"Getting it done" vs. "Making it so"?

[Nerys Ghemor]

STR--You get in a lot of ways to the point I was trying to make. Jellico was probably the more capable commander, and has a better understanding of what to do in wartime, but his people/social skills are not where they should be. Strict hierarchy and discipline is one thing, and in my opinion SHOULD be maintained on a military vessel (unless, of course, one does not regard Starfleet as military, which is a debate for another place and time), but you can never forget that these are people that work for you, and you have to remember that while position and rank may have been given to you, respect is earned.

While ultimately I think Jellico was better for the situation than Picard was, I still think someone like Sisko--who had the social AND tactical skills--would have been BEST.

 

[Joby]

STR, Arpy, those are my very similar sentiments.

Just because Jellico was a dick does not make him "more real" and/or better then Picard. Oh wow look, he's an asshole, a real person. He's real. That's what that fake and perfect TNG crew needed!. Jellico made things way too personal, especially with Riker. Would a "real" military captain be so thin skinned to start personal grudges against his crew?

And those of us who prefer Picard's command are not a bunch of new age communist hippies that want to be best friends with our boss and give equal rights to cows and chickens. Picard could be a stern taskmaster as well, but Picard never started personal wars with his crew, if he wanted it to be done he said so.

 

[J.T.B.]

I have no problems with Jellicoe's style, but I don't have a problem with Picard's, either. What I had a problem with was Riker whining to his new boss rather than taking care of business the way the CO wanted. The top brass at Starfleet Command put Jellicoe there, he had the responsibility, and Riker as his exec had an obligation to support him and do whatever Jellicoe thought was necessary. Riker was not only questioning Jellicoe but the whole command structure of his service.

I understand that the requirements of an ongoing TV series stuck Riker in a permanent second-fiddle position, but episodes like this and him turning down commands did a big disservice to his character.

As far as "loving authoritarianism," I'd say that has very little to do with it. Military organizations deal with issues of sending people to their deaths, quite unlike anything encountered in civilian life. There is no place for democratic deliberation in such an organization, and, indeed, even enlightened liberal democracies know this and suspend many otherwise-basic rights for those serving in their armed services.

--Justin

 

[Enterprise1981]

I don't think it's a question of democracy versus autocracy (in Janeway's own words: "This isn't a democracy. I can't run this ship by consensus"), but of unilateralism versus multilateralism. The XO and senior officers are there to voice any concerns among the crew, but the CO always has final authority. Jellico was a hard-ass almost to the point of viewing any objections even from the XO in the privacy of the captain's ready room as insubordination (even though Riker and others never knowingly disobeyed orders during Jellico's time there). Kirk/Picard/Sisko/ Janeway/Archer were willing to say at the right time, "I don't care how it gets done, just get it done", but not to the point of bureaucrats on TOS demanding that all celestial bodies stop moving, the rain on Ferenginar stop falling, and Riker stop voicing any objections.

 

[Anji]

For some reason this topic made me envision Larry the cable guy on the bridge of the Enterprise D.

You write the novel and I GUARANTEE I'll be the first in line to buy a copy!

 

[Hambone]

I'm just curious about the age breakdown of those who prefer Jellico and those who prefer Picard. I'll bet we older folks prefer Jellico far more than the younger folks do. The idea that everyone gets a say and that superiors have to explain themselves (indeed, that they aren't "superiors" at all) is a new (and to my mind disturbing) development in the past 15 years.

I'll be fifty on my next birthday. Having served in the military for over a quarter-century, I much prefer the Jellico style of command (kickin' ass and takin' names) over the Picard style (can't we sit down and discuss this like rational beings?). I much prefer a commanding officer who says "This is how it's going to be!!!" and everyone replies "Yes, Sir!!!".

 

[Kaziarl]

I'm just curious about the age breakdown of those who prefer Jellico and those who prefer Picard. I'll bet we older folks prefer Jellico far more than the younger folks do. The idea that everyone gets a say and that superiors have to explain themselves (indeed, that they aren't "superiors" at all) is a new (and to my mind disturbing) development in the past 15 years.

I'll be fifty on my next birthday. Having served in the military for over a quarter-century, I much prefer the Jellico style of command (kickin' ass and takin' names) over the Picard style (can't we sit down and discuss this like rational beings?). I much prefer a commanding officer who says "This is how it's going to be!!!" and everyone replies "Yes, Sir!!!".

I'll be half that age on my next birthday, and haven't served in the military nearly that long, and quite frankly I'm on the fence between the two. Yes, there are times where a leaders orders should be carried out without question, but Jellico's complete dissregard of his senior staffs opinions and experience cries power hungry incompetence to me. It's easy to simply order people around, but a good leader should atleast hear his subordinates out. Sometimes they might see something he's overlooked, which is certainly not a weakness unless they deny the possibility.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

a good leader should atleast hear his subordinates out.

