The United States Navy is often criticized for its perceived failure to embrace change in warfare. While drones are forging new capability in the Russia-Ukraine War, critics charge the Navy with being a “20th century organization” armed with ships better suited to fighting the Soviet Union in the 1980s. The Navy has been heavily criticized for one of its attempts at change in the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) but also for its lack of speed in embracing the change of uncrewed systems.
There are many choices in maintaining continuity in familiar and capable systems versus sailing rapidly into the unknown waters of change. One constant in these decisions that the Navy can sustain, however, is honesty with all stakeholders in force design to include the Department of Defense, Congress, and U.S. citizens. Good character, as enabled by honesty, is one of the service’s most effective tools. Several military and civilian leaders who embodied character in the course of their service are role models to follow as the Navy confronts the need for continuity in some areas of force design and meaningful change in others.
Admiral Elmo Zumwalt
In 1970, Admiral Elmo Zumwalt was nominated as the youngest Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) in the Navy’s history, and he entered the job with a desire for radical changes to the naval service. Many senior Navy officers thought Zumwalt was too young, and his predecessor Admiral Tom Moorer thought Zumwalt should spend another four years in a numbered fleet command before becoming CNO. Zumwalt embraced cruise missiles, mines, and unconventional platforms including the sea control ship for convoy protection and a surface effect ship for sea control combat. Zumwalt also made significant changes to the Navy personnel system in relaxing many of what he saw as outmoded “Mickey Mouse” regulations for sailors, and he also opened new opportunities for women and for minority sailors.
Zumwalt faced considerable opposition from the aviation navy, who perceived that he was reducing the value of aircraft carriers and from the retired community who thought his personnel regulation changes would reduce Navy readiness and sailor reliability. Admiral Zumwalt persevered, in spite of these challenges, and displayed honesty and good character by standing up for what he believed to be true. Many of Zumwalt’s proposals including his sea control and surface effect ship were not accepted, but his good character ensured that people knew his advocacy for what he believed was always in good faith. Zumwalt’s legacy as enabled by his good character included multiple Navy programs that helped secure peace in the later Cold War, such as the Tomahawk and Harpoon cruise missiles, along with a major, positive shift in navy personnel programs.
Admiral Hyman Rickover
One of Admiral Zumwalt’s most persistent competitors in defining what the Navy should be was nuclear power and Navy submarine boss Admiral Hyman G. Rickover. Like Zumwalt, Rickover aggressively pursued change where he thought it ought to be implemented. Like Zumwalt, Rickover presented his ideas with honesty and conviction. His efforts to create nuclear navy knowledge among officers and sailors caused major change in the naval education system while at the same time his tough adherence to standards won him the respect of those who disagreed with him. Admiral Rickover was also well known for his tenacity in holding private contractors to strict levels of quality and cost accounting, His efforts served to increase the overall readiness of the nuclear navy and to ensure that the U.S. taxpayers received fair value for the funds invested in the naval service. Admiral Rickover was a life-long advocate for the value of continuing education and not just in technical fields. He suggested that naval officers broaden their fields of study over their careers to develop well-rounded capabilities. All of these educational pursuits were in Rickover’s mind to develop good character in the officers and sailors of the submarine force.
Admiral Rickover and Admiral Zumwalt delivered their message of character in separate ways but with no less sincerity of purpose. No one could accuse Admiral Rickover of a lack of character. He demanded it from both his nuclear sailors and from himself. The nuclear navy remains a monument to Admiral Rickover’s honest assessment of people and equipment as enabled by good character.
Philip London
Philip “Jack” London career both inside the Navy on active and reserve duty, and later in the analysis sector also demonstrated the value of good character. London began his career as a naval aviator and helicopter pilot in the Cold War United States Navy, where he learned to be a good leader from strong Navy role models with good character. He served as first an antisubmarine warfare helicopter pilot and later as an aeronautical engineering duty officer, retiring from the U.S. Naval Reserve as a Captain. London’s naval service informed his ideas of corporate leadership, and he embraced the idea that a leader should set the absolute best example and be able to tell their subordinates, “Do as I say and as I do.” Leadership by personal example became London’s watchword for success when, in 1984, he became the President and CEO of CACI Inc., a government contractor.
