The Rise and Fall of Captain Holly Graf (USN)

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

I'm in agreement with the rest of you that profanity is no big deal, at least from a crew dog perspective, but abusing and berating leaders in front of subordinates is a no-no. Any sort of leadership training will tell you this. Leadership should appear as one cohesive unit to subordinates, no matter how incompetent a piece of that leadership chain may be. If Sr leadership goes on a tear to your immediate leadership questioning their competence, what position does that put their subordinates in? You're left trying to decide who the real idiot is.... your boss who just got his ass handed to him by his boss, or his boss for being wrong about your boss. It's a breakdown in the chain of command and erodes the authority of leadership.

This sounds like a good, clean kill for the Navy IG. This kind of person is poison to good order and discipline, and should never be in a command position.

[Guest Crew Report]

I am not such a whiny, sensitive, insecure punk that it would bother me, no. It's just words...so ######ing what.

I have seen my leadership be berated in front of me before for making mistakes. It didn't make me think any less of that leader, undermine their authority, or make me question any further orders or guidance I received from that leader...it made me just want to not be there because I was embarrassed for him.

That's bad leadership. Praise in public, counsel in private.

[Hacker]

That's bad leadership. Praise in public, counsel in private.

Spoken like someone who has never had to actually do either. Yes, that's certainly the "book" answer, but there are actually some valid opportunities to use public humiliation, and it can be a very effective leadership tool.

are you telling me she is a good leader?

No, I never said this woman was a *good* leader. Not defending her act in any way. I just didn't see any direct evidence of that from the quotes provided in the article. It was all a bunch of crying about the harsh language she used when addressing people, and the fact that she got mean and threw things. Again, SFW.

The point about having seen leadership shot in front of subordinates wasn't to display it as a shining example of leadership, more to point out that it is not a situation that leads to instant loss of credibility in front of subordinates.

Edited March 7, 2010 by Hacker

[BFM this]

It's easier to sell a cake that has some frosting and decorations on it.

I really don't think the "swearing", "outbursts", "public humiliation", and """assault""" charges are what got this Captain canned. Those were just the easy to digest illustrative points that made good copy for the editors at Time and the reading public. My gut feeling is that some folks with quite a bit of collective officer rating and mentoring experience might have, for once, done the right thing before others' mistakes turned into a mishap investigation at worst.

Of course, I could definately be wrong.

[slacker]

I think the hurtful words were definitely spoken into both ears.

[Vertigo]

but there are actually some valid opportunities to use public humiliation, and it can be a very effective leadership tool.

Sure... when it's the exception and not the norm. This chick made it a routine thing, which undermines the junior officers ability to lead his/her enlisted personnel.

Look at it this way. If an E is watching his OIC get berated and put down on a routine basis by the CC then eventually that E is going to start seeing his OIC as a regular fuck-up... even if they are not. This woman is instilling an environment where the E's are seeing their O's as incompetents. So when the shit hits the fan and a real world scenario is developing, why would that E listen to his OIC? It's obvious the OIC is a fuck up... the O6 made sure the E's knew it on a regular basis.

[M2]

OK, maybe we all need to trust that the Navy IG did a thorough investigation of this captain and found she failed in command, hence her being relieved. I doubt that would have happened if she simply "cussed out" a few subordinates in public...

Secondly, the old rule "praise in public, chastise in private" is a nice generality but as Hacker points out it is not a absolute one. "True leadership" is knowing the right tactic to use in any given situation, and when the "book answer" is not always the "right answer."

Cheers! M2

[Guest bunk22]

OK, maybe we all need to trust that the Navy IG did a thorough investigation of this captain and found she failed in command, hence her being relieved. I doubt that would have happened if she simply "cussed out" a few subordinates in public...

Secondly, the old rule "praise in public, chastise in private" is a nice generality but as Hacker points out it is not a absolute one. "True leadership" is knowing the right tactic to use in any given situation, and when the "book answer" is not always the "right answer."

Cheers! M2

The yelling and cursing was just part of it. She did a lot of things behind closed doors, abusing her power. Hell, if yelling and throwing F-bombs was a cause for dismissal, I would have seen at least half of my previous CO's go bye-bye. I worked for a tyrant CO who constantly publicly chastised his officers and threatened us in front of others at DH meetings weekly. Had us work weekends all the time (this was shore duty), making life pretty much miserable. He used chew my ass at least twice a week just beacause it was fun I think. I hear more f-bombs than I hear growing up from my father. He was a horrible leader but was a damn good pilot and got the job done. This particualy CO went beyond that, punishing people for small infractions, intidating JO's to do personal business, etc, etc. Maybe a fine line between these two CO's but this CAPT crossed it. My old CO would walk the line and knew when not to cross.

https://militarytimes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1584379

[amcflyboy]

Somebody said there was more to this, well there is:

"WASHINGTON A Navy captain was demoted because she berated and assaulted her crew, not because she led her guided missile cruiser on a drag-race with another U.S. warship in the Pacific, an investigation shows.