Why? He's the captain, he doesn't have to. And he didn't have time - they were at war.

It would be interesting to see how Jellico acted when he was at his normal post - command of the Cairo. I'd wager that he didn't act like this back there, because he didn't need to. His time on the Cairo was, I'm sure, just normal Starfleet duty. There, he'd have *time* to listen to his subordinates. Not here - he was brought to the Enterprise for a very specific purpose, during a time of war (and make no mistake, it was war), and THERE WAS NO TIME to dilly-dally.

 

[Kaziarl]

When were they "At War?" When they were 51 hours away from the meeting point? when they were outside the nebula and the cardies couldn't even see them? before or after Picard left the ship? At which of these times that Jellico ripped riker a new one, were they at war.

Oh, and it was riker who piloted the shuttle, which wouldn't have happened had Jellico not had that rare moment of listening to Geordi.

 

[Nightdiamond]

In some ways, if you look at it, almost all the captains came out looking jerk like, or stern, in the first episodes.

On DS9, there was a scene where Kira tells Sisko that several shop owners were killed trying to defend their shops from the Cardassians, and Sisko simply says, 'why hasn't this mess been cleaned up yet?'.

And then when they notify him that captain Picard would like to speak with him, he ignores it, and when he does answer, he states, this 'won't take long'.

Obrien and anyone that liked TNG and Captain Picard could have taken that the wrong way.


With Kirk, in the first movie, he shoves captain decker aside, (the ships's new commander) and insists on taking command of the ship, though he hardly understands the ships new systems.

He appears to act stubbornly in the first parts of the movie.


Like one poster stated, Picard admited he was unfamilar with children, and even ordered Troi to secure his image as a father figure, and we also saw how he ordered Riker to connect the enterprise, while hardly acknowlegling him when they first met.


Only Janeway appear to come off as cool in the first episode! She did the 'hand over the shoulder' thing with Harry Kim seeing that it was his first posting and he was nervous.

With that said, all the captains mentioned had a way of communicating in a way that made you think they were calm and sensible and had reasons for acting the way they did...

 

[M.Robison]

I'm just curious about the age breakdown of those who prefer Jellico and those who prefer Picard. I'll bet we older folks prefer Jellico far more than the younger folks do. The idea that everyone gets a say and that superiors have to explain themselves (indeed, that they aren't "superiors" at all) is a new (and to my mind disturbing) development in the past 15 years.

I'll be fifty on my next birthday. Having served in the military for over a quarter-century, I much prefer the Jellico style of command (kickin' ass and takin' names) over the Picard style (can't we sit down and discuss this like rational beings?). I much prefer a commanding officer who says "This is how it's going to be!!!" and everyone replies "Yes, Sir!!!".

I'll be half that age on my next birthday, and haven't served in the military nearly that long, and quite frankly I'm on the fence between the two. Yes, there are times where a leaders orders should be carried out without question, but Jellico's complete dissregard of his senior staffs opinions and experience cries power hungry incompetence to me. It's easy to simply order people around, but a good leader should atleast hear his subordinates out. Sometimes they might see something he's overlooked, which is certainly not a weakness unless they deny the possibility.

I am 34 myself. I served from 17 to 31 in the military and agree with both. I have found myself in command a time or two and have gone through more than a share of "Change of commands" within a given unit. Not to mention seen more than a few raw Lt's come out of the barn with inflated ego's and shiny new bars to boot.

(Me being enlisted, and considered going officer a time or two) one thing telly and movies screw up more often than not is how the chain of command truly works. You always respect who is in command ("Respect the rank not the man" is a well known phrase)regardless. Riker and crew's behavior in times of combat is disrespectful and dangerous. But that's just my two pennies.

 

[Arpy]

I wonder what people would have thought of Jellico if the writers hadn't done such a poor job with the regular crew. If he were just a hard-ass for the sake of being a hard-ass. Frankly, he was worse. His negotiation tactics portraying himself as a nut could have really ruined his credibility and that of the Federation in future talks. Jellico wasn't just a guy playing a one-time hand of poker with some dive he'd never visit again - Gul Lemec was reporting back to Central Command. It's a wonder the Cardassians didn't call for another representative using the opportunity to embarrass Starfleet. The more I think about the episode, the less I like the B-story back in the Enterprise. It was Picard with Madred that was the weight of the episode. That and Ronny Cox doing his characteristic bang-up job playing a mean SOB.