London’s positive efforts were frequently rewarded by others outside his company and outside his corporate fields of endeavor. In particular he was honored by the Human Resources Leadership Awards of Greater Washington with the establishment of its Ethics in Business Award in his name. In 2014, he was named by the Ethisphere Institute as one of the Most Influential People in Business Ethics. He received additional awards from technology sector including Entrepreneur of the Year for Government IT Services from Ernst & Young (2003); Federal 100 and Eagle Awards from Federal Computer Week (2004); and the Earle C. Williams Leadership in Technology Award from the Northern Virginia Technology Council (2004.) Finally, he was the recipient of numerous awards from the United States Navy including the Distinguished Graduate Award from the U.S. Naval Academy (2019); and the U.S. Navy Memorial Lone Sailor Award (2019).
London embraced change by moving CACI’s focus to information technology and intelligence work, and in the process, increasing the value of the company. His uncompromising demand that his employees display good character in their work won him great loyalty from the members of his firm. London later penned a book on the subject of character in corporate life, Character, the Ultimate Success Factor. As with Zumwalt and Rickover, London’s stance was forceful and rested on a belief that good personal and corporate character was the foundation of honest assessment.
Good Character Must be at the Center of Naval Action
In the rush to judge littoral combat ships or officers accused of taking bribes from “Fat Leonard,” good character is often missing from the record. Naval leaders of all ranks must set good examples and display good character in all that they do, while in uniform and on the beach, on leave or liberty. Failures on the battlefield, at the shipyard, or in corporate boardrooms are inevitable and the cost of those failures is high. Good character, however, allows for an honest assessment of mistakes and sets the groundwork for their addressal in good faith with an eye to positive outcomes.
Dr. Steven Wills is the Navalist at the Center for Maritime Strategy. His research and analysis centers on U.S. Navy strategy and policy, surface warfare programs and platforms, and military history.
Center for Maritime Strategy
By Dr. Steven Wills
The United States Navy is often criticized for its perceived failure to embrace change in warfare. While drones are forging new capability in the Russia-Ukraine War, critics charge the Navy with being a “20th century organization” armed with ships better suited to fighting the Soviet Union in the 1980s. The Navy has been heavily criticized for one of its attempts at change in the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) but also for its lack of speed in embracing the change of uncrewed systems.
There are many choices in maintaining continuity in familiar and capable systems versus sailing rapidly into the unknown waters of change. One constant in these decisions that the Navy can sustain, however, is honesty with all stakeholders in force design to include the Department of Defense, Congress, and U.S. citizens. Good character, as enabled by honesty, is one of the service’s most effective tools. Several military and civilian leaders who embodied character in the course of their service are role models to follow as the Navy confronts the need for continuity in some areas of force design and meaningful change in others.
Admiral Elmo Zumwalt
In 1970, Admiral Elmo Zumwalt was nominated as the youngest Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) in the Navy’s history, and he entered the job with a desire for radical changes to the naval service. Many senior Navy officers thought Zumwalt was too young, and his predecessor Admiral Tom Moorer thought Zumwalt should spend another four years in a numbered fleet command before becoming CNO. Zumwalt embraced cruise missiles, mines, and unconventional platforms including the sea control ship for convoy protection and a surface effect ship for sea control combat. Zumwalt also made significant changes to the Navy personnel system in relaxing many of what he saw as outmoded “Mickey Mouse” regulations for sailors, and he also opened new opportunities for women and for minority sailors.
Zumwalt faced considerable opposition from the aviation navy, who perceived that he was reducing the value of aircraft carriers and from the retired community who thought his personnel regulation changes would reduce Navy readiness and sailor reliability. Admiral Zumwalt persevered, in spite of these challenges, and displayed honesty and good character by standing up for what he believed to be true. Many of Zumwalt’s proposals including his sea control and surface effect ship were not accepted, but his good character ensured that people knew his advocacy for what he believed was always in good faith. Zumwalt’s legacy as enabled by his good character included multiple Navy programs that helped secure peace in the later Cold War, such as the Tomahawk and Harpoon cruise missiles, along with a major, positive shift in navy personnel programs.