Capt. Holly Graf was relieved of her command of the cruiser USS Cowpens after an investigation substantiated crew allegations that she was abusive and used her position for personal gain, naval officials said Thursday on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record.

Graf did not immediately answer an e-mail. A message on her phone said the number had been changed, disconnected or was not in service.

A Navy inspector general report said investigators had substantiated that Graf assaulted subordinates (pushing one, grabbing another and once throwing wadded up paper at another sailor) and that she regularly verbally abused subordinates by publicly berating them, belittling them and using profane language.

The allegations were called in to a Navy hotline and covered March 2008 to July 2009. The report was issued in December, she was relieved of her command on Jan. 19 and on Thursday was awaiting new orders, one official said.

Graf once ordered a subordinate to stand in a "timeout" in a corner in front of the full watch team, which he complained to investigators was demeaning to him, according to the report.

The report also found she used her office for personal gain that is, asked junior officers to play piano at her private Christmas party and to walk her dogs.

Among allegations not substantiated was one that she endangered the ship while allowing a drag-race between the Cowpens and the destroyer USS John S. McCain in February 2009.

Four witnesses described the 2009 race off of Okinawa, but they differed on how close the two vessels came to each other before the race was halted.

One sailor said that during the race, aimed at boosting morale, the McCain got ahead of the Cowpens and began drifting to the left into the path of the Cowpens. Though the report did not question that the race took place, it said the allegation of "hazarding a vessel" was unsubstantiated.

"In order to show that (she) improperly hazarded the USS Cowpens, the evidence must show that an actual event occurred in which the ship was lost or damaged, or that there was a situation in which the ship was placed in imminent danger of loss or serious damage" and that she did it willfully, the inspector general said.

One of the officials, who has many years of sea duty, said races on the open seas are not uncommon and are done to bolster morale or as a kind of maneuver drill."

Above it states she was relieved of command because of her harshness, and not the fact that she decided to race another boat and put her crews lives in danger for this. I say bullshit...yeah it claims that the reports of the race were unsubstantiated, but I believe this did have some sort of a factor in the IG's report.

My opinion only...

Edited March 8, 2010 by amcflyboy

[Guest Okawner]

Racing another boat? That sounds like a kick-ass captain to me. Plus, she's hot (in a Martina Navratilova sort of way).

[gohornsgo]

Racing another boat? That sounds like a kick-ass captain to me. Plus, she's hot (in a Martina Navratilova sort of way).

Dude, what? She looks like a ######ing leprechaun.

[Guest Okawner]

I take it you have no idea who Martina Navratilova is.

[OverTQ]

OK, maybe we all need to trust that the Navy IG did a thorough investigation of this captain and found she failed in command, hence her being relieved. I doubt that would have happened if she simply "cussed out" a few subordinates in public...

Secondly, the old rule "praise in public, chastise in private" is a nice generality but as Hacker points out it is not a absolute one. "True leadership" is knowing the right tactic to use in any given situation, and when the "book answer" is not always the "right answer."

2

[Wolf424]

Bingo. There had to be more to it. I'm throwing the BS flag on the race having nothing to do with it.

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

Above it states she was relieved of command because of her harshness, and not the fact that she decided to race another boat and put her crews lives in danger for this. I say bullshit...yeah it claims that the reports of the race were unsubstantiated, but I believe this did have some sort of a factor in the IG's report.

My opinion only...

I think the alleged race ended up as another tick mark in the "poor judgment" column that I'm sure factored into her removal. One incident may be a non-event, but a series of non-events can often establish a trend that can be hung around your neck. I know as much about this case as I have read in this thread, so who knows what else was at play here. I doubt it was just a few naughty words and an errant coffee mug though.

[gohornsgo]

I take it you have no idea who Martina Navratilova is.

You're right. Nevermind. Oh god.

[amcflyboy]

I think the alleged race ended up as another tick mark in the "poor judgment" column that I'm sure factored into her removal. One incident may be a non-event, but a series of non-events can often establish a trend that can be hung around your neck. I know as much about this case as I have read in this thread, so who knows what else was at play here. I doubt it was just a few naughty words and an errant coffee mug though.

