NEURON SECRET SIX

The Principle of Authority: Tough love leaders are authoritative mentors, not authoritarian dictators.

Not long before Tom Flanagan graduated from college and received his commission as a naval officer, he met Admiral Hyman G. Rickover—the “father” of the Submarine Nuclear Navy. Tom stood in the top 25 of his class of nearly 900, so Rickover tried to recruit him for submarine duty. Tom had his sights set on being a Navy SEAL, so he declined. Rickover upped the ante by guaranteeing Tom a Navy‐paid opportunity to earn a master's degree in engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Tom took the deal, got his degree, and reported for submarine duty aboard the USS Whale (SSN 638). The CO of the sub assigned Tom to the communications division, which consisted of six petty officers and a master chief.

“I was the guy in charge of communications, but I must admit that I was new at communicating orders and managing a division,” said Tom. “I had just come from MIT and I had been given authority, but I hadn't yet earned it. I knew that I would never earn it if I didn't learn how to connect with my team and speak their language. Fortunately for me, the master chief took me under his wing. He also ensured that the team knew that I was now in charge.”

Tom learned how to better translate his thinking and “commander's intent” into easily understood directives by observing the master chief, his CO, and other officers on the boat. He improved his leadership skills by exhibiting confidence, compassion, and the ability to listen, but also by adjusting his communication style. Over time, he earned more trust and respect from his team, and later took charge of the largest division on the submarine in engineering. He was then transferred to the USS Memphis (SSN 691) but harbored plans to serve one final year of his obligation and then leave the Navy. Not long after getting married, an unexpected series of events changed the entire direction of his career:

Tom's wife gave him a green light, so he packed his bags and flew to Naples to work on a classified project called Outlaw Shark. The program entailed launching a cruise missile from a nuclear submarine with targeting information provided beyond the sub's sensors via satellite. Tom spent the next few months on what later became the Tomahawk cruise missile program.

Launching cruise missiles from a submarine was not new. The Navy had previously equipped subs with Regulus nuclear turbojet missiles after World War II. The USS Tunny (SS 282) launched the first Regulus in 1953, and was later joined by four other submarines. These five subs became America's first nuclear‐deterrent strike force and completed 40 patrols before being replaced by newer fleet ballistic missile subs.

In 1976, when Tom got involved with operation Outlaw Shark, the Navy had decided to integrate several new technologies from intelligence sources and “big data” satellites, mid‐range computers, and new cruise missile platforms. The new missiles would be smaller, lighter, and faster. They would also fly farther and would be extremely accurate, going well beyond the range of a submarine's sensors.

By Christmas, Tom and his teammates had solved a lot of technical issues, but they were just getting started. Tom had promised his wife that he'd be home for the holidays. Then he got a call from the local Submarine Group (SUBGRU) 8 admiral.

“They wanted someone to brief Admiral Stansfield Turner, who ran the Sixth Fleet, on operation Outlaw Shark,” said Tom. “There were only two of us who could do that, so we drew straws. Damned if I didn't get the short one.”

Instead of flying home to see his wife, Tom spent the next few days preparing his presentation, which he later gave to Turner. He then joined his wife and after the holidays returned to Naples to finish the project. Three months passed before he received another call from Submarine Atlantic (SUBLANT) command in Norfolk, Virginia.

“They wanted me to brief a bunch more officers,” said Tom. “One of them was Admiral Isaac Kidd, the guy in charge of the entire Atlantic fleet. I was within two months of leaving the Navy, and it was a Saturday morning when I got the call to be in Norfolk immediately. Needless to say, I wasn't pleased with the unexpected request.”

Tom recalled his experience as a junior officer and thought about how his CO and other senior officers had helped him improve his communication style. He decided that instead of trying to show off and impress the admiral with his technical prowess, he'd instead simplify his presentation so it could be easily understood.

“One thing I learned on my first submarine was how to communicate well,” said Tom. “Sometimes when we have authority, we don't do a great job of explaining to others what we want them to do, and we often fail to keep the message simple and concise. My message was simple: technology was about to revolutionize modern warfare. Back in 1977: my team and I were painting a vision of drones and cruise missiles as they might be used twenty or thirty years in the future.”

Tom briefed the Commander of Submarine Atlantic (COMSUBLANT)—a three‐star admiral—who reported to Admiral Kidd. Then Kidd walked in and Tom spent another 25 minutes briefing him. Kidd stood up, smiled, shook Tom's hand, and then turned to COMSUBLANT and said, “It's on.”

After ADM Kidd left, COMSUBLANT said to Tom: “Congratulations, you are going to brief the president of the United States.”

Tom's jaw dropped. He learned that Admiral Rickover had scheduled a briefing on the latest nuclear submarine capabilities for President Jimmy Carter. As Carter was the only president in history to have qualified on submarines when he was a naval officer, he had an interest in the newest technologies.