Admiral Hyman Rickover
One of Admiral Zumwalt’s most persistent competitors in defining what the Navy should be was nuclear power and Navy submarine boss Admiral Hyman G. Rickover. Like Zumwalt, Rickover aggressively pursued change where he thought it ought to be implemented. Like Zumwalt, Rickover presented his ideas with honesty and conviction. His efforts to create nuclear navy knowledge among officers and sailors caused major change in the naval education system while at the same time his tough adherence to standards won him the respect of those who disagreed with him. Admiral Rickover was also well known for his tenacity in holding private contractors to strict levels of quality and cost accounting, His efforts served to increase the overall readiness of the nuclear navy and to ensure that the U.S. taxpayers received fair value for the funds invested in the naval service. Admiral Rickover was a life-long advocate for the value of continuing education and not just in technical fields. He suggested that naval officers broaden their fields of study over their careers to develop well-rounded capabilities. All of these educational pursuits were in Rickover’s mind to develop good character in the officers and sailors of the submarine force.
Admiral Rickover and Admiral Zumwalt delivered their message of character in separate ways but with no less sincerity of purpose. No one could accuse Admiral Rickover of a lack of character. He demanded it from both his nuclear sailors and from himself. The nuclear navy remains a monument to Admiral Rickover’s honest assessment of people and equipment as enabled by good character.
Philip London
Philip “Jack” London career both inside the Navy on active and reserve duty, and later in the analysis sector also demonstrated the value of good character. London began his career as a naval aviator and helicopter pilot in the Cold War United States Navy, where he learned to be a good leader from strong Navy role models with good character. He served as first an antisubmarine warfare helicopter pilot and later as an aeronautical engineering duty officer, retiring from the U.S. Naval Reserve as a Captain. London’s naval service informed his ideas of corporate leadership, and he embraced the idea that a leader should set the absolute best example and be able to tell their subordinates, “Do as I say and as I do.” Leadership by personal example became London’s watchword for success when, in 1984, he became the President and CEO of CACI Inc., a government contractor.
London’s positive efforts were frequently rewarded by others outside his company and outside his corporate fields of endeavor. In particular he was honored by the Human Resources Leadership Awards of Greater Washington with the establishment of its Ethics in Business Award in his name. In 2014, he was named by the Ethisphere Institute as one of the Most Influential People in Business Ethics. He received additional awards from technology sector including Entrepreneur of the Year for Government IT Services from Ernst & Young (2003); Federal 100 and Eagle Awards from Federal Computer Week (2004); and the Earle C. Williams Leadership in Technology Award from the Northern Virginia Technology Council (2004.) Finally, he was the recipient of numerous awards from the United States Navy including the Distinguished Graduate Award from the U.S. Naval Academy (2019); and the U.S. Navy Memorial Lone Sailor Award (2019).
London embraced change by moving CACI’s focus to information technology and intelligence work, and in the process, increasing the value of the company. His uncompromising demand that his employees display good character in their work won him great loyalty from the members of his firm. London later penned a book on the subject of character in corporate life, Character, the Ultimate Success Factor. As with Zumwalt and Rickover, London’s stance was forceful and rested on a belief that good personal and corporate character was the foundation of honest assessment.
Good Character Must be at the Center of Naval Action
In the rush to judge littoral combat ships or officers accused of taking bribes from “Fat Leonard,” good character is often missing from the record. Naval leaders of all ranks must set good examples and display good character in all that they do, while in uniform and on the beach, on leave or liberty. Failures on the battlefield, at the shipyard, or in corporate boardrooms are inevitable and the cost of those failures is high. Good character, however, allows for an honest assessment of mistakes and sets the groundwork for their addressal in good faith with an eye to positive outcomes.
Dr. Steven Wills is the Navalist at the Center for Maritime Strategy. His research and analysis centers on U.S. Navy strategy and policy, surface warfare programs and platforms, and military history.