 

[Timewalker]

Ohhh yeah, that was my favorite thing Jellico did--making Troi dress as a PROFESSIONAL.

I can only imagine what he would've had to say about Seven of Nine...I would seriously buy tickets to see THAT.

Seven didn't choose her wardrobe; the Doctor did. And since Seven wasn't Starfleet - and therefore not entitled to wear a uniform - what do you suggest she should have worn?

Well people are forgetting how very "Jellico-like" Picard was in the 1st and even 2nd season of TNG. He was a stodgy old fart that didn't like kids or families and often was cold and professional with Riker and the rest. Infact Picard was more distant then Jellico was, at least Jellico tried some attempts at banal conversation and talked about his kids drawings. Picard didn't start to really become a fun guy that you want to explore the galaxy with until Guinan showed up and then in the 3rd season.

So if Jellico spent more time with the crew, after awhile he too would have likely mellowed. If you are a boss and once you start to know people and spent a couple years with them, you by nature will ease up on the hard assness without realizing it.

Yeah, I can just see Jellico comforting a sobbing Tasha and telling her, "When one is in the penalty box, tears are permitted."

... we also saw how he ordered Riker to connect the enterprise, while hardly acknowlegling him when they first met.

I took that scene as Picard throwing Riker off the deep end as a sort of test, to see how he handled unexpected stress. How many real-world bosses haven't done the same sort of thing to a subordinate to see how they handle an unexpected situation?

 

[Zorgon]

I'm late to the party, and I have no idea why I decided to create an account to respond to this thing. I think the true difference in their captaining styles is the difference between a ship of exploration and a ship of war. Picard's crew were used to questioning orders and offering solutions because half of the time, they'd be facing some sort of spacial anomoly, rather than a intense tactical simulation. I doubt Jellico could have gotten through half of those situations without opening himself up to suggestion. Then again, I do think that Jellico makes a better wartime captain, because there's no time for suggestions when someone needs to fire a phaser within the next 3 seconds. I personally prefer Picard's command style, but only because I prefer peacetime to wartime, and I prefer exploration to patrolling the border.

Eh, I'm sure this has been said and refuted a thousand times before, and my opinion is probably no very well informed, but I figured I'd throw it out there anyway.

 

[CoveTom]

I don't think democracy and accountability are so recent concepts as you think... but anyway...

In the military? Okay, accountability, sure. But democracy? No military could function effectively as a democracy. In our system here in the United States, we have the military answering to the authority of the civilians who are part of the democratic process, and of course those in the military personnel can participate in that process and vote for their preferred civilian leadership. But democracy within the actual command structure of the military? Hardly.

Let's also not forget that none of our "hero" captains, not even Picard, ever ran their ship as a democracy. In most -- but not all -- cases, they were willing to listen to the opinions of their officers. But the captain made the final decision, and it was executed without question. Riker even said so himself when discussing command responsibilities with Wesley in "Pen Pals."

And let's face it... the orders Jellico was giving were not out of line or even that unusual. Certainly nothing that would give the crew grounds to question his authority. Hell, not like, say, ordering the crew to poison the atmosphere of a planet. And had those exact same orders been given by Picard, do you think Riker and LaForge would have been whining about how difficult the changes were?

No, this wasn't about Jellico being out of line. It was about officers being, as Riker said in BoBW, too comfortable on the Enterprise and not being adaptable to change. Had Jellico stayed in command longer, I'm sure he would have built the rapport with the crew that was necessary for a less confrontational environment. But, as he rightly pointed out, he was put in command and immediately thrown into a crisis situation and he simply didn't have the time.

Unless a commanding officer is mentally incompetent (e.g. Commodore Decker) or ordering something that is blatently illegal (e.g. Admiral Pressman), any Starfleet officer should be prepared to follow their orders regardless of their "command style."

 

[Kaziarl]

I don't think democracy and accountability are so recent concepts as you think... but anyway...

In the military? Okay, accountability, sure. But democracy? No military could function effectively as a democracy. In our system here in the United States, we have the military answering to the authority of the civilians who are part of the democratic process, and of course those in the military personnel can participate in that process and vote for their preferred civilian leadership. But democracy within the actual command structure of the military? Hardly.

Let's also not forget that none of our "hero" captains, not even Picard, ever ran their ship as a democracy. In most -- but not all -- cases, they were willing to listen to the opinions of their officers. But the captain made the final decision, and it was executed without question. Riker even said so himself when discussing command responsibilities with Wesley in "Pen Pals."