Carter arrived in Norfolk, Virginia, to tour the USS Los Angeles (SSN 688). ADM Kidd had convinced ADM Rickover to have Tom brief the president while he was aboard. Rickover agreed, but allotted only 15 minutes.

Tom met with President Carter in the control room and began his briefing. Carter was very interested, stopped Tom, and asked that his wife, Rosalynn, also hear the presentation. When she walked over, Tom continued his talk.

“The president asked a lot of questions about the program,” said Tom. “He was genuinely interested and frequently asked me what I thought. He really wanted to know my opinion. For me, that was an excellent example of authoritative leadership. Here was the president of the United States making a junior lieutenant feel empowered while asking intelligent questions so he could be informed enough to make decisions.”

For President Carter's briefing, Rickover had given Tom a hard stop at only 15 minutes. At 30 minutes, Tom saw Rickover standing on his toes behind the president and Rosalynn. He was tapping his watch. He did not look happy. Rickover was widely known throughout the Navy as an authoritarian leader. His controlling style had proved effective at ensuring a safe nuclear submarine force, but it had also created occasional difficult situations for junior officers.

Tom did his best to balance the demands of the two leaders. He knew that the effective use of the Tomahawk program could potentially one day save lives, and it was important that the leader of the United States have a full understanding of the system's capabilities. He continued with the briefing for a while longer to ensure that the most important information was imparted, and then said, “Mr. President, I think we have exceeded our allotted briefing time.”

Carter glanced at Rickover and then nodded.

During a Town Hall Meeting on October 9, 1980, President Carter remarked that when he had become president there was no long‐range cruise missile program, and now the United States had a very good one.

A decade later, during the first Iraq War in 1990, two nuclear attack submarines launched a barrage of Tomahawk cruise missiles on Iraqi communications centers, tanks, and the Zaafaraniya nuclear fabrication plant. One senior Defense Department official commented that the Iraqi plant was “a perfect candidate for a strike by cruise missiles because of the need for pinpoint accuracy and because Baghdad is so heavily defended.”

Experts estimate that dozens and perhaps even hundreds of lives were saved by having the ability to implement initial strikes on targets with accuracy from distant stealth positions.

“I never forgot my briefing with President Carter,” said Tom. “In less than one hour, I observed a man with the weight of the world on his shoulders. He was genuinely interested in what a young lieutenant had to say about an important new technology. Today, whenever I think I have too much on my shoulders, I remember that briefing and it helps me place my situation into proper perspective.”

Tom's experience with the Tomahawk program and his briefing with President Carter helped him learn several valuable lessons:

1. Take control of your career. If you are bored or if your job is growing stale, get out of your comfort zone and volunteer for something new.
2. Sometimes in life you will pull the short straw. You may get an unexpected call on the weekend that could change your life. It's okay to get angry, but then get over it. Sometimes opening new doors in life requires enduring a little discomfort, but that pain might just lead to a career‐changing meeting with the president of the United States.
3. Great leaders don't force their opinions or their authority on anyone. They invest appropriate time to gain their team's input and trust. They ensure that others are a part of creating ideas and making decisions so they will be motivated to take ownership. They also relinquish authority by delegating and empowering.

“Prior to giving all those Tomahawk program briefings, not once did an admiral or officer require that I first do a dry run or presentation preview,” said Tom. “They empowered me and trusted me.”

Tom Flanagan retired from the Navy after nearly 25 years of service. He later became Chief Information Officer (CIO) for MCI, a global communications giant. He was also CIO and Senior Vice President for Amgen, the world's largest biotechnology company, where in 2008 he earned recognition as a Top Ten Global CIO Leader and Innovator. In 2010, Tom was selected to the CIO Hall of Fame and is now a vice president at IBM.

STORGE LOVE

Tom Flannigan's experience serves as an introduction to the Sixth Neuron Secret: The Principle of Authority: Tough love leaders are authoritative mentors, not authoritarian dictators.

The ancient Greeks practiced a form of love called storge, most often found in the authoritative relationship between parents and children. This form of love underlines the Principle of Authority. The ancients would have believed the actions of “helicopter parents” to be humorous and sad. In the Greeks' view, a parent shows the opposite of love by shielding a child from pain or effort. These two essential elements of life sharpen swords and teach our offspring the painful lessons they need to face a difficult and harsh world.

For leaders, we may frequently be required to act like a parent with those whom we lead in that we are given the authority to hire, fire, and direct. Understanding this Neuron Principle and the logical neuropsychology that dictates how we respond to authoritative figures will help us improve our ability to set proper boundaries, instill trust, and deliver “tough love.”