Definitely agree with you on the "tick marks" stacking up against her. The last set of nails in the coften.

By the way, she does look like a leprachaun!!

[LJDRVR]

There is more depth to this than somebody cussing at their troops. I think we're all thick-skinned enough to tolerate a litle ass-chewing, especially when we deserve it. But like Max says, the secret lies in using that as just one of the tools in your bag and not the only implement you own. (A club at that.)Much like the cockpit of an airplane, the safety and effectiveness of a ship relies on the commander getting the very best performance and information from all team members. Part of that's them but a lot of it's the culture you create as the Commander, A/C, Captain or CEO.

When you start treating your team like lower life forms? They shut down and stop providing you with the vigilance and counsel you need to do your job safely and effectively. You're now running the boat/airplane/company all by yourself, which is just plain frickin' stupid. Worse, when you physically assault them? Now you're just being a prick who lacks the intelligence, creativity and most importantly, integrity to do your job the way you're supposed to.

You want to wear all the fancy crap on your uniform, collect the extra pay and nice title? That's fine - but you better step the hell up and meet your obligations to the people whose lives have been entrusted to you.

Reading the article you get a sense of what an epic failure she must be. Potty mouth notwithstanding.

Edited March 9, 2010 by LJDRVR

[Guest]

She sounds like an idiot.

I used the F-Bomb on approx 69 million occasions. So what.

I had the CFACC give me this order "Rainman, I am sending you in there on the ground to un###### this situation. Don't ###### this up." Loud and clear.

I have screamed at the Top 3 (outside the combat ops tent so there was absolutely no way anyone 6.9 feet away inside the tent could hear) "You get on the ######ing radio and tell those goddamn pussies to quite worrying about a stupid ######ing band 3 fault on their ECM pod and put those ######ing machines in the air and get them over the ######ing enemy where they ######ing belong right ######ing now!" and no one quit or fired me. In fact, we laugh our asses off about that when we get together now.

She got whacked because she was shitty.

[slacker]

I have a similar story to rainman’s where I dropped the f-bomb in a heated situation.

I sent a LT to Sam’s to stock the snackbar. When I came in from flying, I went to check his work. He bought fruit cups! The very same fruit cups that no one eats from the box lunches. There are enough discarded fruit cups in the mission planning room to feed a small nation and this moron buys more. People won’t eat them when they’re free and now he’s charging $.50 a piece.

What a fucking douche. Debrief was harsh and ladened with F-bombs. I think he cried.

[Learjetter]

She sounds like an idiot.

I used the F-Bomb on approx 69 million occasions. So what.

I had the CFACC give me this order "Rainman, I am sending you in there on the ground to un###### this situation. Don't ###### this up." Loud and clear.

I have screamed at the Top 3 (outside the combat ops tent so there was absolutely no way anyone 6.9 feet away inside the tent could hear) "You get on the ######ing radio and tell those goddamn pussies to quite worrying about a stupid ######ing band 3 fault on their ECM pod and put those ######ing machines in the air and get them over the ######ing enemy where they ######ing belong right ######ing now!" and no one quit or fired me. In fact, we laugh our asses off about that when we get together now.

She got whacked because she was shitty.

I agree 96.9% with your last statement.

While I have no doubt the CFACC sent you precisely because he believed you had the skills and ability to unf**k the situation, I doubt he "screamed" it at you in a large public forum. I also suspect he selected that phraseology because he knew you, and your leadership/management and followership styles, and knew you would read him as he intended: "loud and clear."

I worked with the CFACC, C3 and DIRMOBFOR in the beginning of OIF and never once heard any them utter an angry f-bomb in a public forum. Their demeanor and use of language set a clear, professional military tone and I, for one, appreciated it. There are few words in the English language that we can use like an f-bomb--it's versatility is unsurpassed. But, I think it's still vulgar and coarse, and I prefer to keep my military bearing intact and have only once myself uttered an f-bomb in flight (several "holy sh*ts!, though).

Your tale of screaming at the SNCO may have been exactly the right motivational tool to use at that moment: you needed to get a certain message across and you chose that method/language to deliver it. Maybe it worked exactly as designed, and maybe the SNCO believes to this day that you are an unprofessional, angry tool who laughs about the incident now because he's afraid if he doesn't you'll do it again. I'll never know, and neither will you. But, even you would have to admit that, viewed by a dispassionate observer, your rant would appear as a childish, hot-headed, emotionally-charged (irrational?) outburst. I'm not saying it wasn't effective, but I'd hope that a professional air-warrior would normally not choose to salt his communications in that way.

