for a leader, but I'll save that for a formal training course, where people will actually read it. =p

Brief summary:

We (leaders, not just officers) do a lot of work, and we rarely, if ever, get thanked for it. Sure, fancy titles and chest bling may look prestigious and make you want them to look better, but when it comes down to it, the reason people want those things is for respect. If you want to be a leader so that people will respect you, then you need to stop right now, because that's not how it's going to go down. A common piece of advice to enlisted is to "respect the rank." That may be enough to get someone to follow orders, but you can't force someone to like you.

Everyone is part of a team, and every leader is responsible for making sure they are accomplishing their part of the grand scheme, while also making sure their subordinates are taken care of. That is your job. That is your duty. To be a leader, you must accept this as your primary and only concern, at the possible expense of anything of your benefit. Subordinates always do better work when they respect their leader, and are happy. This is especially so in a volunteer environment like Ordo, where people are under no obligation to work at all.

It is for this reason that an already committed E-6/7 or even O-1 who has shown demonstrated devotion, time dedication, willingness to sacrifice, and ability, as well as the respect of those underneath him/her, may be chosen over another candidate of equal or greater rank.

Although Ordo is a volunteer organization, our size and mass dictate a need to select the best possible candidate for a position given ALL factors, as even a slight hiccup can affect an entire division.