We learned earlier that Dutch children are the happiest, and perhaps the most well‐adjusted, in the world. One might think this is so because the Dutch, being more liberal, are less authoritarian and disciplinarian. In a few scenarios, this is true, but in most it is not. Most Dutch parents have mastered the delicate balance between stifling domination and benign neglect. They refer to this as being authoritative rather than authoritarian.

The best leaders understand the difference between these two words. Authoritarian favors complete obedience or subjection to authority rather than individual freedom exercised within appropriate boundaries. Authoritative means having an air of authority, usually supported by a demeanor of confidence and underscored by knowledge and experience. To be authoritative, the best leaders also know that it's important to gain the enthusiastic support of your team. They must be committed and willing to do whatever it takes to follow the commander's intent. This requires removing yourself as the authoritative figure.

That last statement may seem counterintuitive, but recall that teams are far more motivated to achieve a higher passion and purpose than to simply follow an order or line their pockets … or yours. To achieve a storge form of authority, it's important to point your team toward a higher passion and purpose and make that the “authoritative figure.”

Years ago, in a movie titled Knute Rockne: All American, Ronald Reagan played the part of a Notre Dame college star football player, George Gipp, nicknamed Gipper. In one scene, when Gipper fell ill and was on his deathbed, he asked his coach, Knute Rockne, to make him a promise.

Gipper said to Rockne that when the team was up against difficult odds and the boys were being defeated, he should go out there and tell them to give it their all and win one just for the Gipper. That line became so famous that Reagan later used it to help him win a presidential election. This is an example of using a higher purpose, or passion, as the authoritative figure or goal that motivates a team to “give it their all.”

In most thrillers, famous writers usually employ a plot device called “the MacGuffin.” It's a term made up by Alfred Hitchcock for his 1935 movie, The 39 Steps. It's the objective, desire, or item that most of the characters want. For example, in the original 1977 Star Wars movie, everyone wanted the plans for the Death Star. The Empire wanted them back, and the Rebellion wanted to use them to find a weakness. The antagonist, Darth Vader, and the protagonist, Luke Skywalker, were pitted against each other and stopped at nothing to find “the MacGuffin” plans. Both used this goal to invoke authority and gain the undying cooperation of their respective teams.

Leaders are wise to do the same by first understanding and clearly communicating a higher purpose and passion that drives their organization and teams. Name it, visualize it, clearly portray it, and create a MacGuffin to symbolize it. For example: saving lives by encouraging the use of electronic cigarettes. The MacGuffin could be the attainment of one million units sold of a new e‐cigarette device designed to help smokers quit their habit. We might use a poster showing a near‐death smoker on one side contrasted by a healthy and happy vaper on the other side. Above the two figures, we might place the headline: 1M SAVED.

Now, in company meetings, we can leverage the “authoritative goal” displayed on our MacGuffin poster. As a team leader, we can point to the picture and say, “Let's do the following so we can make our next campaign a huge success. Let's save one more life for the Gipper.”

Some leaders might find the statement above a bit corny or illogical, but remember that our brains are more motivated by emotional and instinctual triggers than logical ones, so maybe this approach isn't so corny after all.

In The Netherlands, discipline is based more on an authoritative storge form of love than on strict obedience. The Dutch believe in teaching children how to adopt socially appropriate attitudes and behaviors. Dutch children respect their elders, but do not automatically defer to them as they would in France, Britain, or Asia. They are expected to be helpful and friendly with grandparents, for example, but are not required to be blindly obedient. They are not willfully disobedient, but they are taught to speak their minds. Dutch parents believe that it's important for their children to stand up for themselves. Learning how to voice a sound argument is a valuable life skill. Being a doormat is not.

Storge love admonishes us to set good examples for others to follow. We must earn respect, not demand it. Likewise, Dutch parents seek to be good examples for their children. They use two common expressions to illustrate this: “Parenting is practicing what you preach” and “What the old cock crows, the young cock learns.”

Storge love requires clear, firm, and polite communication. Children in most Western countries have learned how to argue with their parents when told to do something, like take out the trash. If they argue long and loud enough, parents may eventually throw up their arms in frustration and give up. Dutch parents have learned that “no” is a complete sentence. Their child‐rearing experts recommend telling rather than asking. Saying “will you please take out the trash?” may seem more polite and correct. It may feel like a better way to teach children how to be kind and courteous, but it's not the best leadership approach. In The Netherlands, parents don't ask, they tell. They will say in a polite but firm tone, “please take out the trash.” This removes any options or arguments. By asking, you give your child a choice. What if their answer is, “No, I will not take out the trash”? Now you are backed into a corner.