Like the senior leaders I served with, I want my bosses, crews, staff, airmen, and peer officers I work with to believe I keep my cool under pressure, use rational, dispassionate reasoning to reach the right decision, and never get "ruffled" or "out-of-control." I think indiscriminate use of the f-bomb destroys that image and does not instill in them confidence in my ability to lead my troops or my crews, in combat or back at the home-drome. Perhaps that's what happened to "Captain Bligh?" Her superiors lost confidence in her ability to lead in part because she wasn't cool, calm, collected, and in control in difficult situations?

In the end, I like to think that as an officer, I should act the part--that means no f-, c-, b-, or any other kind of bombs while in uniform. I try not to raise my voice--though I do "change my tone" when the situation calls for it. While I disapprove of such vulgarities and usually counsel (in private) my younger troops with a speech similar to this one, in the end, each of us will lead in our own way.

If what really matters is getting the mission done, regardless of professional demeanor, couldn't it be said the female skipper did exactly that? And look what happened to her...

Fly safe!

[BFM this]

Your tale of screaming at the SNCO...

Top-3 in the fighter world is the term for squadron supervision during flying ops. The OG puts a SOF in the tower, the FS/CC puts typically a Flt/CC or ADO at the desk (referred to as Top-3). Job comes with expectation to get verbally crushed every few tours.

[Smokin]

I think everyone is looking at the wrong stuff here. Who cares if she drops f bombs? This is the military, we kill people for a living. If you're offended by an occasional f bomb, you're probably in the wrong line of work.

The stuff that should be looked at is yelling at officers who came to her for advice, putting senior enlisted in "timeout" (funny, but probably not a good idea), using the office for personal gain, and throwing normal coffee mugs at subordinates. A wadded up piece of paper - irrelevant, but throwing a ceramic coffee mug at someone is corporal punishment, which has been banned for a long time. I don't think any one of these things got her fired, but the combination of all of these made here an ineffective leader who should not be in charge of a ship. I also believe the the report that says the racing ships had nothing to do with it. I have relatives in the Navy who have participated in races and is apparently a relatively normal event.

[backseatdriver]

I agree 96.9% with your last statement.

While I have no doubt the CFACC sent you precisely because he believed you had the skills and ability to unf**k the situation, I doubt he "screamed" it at you in a large public forum. I also suspect he selected that phraseology because he knew you, and your leadership/management and followership styles, and knew you would read him as he intended: "loud and clear."

I worked with the CFACC, C3 and DIRMOBFOR in the beginning of OIF and never once heard any them utter an angry f-bomb in a public forum. Their demeanor and use of language set a clear, professional military tone and I, for one, appreciated it. There are few words in the English language that we can use like an f-bomb--it's versatility is unsurpassed. But, I think it's still vulgar and coarse, and I prefer to keep my military bearing intact and have only once myself uttered an f-bomb in flight (several "holy sh*ts!, though).

Your tale of screaming at the SNCO may have been exactly the right motivational tool to use at that moment: you needed to get a certain message across and you chose that method/language to deliver it. Maybe it worked exactly as designed, and maybe the SNCO believes to this day that you are an unprofessional, angry tool who laughs about the incident now because he's afraid if he doesn't you'll do it again. I'll never know, and neither will you. But, even you would have to admit that, viewed by a dispassionate observer, your rant would appear as a childish, hot-headed, emotionally-charged (irrational?) outburst. I'm not saying it wasn't effective, but I'd hope that a professional air-warrior would normally not choose to salt his communications in that way.

Like the senior leaders I served with, I want my bosses, crews, staff, airmen, and peer officers I work with to believe I keep my cool under pressure, use rational, dispassionate reasoning to reach the right decision, and never get "ruffled" or "out-of-control." I think indiscriminate use of the f-bomb destroys that image and does not instill in them confidence in my ability to lead my troops or my crews, in combat or back at the home-drome. Perhaps that's what happened to "Captain Bligh?" Her superiors lost confidence in her ability to lead in part because she wasn't cool, calm, collected, and in control in difficult situations?

In the end, I like to think that as an officer, I should act the part--that means no f-, c-, b-, or any other kind of bombs while in uniform. I try not to raise my voice--though I do "change my tone" when the situation calls for it. While I disapprove of such vulgarities and usually counsel (in private) my younger troops with a speech similar to this one, in the end, each of us will lead in our own way.

If what really matters is getting the mission done, regardless of professional demeanor, couldn't it be said the female skipper did exactly that? And look what happened to her...

Fly safe!

Are you an SOS instructor?

[brickhistory]

Are you an SOS instructor?

Now that's funny right there, I don't care who you are...