And let's face it... the orders Jellico was giving were not out of line or even that unusual. Certainly nothing that would give the crew grounds to question his authority. Hell, not like, say, ordering the crew to poison the atmosphere of a planet. And had those exact same orders been given by Picard, do you think Riker and LaForge would have been whining about how difficult the changes were?

No, this wasn't about Jellico being out of line. It was about officers being, as Riker said in BoBW, too comfortable on the Enterprise and not being adaptable to change. Had Jellico stayed in command longer, I'm sure he would have built the rapport with the crew that was necessary for a less confrontational environment. But, as he rightly pointed out, he was put in command and immediately thrown into a crisis situation and he simply didn't have the time.

Unless a commanding officer is mentally incompetent (e.g. Commodore Decker) or ordering something that is blatently illegal (e.g. Admiral Pressman), any Starfleet officer should be prepared to follow their orders regardless of their "command style."

It could probably be argued that forcing the entire engineering staff to work around the clock for two days is reckless and hazardous to the safety of the crew, something which always seems to be the main concern of any starfleet captain. IIRC, and not being an expert of the UCMJ by far, even we have rules against over working the soldiers.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ It's not Jellico's fault that the engineering crew were so inefficient that they couldn't get the work done on time.

 

[Kaziarl]

oh, please. Geordi? Inefficient? Thats a laugh and a half.

But realisticly, where would they have ended up if they had gotten into a real fight and half the crew was the walking dead because he kept them up for two days? Chain of command issues or not, that just seems like a bad idea.

And going back to an earlier point, considering the precarious situation I think that makes it all the more vital for a new captain to take a moment to listen to whats being said. Riker knows the crew, knows what they can do, yet he is blatently treated like a child before he can get a word in edgewise. Like you said, it's not a democracy, there's no vote. Some have even said the military is more like a dictatorship. Even so, I still say not taking into account the knowledge and experience of those around him is short sighted at best.

 

[DevilEyes]

I don't think democracy and accountability are so recent concepts as you think... but anyway...

In the military? Okay, accountability, sure. But democracy? No military could function effectively as a democracy. In our system here in the United States, we have the military answering to the authority of the civilians who are part of the democratic process, and of course those in the military personnel can participate in that process and vote for their preferred civilian leadership. But democracy within the actual command structure of the military? Hardly.

I was referring to this:

I'm just curious about the age breakdown of those who prefer Jellico and those who prefer Picard. I'll bet we older folks prefer Jellico far more than the younger folks do. The idea that everyone gets a say and that superiors have to explain themselves (indeed, that they aren't "superiors" at all) is a new (and to my mind disturbing) development in the past 15 years.

I find the idea that a rank gives person right to do just about anything they please without explaining themselves, very disturbing. I think that, generally, you need to explain yourself, or at least sound like your orders make some damn sense, and let the crew have a general idea why they're supposed to do what they're supposed to do - unless they already know you and trust your judgment. If you're new to the crew, "shut up and do this because I say so" is not the best approach in winning the trust and establishing rapport.

Which is not to say that the crew should disobey without a damn good reason - such as the commander being insane, suspected of treason, or ordering immoral and criminal things to be done, such as committing war crimes.

Now, Jellico was neither of those, and I don't think he was a that bad of a commander, though we could debate if he was a good commander or not. But think of what this attitude to authority ("you must obey orders whatever they are") would do if you served under someone as Admiral Cain from BSG? As you observed, neither Kirk not Picard were obeying the orders of a superior officer who was insane like Deckard, or ordering illegal things like Pressman.

But, Jellico did seem to be really going out of his way to be an ass to a crew he'd just met. Not good people skills. Rearranging the shifts was unnecessary and counterproductive to the morale of the crew. Neither is treating your XO like a child and showing no respect for your officers.

OTOH, I don't think he was wrong to order Troi to wear uniform - and, anyway, Picard and Riker were far worse when they didn't allow Ro to wear her earring; Ro's earring was a mark of her cultural identity, and forbidding it sends a very disturbing message about Starfleet and cultural assimilation and the need for everyone to be bland and stripped of any specific cultural identity. Though the treatment of Worf seems to suggest otherwise, but using double standards for people you like and those you dislike is hardly something to be commended.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Ohhh yeah, that was my favorite thing Jellico did--making Troi dress as a PROFESSIONAL.

I can only imagine what he would've had to say about Seven of Nine...I would seriously buy tickets to see THAT.

Seven didn't choose her wardrobe; the Doctor did. And since Seven wasn't Starfleet - and therefore not entitled to wear a uniform - what do you suggest she should have worn?

Normal civvies, as soon as medically possible (IF there was ever any medical reason for the catsuit in the first place). Something that looks decent and is also good for moving around in, but won't choke the life out of the person wearing it.