Likewise, as leaders, to be a good example and exhibit a storge form of love, we must politely direct rather than timidly ask. Again, this should not be done in a dictatorial, harsh manner, but instead by using a courteous but firm voice. The best way to do this without sounding like a tyrant is to phrase it in the right way by indicating the desired expectations in relation to the firm's stated vision, and the need for your subordinate's help to exceed the expectations. For example, you might say, “I need your help to complete this project by Friday so we can save another life. What help do you need from me or others on the team to do this?”

In this way, we have “told” the person what needs to be done but phrased it within the context of needing their help so as not to let us or the team down. We then asked how we or others could help them. When they state their needs, we can offer encouragement by letting them know that we trust and believe in them and their ability to accomplish the goal. This is called the Pygmalion effect, wherein the confidence level of previously average‐performing employees is boosted, resulting in higher performance to meet the socially stated goal.

The U.S. Navy and Israeli Defense Forces conducted studies years ago and validated the Pygmalion effect. They determined that between 12 and 17 percent of average performers gained a significant boost up to the superior level when this approach was used. The opposite is also true, and has been referred to as the Golem effect, named after a clay creature in ancient Jewish mythology that was given life.¹ Recall Captain Jo Dee Jacob's story about her abusive boss that made her feel inferior? Her desire to perform also wobbled.

The Dutch do a good job of avoiding the Golem effect by delivering discipline that does not entail forcing children to bend to wills. It is not about bullying, power struggles, constant spying or monitoring, or imposing threats. It does not require yelling, screaming, demeaning, or shouting. Instead, Dutch parents gain cooperation by delivering praise for good behavior and setting proper but loving boundaries to limit unacceptable or harmful behaviors.

Leaders who practice storge love, in like measure, understand that balance is the key. Subordinates should be given ample rope and autonomy. They should not be micromanaged or spied upon. They should be trusted to act like adults and do their jobs correctly and effectively. However, when the end of the rope is reached, a polite but firm yank is acceptable and required.

Leaders should clearly communicate where the rope ends. It's not appropriate to yank someone's chain when they did not even know they had one. Double standards are not allowed. If a boundary is set for one, it must be set for all. A favored employee should not be allowed to come in every other day with a hangover while everyone else risks being fired. Storge love means setting proper examples. As leaders we should not come in every other day with a hangover and expect our employees to be model citizens.

Open communication in other areas is also important. Employees should be kept well informed about all aspects, aspirations, and attainments of the firm, the marketing, and the competition. They should also be told about all the awful stuff. Lying and hiding will diminish trust and lower oxytocin and productivity levels. Recent research studies verify that only about 40 percent of employees say they are well informed about their organization's strategies, tactics, and goals.² If workers don't know what their firm's goals are, how can they align them to their personal goals?

To some, being open is akin to being vulnerable or losing control. These individuals tend to control others and information flow to feel safe and secure. We may fear that relinquishing any control or information will cause us or our organization harm in some way. This is our instinctual brain talking to us. It sits upon our shoulder like an annoying little devil and whispers things in our ear like “don't tell them anything, they'll leak it on the Internet and scare off customers,” or “better keep an eagle eye on that guy because he'll never do the job well enough.” Generally, these are unfounded fears. That little devil is lying to us. We need to flick him off our shoulder and let go of our unrealistic expectations of perfection. We need to delegate and allow others the dignity to perform assigned tasks to the best of their ability. Our job is to point toward the MacGuffin poster and ensure everyone is marching in the same direction. We can then let go and trust that if we are all focused on the same higher purpose, even if we take different paths to get there, we will reach our goal together.

From a neuroscience perspective, storge love is logical and is best expressed with numbers, facts, figures, graphs, charts, and other analytical data and information. Our demeanor when demonstrating this form of love should be calm, authoritative, and knowledgeable. When we practice this principle correctly, we can raise serotonin and GABA in the brains of those we lead, which both have a calming effect. In high‐stress situations, where cool heads need to prevail, leaders should engage their logical brain so they can remain calm and collected. Teams will more readily follow leaders who act rationally and who have demonstrated a thorough understanding of the situation. Also, they have thought several “chess moves” ahead and will make sound, intelligent decisions.

An authoritative leader is a wise and rational leader. Teams have confidence in these leaders and will more readily follow instructions and overcome fear to accomplish the “commander's intent.” They will remain calm and confident because their mirror neurons will help them emulate the attitude, demeanor, and actions of their leader.

LOSE THE LADDER

A U.S. Navy SEAL team is commanded by a Navy Commander (O‐5 rank) and comprised of eight operational platoons with 16 operators in each. Platoons usually operate as eight‐man squads, four‐man fire teams, or two‐man sniper/reconnaissance teams. Operators report up to a senior enlisted man or officer, but regardless of rank, there is no “ladder.” No one is trying to climb over anyone else, and everyone is empowered to act within their envelope of authority.

