Diamonds in the Rough

Shortly after starting medical school, I applied for and received a U.S. Armed Forces Health Professions Scholarship.  During the summer between my first and second years of medical school, I attended what was then called Officer Indoctrination School (OIS, which is affectionately known as "knife and fork" school), now known as Officer Development School (ODS).  The school is one of five officer training programs at the Navy's Officer Training Command located in Newport, Rhode Island.  

The purpose of ODS is to provide Staff Corps (physicians, nurses, chaplains, lawyers, etc) with the education and training necessary to prepare them to function in their role as a newly commissioned Naval Officer.  The 5-week course covers areas including Naval Leadership, Naval Administration, Naval Organization, Sea Power, Military Law, Military Indoctrination, Naval Warfare, and Damage Control (see a video of Damage Control training aboard the USS Buttercup), as well as providing a basic introduction into the fundamental aspects of leadership through case studies and instructor led leadership scenarios.

I thoroughly enjoyed my time at OIS.  These experiences have been the subject of or at least mentioned in a number of my previous posts (see "You know what to do", "Tap Code", and "12 O'Clock High" for a few of my favorites).  I suppose it also helped that I learned to sail and became certified in scuba diving during my time there!  And most importantly, shortly after graduating from OIS, my wife and I were married and went on our honeymoon!  Needless to say, it was a great summer.

Our brigade (all of my classmates were fellow medical students who were in the scholarship program) was divided into six companies of approximately 20-30 officers (a big difference between OIS/ODS and some of the other officer training programs is that the students are already commissioned officers).  Our company was led by a Lt. Commander in the Nurse Corps (as the Officer-in-Charge, or OIC), assisted by a Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant.  Each week, our OIC selected our company leader and assistant to help her coordinate the training and classroom activities for the week.  She would rotate who would serve as the leader and assistant based upon our performance (and level of interest, of course) during the previous week.

There was a small group of us who were perhaps less seriously engaged as the rest (see my previous comment about learning to sail and getting certified in scuba diving).  We did what was required, of course, but we also made sure that we were having fun doing so.  For the fifth and final week of our training, our OIC decided to let the rest of our company elect the leader and assistant.  She assumed that the company would vote for who they thought had been the best leader or the most engaged for the preceding four weeks of the program.  More or less as a joke (or punishment), the class selected two of us who were part of the group that had fun.  I was selected as the assistant, and one of my new friends was selected as the leader.  Our OIC was pretty worried and told us so during our first meeting of the week.  I remember her telling us, "Surprise me!"

I think we rose to our OIC's challenge.  We made sure that our company had a great week to close out our training, but we also made sure that we had fun doing it.  One of the areas that our OIC prided herself on was teaching her company to march/drill in formation.  We made sure that our company won the brigade-wide march/drill competition, which was held the day before graduation.  Afterwards, we celebrated with a softball game and barbecue that we put together.  We led by example (which required us to "up our game" significantly), and we finished the week strong.  By the end of the week, our OIC met with us and told us that she was surprised and impressed.  She told us, "I completely underestimated you both.  You did a fantastic job leading the company this week."

We often think that leaders should fit a certain mold or phenotype.  The stereotypical leader is someone who captures our attention the moment they enter the room.  According to this line of thinking, leaders should be charismatic, visionary, and inspiring.  The truth is that there isn't a single, dominant leadership phenotype.  We often find leaders in unexpected places - the so-called diamonds in the rough.  These "unexpected leaders" are the often the individuals who nobody believed would emerge as a leader of a group.  These individuals are often quiet, introverted, and otherwise nondescript (the "wallflower stereotype"), but as the case above shows, they could also be the individuals who don't necessarily want to be the first to step up to the plate.

As Matthew Collier writes in his blog post "Unexpected Leadership", "Past performance in just about any skill is not necessarily a predictor of future leadership greatness."  He talks about two historical leaders who suddenly and unexpectedly found themselves in a leadership position (Ulysses S. Grant, who was placed in overall command of the Union Army during the Civil War and Harry Truman, who became President after Franklin Roosevelt's death in office).  Neither individual had, at least to that date, what anyone would call a successful career or demonstrated the qualities necessary to be a great leader.  Yet, they both showed great leadership during some of the most difficult times in our nation's history.

The author and poet Solange Nicole said, "A diamond doesn't start out polished and shining. It once was nothing special, but with enough pressure and time, becomes spectacular."  You never know where you will find the future leaders in your group, team, or organization.  Don't write off someone just because they don't fit your classic leadership stereotype - you may lose out on a diamond in the rough.