Team operators work in tandem to complete the mission objectives, which are clearly communicated as the “commander's intent.” Most civilian organizations would do well to lose their ladders. They incentivize employees to climb up to manager, then director, then vice president. Titles stroke egos, and everybody wants a higher one along with more pay. Unfortunately, a “bottom‐up” or “top‐down” hierarchical structure is usually not very effective in today's fast‐paced environments.

The executive coaches at CUSTOMatrix, a successful leadership consulting firm in San Diego, California, cite that one of the most common problems their clients iterate is the inability to be agile. They are getting eaten alive by competitors because their structure prevents fast decision making and action. If an employee is required to gain permission from a “boss” who also needs permission from another “boss,” and both are busy or traveling or slow, decisions take forever and opportunities are missed or threats are allowed to escalate.

Dr. Paul Zak said, “High performance teams anticipate each others' moves and respond effectively without having to articulate what they are doing. These teams integrate new information deftly in order to reach a known objective. High‐performance teams are also generative, improvising new solutions. For this to happen, though, team members have to trust each other.”

Small teams are best, which is why SEALs usually operate in teams of eight. Studies show that individual performance degrades when teams expand beyond six to 12, depending upon the objectives and environment.³

COMMANDER'S INTENT

Former U.S. Navy SEAL Lieutenant Jason Booher, now the CEO of consulting firm Northwest Harbor Solutions, learned a lot about authoritative team leadership during his 23 years on the teams. He joined the Navy as an enlisted seaman at the age of 19. After enduring a year of the world's most demanding military training, he spent his career risking his life to complete dangerous missions in third‐world countries as part of an elite team of warriors.

Like all SEALs, he often used a “briefback,” which is a detailed briefing and mission plan starting with the objective and working backward to the start. This plan might include deploying from an aircraft, Zodiac, or attack submarine. The plan ensures that everyone on the team knows where their rope begins and ends.

Said Jason, “It's critical for a mission commander to outline the ‘commander's intent’ and clearly communicate that to everyone on the team. The leader's intent must be commonly understood so it can be carried out effectively.”

If you haven't figured it out by now, when translated into the corporate world, the ‘commander's intent” is like an executive's passionate vision, departmental or project goal, or quarterly objective. Delivering this correctly requires an understanding of storge love.

As Jason explains, “SEAL teams excel in extremely complex and high‐risk environments because we ensure common understanding in a defined ‘commander's intent,’ and then empower aligned decision making at the lowest level possible. Corporate leaders can also drive agility and performance in their companies by better aligning their people and teams to their mission.”

It may seem that Jason and others who have operated in close‐knit units, such as SEAL teams, have a unique perspective unadaptable by corporate executives or others in commercial leadership positions. In some respects, this may be true, but common ground can be found by adopting and using storge love.

Leaders, like SEAL commanders, need to politely direct, not ask. They need to do so in clear and uncertain terms. They need to outline the objective, the “commander's intent,” and communicate the rewards for success and consequences for failure. Then, they need to empower and let go. Micromanaging is not an option. They need to trust, reasonably monitor, gently guide when needed, and occasionally yank a chain when limits are reached. They must set good examples, be fair and consistent with every member of the team, and do so out of a genuine love for everyone on the team. All of this may seem unattainable, but that's only true if your heart is cold and closed. Conversely, if it is open and full of compassion for those you lead, if you genuinely know and care about everyone on your team, then storge love is not only possible, it is inevitable.

CHIEF EVERYTHING OFFICER

Eric Casazza's grandfather, Vice Admiral Eugene P. Wilkinson, commanded one of the submarines that launched Navy SEAL teams into action. In fact, he was the first captain to command the Navy's first nuclear submarine, the USS Nautilus (SSN‐571) and worked closely with Admiral Hyman G. Rickover to pioneer the nuclear submarine Navy. Eric concurs that properly and clearly communicating your organization's passion and vision is critical to great leadership.

“A great leader helps his or her team visualize where they can be by creating an extremely detailed picture of the future,” said Eric. “With input from my team, I do this for our entire company and then have them translate that into something similar for each practice area.”

Eric is the CEO of FMT, an IT consulting firm in San Diego, California, with almost 80 employees. He also sits on the board of Saint Vincent de Paul Village, which offers shelter and care to the homeless. Eric launched his career with Andersen Consulting and later became a senior consultant for Deloitte Consulting.

“At the young age of twenty‐three, I was managing teams of 150 or more people,” said Eric. “Many of them were older than me, which was a huge leadership challenge.”

Eric later joined AMN Healthcare Services, Inc., a $400 million healthcare staffing firm in Del Mar, California. Under the direction of CEO Susan Salka, over the next 11 years, AMN blossomed into a $1.3 billion company. During that time, Susan became one of Eric's most remembered mentors.

“Susan is charismatic, smart, and decisive,” Eric said. “She is a great listener and knows how to communicate her vision extremely well, and then get out of the way. She is authoritative but also passionately invested in her people. She makes you feel important, wants to know about you personally, what your aspirations are, and all about your family.”

Obviously, Susan Salka uses an authoritative rather than an authoritarian leadership approach to clarify her company's passion and purpose and then allows her team to take charge. Leaders like Susan and Eric understand that it often takes more guts to empower than it does to micromanage. They are excellent examples of storge love, in that they truly care about those they lead, empower them to succeed, and then step aside and trust. The best leaders know how to set proper and loving boundaries and politely tell rather than ask.

“I need to exhibit a lot of patience to help my team learn and grow,” said Eric. “I also need to be humble and set good examples. I believe the title CEO really means Chief Everything Officer in that I need to be willing to roll up my sleeves and wash dishes or whatever it takes to get the job done.”

COMMAND AUTHORITY

Charles Michel's father was an Army artillery officer during the Cold War. Like most military brats, Chuck moved a lot from base to base so it was hard to form long‐term relationships. He initially wanted to follow his father's path and pursue a career in the Army. To that end, he joined the Army Junior ROTC program while in high school. During a “career night” event at his school, dozens of companies and military recruiters set up tables in the gymnasium. Chuck shuffled past most, spent some time at the Army and Navy table, and then by happenstance started talking with a Coast Guard petty officer.

“I asked him if the Coast Guard was a part of the military,” said Chuck. “I admit that I didn't even know if it was. The petty officer said ‘of course it is.’ I asked if they had officers, and he then told me about the Coast Guard Academy, which is a lot like West Point.”

Chuck chose the Coast Guard and packed his bags. A few years later, at the age of 22, he graduated near the top of his class. On board his first ship, he learned a valuable lesson about leadership and authority.

“My first ship was a Coast Guard cutter out of Saint Petersburg, Florida,” said Chuck. “Two other ensigns from my class of 1985 joined me onboard. We had a crew of 75, and our primary job involved drug‐running interdiction in the Caribbean. When I met Captain Jake Jacoby, he had a scruffy gray beard and salty demeanor, and I thought he looked like a cross between Ernest Hemingway and Black Beard the pirate.”

Underway, Jacoby “handed the keys” to Chuck for the first time as the Officer of the Deck (OOD) on the bridge. They had received orders to board a suspect vessel and search for drugs. Slightly nervous, Chuck issued orders to maneuver the ship into position and commence small boat operations. The seas had turned rough with six‐foot swells hammering against the sea painter towing the small boat. Thirty feet below the bridge, Chuck watched the small boat rock and bounce on the surging waves as the interdiction crew struggled to climb aboard.

“Captain Jacoby scratched his beard, turned toward me and recommended that I loosen the stern line to stop the small boat from jerking back and forth so much,” said Chuck. “I radioed the deck crew and told them that the captain had ordered them to loosen the line. They followed the order, and the boat calmed down enough to allow the crew to board so we could complete the mission. Later, Jacoby pulled me aside and asked me one question: ‘Who is charge on this bridge?’ I said that he was. He said, ‘No, I am not. You assumed complete authority when you became the OOD. You do not say to the crew that I gave an order. You are the one giving the order, is that understood?’”

Chuck nodded and swallowed hard. He had learned a valuable lesson that day he never forgot. Leaders must delegate, and when they do, they must have complete trust. They must step aside and allow those empowered to make decisions and give the orders. They can and should then become mentors, and as such can and should offer advice, such as “loosen the line,” but they should not actually give the orders to their crew.

More importantly, Chuck learned that when given authority, a leader must assume command completely and with confidence.

“It's a lot like riding a horse,” said Chuck. “Once you're in the saddle, you're in command. The horse will not follow your lead if he senses that you're not in control.”

Chuck also learned a valuable lesson in humility. He was reminded that even though he had graduated at the top of his class and had a high degree of theoretical knowledge, he was still a junior officer. Cracking a book is far different from operating on the high seas in a stressful situation where people might be injured or even killed. Chuck learned that “crusty old” seadogs had a lot of real‐world experience to offer that could be invaluable.

When Chuck was promoted to higher ranks, he remembered the words and actions of his CO that day. He recalled the right way to delegate, step aside, trust, and advise. He refrained from allowing his fear of losing control to cause him to micromanage his junior officers.

Jacoby continued to mentor Chuck and taught him a host of other valuable lessons that helped him throughout his career. Chuck swallowed his pride, became humble enough to be teachable, and took Jacoby's guidance to heart. His willingness and attitude helped him progress through the ranks and assume the reigns of his current position as vice commandant—the number two ranking officer in the Coast Guard.

Chuck bottled his views on leadership and condensed them into a powerful presentation that he uses as a reference to help guide his officers and enlisted personnel through their careers. He sees leadership development as consisting of four separate but integrated phases, each containing three key ingredients. The four phases are peer‐to‐peer leadership, field operations, command or HQ operations, and senior leadership that might entail political interaction. Under the peer‐to‐peer phase, Chuck outlines the three keys as being fair and above reproach, being decisive, and remaining calm under pressure.

For the more advanced phases, Chuck's three keys are to know your stuff, delegate without fear, and maintain a “big picture” view. Chuck doesn't see leadership as either relationship‐ or task‐oriented, but believes it to be more situational, based on the people you are leading and the situation you're dealing with. He also feels that it's vital to understand each person on your team and know what motivates and inspires them to perform at their best. He does not see authority as a license to bully or coerce, but as a responsibility to educate, inspire, and set a worthy example.

“Leadership has never been more important than it is right now,” said Chuck. “Motivating and directing people today demands the highest level of skill, dedication, and courage.”

AUTHORITY, RESPONSIBILITY, ACCOUNTABILITY

Mike Petters grew up on an orange farm in Florida. His family also raised cattle so Mike started driving a tractor when he was 10 years old. By the time Mike turned 15, he was given his first opportunity to lead when his father placed him in charge of a three‐person orange tree spraying crew.

“Everyone on the team was twice my age,” said Mike, “so I learned early on how to be responsible but also to be respectful of others who had more experience than I did.”

His father served as an officer in the Army National Guard and frequently expressed his gratitude for being born in a free country. He encouraged Mike and his five siblings to serve in the military, and all of them did. One joined the Navy, three went Air Force, and one sister selected the Army. She eventually earned the rank of two‐star general.

Mike chose the Navy and received an appointment to the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland. When he graduated, Admiral Rickover recruited him for the Nuclear Submarine Navy. Mike completed his training and reported for duty aboard the USS George Bancroft (SSBN 643), a nuclear fleet ballistic missile “boomer” submarine. He initially led two engineering divisions and was later given responsibility for the communications division. As a green ensign, Mike worked hard to prove himself and qualify as a submariner so he could earn his golden “dolphins” pin. Operating in the tight confines of a “425‐foot‐long tube” quickly changed his entire perspective about teamwork.

“Teamwork on a submarine is vital,” said Mike. “Everyone has clearly defined areas of responsibility, accountability, and authority, but we need to operate as an efficient, close‐knit team. If we fail to do that, we place everyone on board at great risk.”

While serving aboard the Bancroft, Mike also learned that being authoritative is vastly different from being authoritarian. Many of the enlisted men in his division, especially the “crusty old chief petty officers,” had a great deal more experience and working knowledge than Mike. He knew that forcing his will on his team by being a domineering authoritarian would not work. They might do what he demanded, but begrudgingly. Adopting an authoritarian approach might also create an environment of mistrust and disengagement that could unravel the fabric of teamwork that's vital to the survival of all submariners.

Mike earned the respect of his team by treating them as equals. While he was granted the authority to be the “boss” of this team, he noticed that other officers who treated their guys with respect and trust, and empowered them to do their jobs, were far more successful.

“As their division officer, I could have ordered my team around,” said Mike. “Some junior officers did that, but it rarely worked. The officers who inspired others to take full responsibility and be accountable were far more successful. In my opinion, this is what authority is all about. You need to lead your team by example and earn their respect rather than force them to follow you.”

Mike was working 20‐hour days until the CO called him into his stateroom.

After serving five years in the Navy, Mike and his wife, Nancy, decided that it would be better for their family if he left the military. Mike continued to serve his country by joining the Naval Reserves and by becoming an employee at Newport News Shipbuilding. Many years later, he became the president and chief executive officer of Huntington Ingalls Industries—a Fortune 500 public company and the world's largest military shipbuilder with $7 billion in revenue and 37,000 employees.

“That discussion with my CO helped me to understand that I needed to determine what I was passionate about and that there were many ways I could fulfill my passion and purpose in life,” said Mike. “Anyone who works at Huntington Ingalls can impact hundreds of thousands of lives worldwide, as we build the Navy's capital ships, aircraft carriers, submarines, destroyers, and amphibious warships. We're also involved in a wide array of government services and even do work for the U.S. Army, the United States Post Office, and our country's court systems. Today, Huntington Ingalls Industries is the largest industrial employer in Virginia and the largest employer in Mississippi.”

Thanks to the leadership style exhibited by his CO on the Bancroft, Mike learned how to be an authoritative mentor rather than a domineering authoritarian. Now, when he meets with employees on his team, he asks them how a career at Huntington Ingalls aligns with their life's goals.

“When someone comes into my office to talk about their career path,” said Mike, “I ask them about where they are and where they want to be. If, for example, their ambition is to be a director, I say ‘director of what?' I try to mentor them by saying that a title means little if your job does not inspire you, and it won't inspire you if it's leading you away from your true aspirations. Gaining authority does not automatically gain you happiness.”

Mike advises his team that if they're not fulfilled and thrilled by their current position, they will not be inspired to do their best work. If they don't give it their all, they'll have a difficult time convincing anyone in authority to promote them to director or any other position they desire. Mike also believes it's important for those in authority to create an environment where people are set up for success and appreciated, recognized, and empowered.

“Leaders can either set their teams up for success or for failure,” said Mike. “One of the best ways to ensure success is to create leaders and not managers; to teach people that a position of authority is a privilege that is earned by showing others in authority who you are and what you're made of.”

Mike also cautions aspiring leaders to refrain from adopting a “lone wolf” attitude rather than being a part of a team. Highly ambitious individuals may be tempted to “go it alone” so they can earn all the credit for a successful outcome. Even worse, they may try to dominate the limelight by stealing credit from others. Employing these tactics may sometimes result in short‐term accolades, but rarely do they ensure long‐term recognition or success. Moreover, these behaviors may result in mistrust and alienation from teammates, which could cause irreparable damage to your career.

“As leaders, we need to create an inclusive culture and environment where everyone can do their best work and where the least empowered person confidently contributes,” said Mike. “As a junior officer aboard submarines, I learned early on that authority, responsibility, and accountability are intertwined. They are three corners of the same triangle. To succeed as a team leader, you need to be an excellent example of all three.”

TEN STORGE LEADERSHIP REVIEW POINTS

1. The Sixth Neuron Secret is: The Principle of Authority: Tough love leaders are authoritative mentors, not authoritarian dictators.
2. This principle is based on the Greek word storge, often exhibited in the authoritative relationship between parents and children.
3. A storge type of love is akin to the “tough love” that is difficult but necessary to help others learn and grow.
4. In practicing this type of love, we should not do for others what they can do for themselves.
5. This principle is logical and aligns mostly with our logical neocortex, which responds best to written words, facts, figures, and data.
6. We should strive to be a confident authoritative leader rather than a “dictator” authoritarian.
7. Authoritative leaders gain the trust and support of teams by earning it rather than demanding it.
8. Leaders who practice this principle and the associated Greek form of love have the courage to delegate, empower, let go, and advise rather than micromanage.
9. The Wizard in The Wonderful Wizard of Oz provides a good metaphoric representation and embodiment of this principle.
10. This principle can be summed by these two words: be authoritative.

THREE STEPS TO STORGE LEADERSHIP

1. Policy: Leaders should be required to collaborate with team members to create only three primary goals per quarter that are realistic and attainable and drive toward the firm's overall passion and purpose. Members should then be given authority and autonomy to execute toward the goals.
2. Procedure: Leaders should meet weekly with team members to review progress toward each goal to ensure the challenges are not too easy or hard, to review expectations for that week, and deliver praise for progress. (The Neuron Decision Making chapter offers examples.) Leaders need to ensure they do not micromanage, but instead review metrics and the progress their members are making toward the goals.
3. Practice: Leaders should be trained, by internal or outsourced coaching experts, to be confidently authoritative, to delegate appropriately and effectively, and to listen and communicate clearly. Visit www.neuronleaders.com to use the Neuron Personality Profiler app to assist with customizing communication styles using neuroscience‐based messaging.

ONE STORGE LEADERSHIP EXERCISE

For this exercise, please answer the following questions. It is best to write your answers on a sheet of paper.

• Do I have the courage to empower and let go, or do I constantly micromanage?
• Am I afraid to lead because I doubt my knowledge, skills, abilities, or authority?
• Am I overconfident and a perhaps a bit cocky, or am I humble enough to listen to my team?
• Am I an example of an authoritative leader like John F. Kennedy or an authoritarian dictator like Adolf Hitler?
• When given authority by others, do I step up and lead, or do I defer to their authority?
• When I am authoritative, will I remember to also be calm, confident, and logical?
• Do I seek to gain the enthusiastic support of my team and a buy‐in to the vision, or do I force my will upon others?
• Am I courageous enough to accept honest feedback and criticism, or does my ego force me refuse to or ignore the input?
• What will I do differently after today to practice storge love in my life and profession?

I played God today

    And it was fun!

I made animals that men had never seen

So they would stop and scratch their heads

    Instead of scowling.

I made words that men had never heard

So they would stop and stare at me

    Instead of running.

And I made love that laughed

So men would giggle like children

    Instead of sighing.

Tomorrow, perhaps, I won't be God

And you will know it

    Because you won't see any three‐headed cats

    Or bushes with bells on…

I wish I could always play God

    So lonely men could laugh!

—Dr. James Kavanaugh, from There Are Men Too Gentle to Live Among Wolves