I often joke with my kids that I took the long, hard road to my current rank. Truth be told, I have had the distinct honor and pleasure of serving as both a Chief Warrant Officer (CWO) and Limited Duty Officer (LDO), prior to my lateral transfer to 1810. Looking back, I wouldn’t change the road I took for the world! Looking forward, however, it is increasingly difficult to understand the Cryptologic Community’s vision for our Limited Duty Officer cadre.
The Role of the Limited Duty Officer
To begin, it is important to understand the role of the Limited Duty Officer (LDO). For this, we’ll go right to the source. From the BUPERS LDO/CWO website:
“As officer technical managers of the line or staff corps, LDOs progressively advance within broad technical fields related to their former enlisted ratings. They fill leadership and management positions at the Ensign through Captain level that require technical background and skills not attainable through normal development within other officer designators. LDOs serve as, but are not limited to serving as, division officers, department heads, OICs, XOs and COs, ashore or afloat.”
Let’s unpack that for a minute — technical managers, advance within broad technical fields related to their former enlisted ratings, fill leadership and management positions, Ensign through Captain, Division Officer through Commanding Officer. Got it.
Now, take a look around the Cryptologic Community for a second and think about the LDOs with whom you currently serve. Technical managers? Maybe. Working in fields related to their former enlisted ratings? Sometimes. Leadership and management positions? Maybe. Ensign through Captain? Commanding Officers? Here is where we start to get into trouble.
Our LDO cadre is dying a slow death, with limited opportunities for advancement, a shrinking billet structure, and no chance for command. Yet, we continue to select and commission Cryptologic Technicians as LDOs.
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly
Selecting Cryptologic Technicians for commissioning as LDOs is good. In our highly technical field, we can leverage their enlisted expertise at all levels. Not only do they bring a wealth of knowledge to the Wardroom, they help bridge the gap between leadership and technical expertise. They also add an immense amount of credibility to our community throughout the Fleet.
Unfortunately, we have no vision for their long term service. As a proud Mustang, I often find myself mentoring potential LDO candidates. These days, my first question to the candidate is typically related to progress towards an Undergraduate Degree. Why? Because our current model forces them to “off ramp” to 1810 if they want to have any future in the Navy and the community. In essence, we hire them as LDOs then force them to compete as 1810s from day one — breakout in traffic, STEM graduate degrees, leadership roles, etc. Their “off ramp” from LDO leads to an “on ramp” into the 1810 career path at 65 MPH! This isn’t to say they can’t, and don’t, compete. But we certainly aren’t setting them up for success.
Finally, to my knowledge, we haven’t had an LDO billet base for years, and plans for “billet purity” never really materialized. Instead, we toss them into the pool and have them fill whatever billet is available. Essentially, we aren’t using LDOs as they are intended to be used — technical managers, experts in their fields, leaders and managers, Ensign through Captain, Division Officer through Commanding Officer. There is no career path. There is no plan. They are simply another accession source.
The Way Ahead
Like any good military plan, I propose three Courses of Action (COA):
COA1: Cancel our LDO program outright. Cease new accessions, shift the billets accordingly and move on. If we don’t see value in the program — employing LDOs as intended — then this shouldn’t be a hard decision.
COA2: Establish a plan! Employ our LDOs in a way that best leverages their technical knowledge and expertise. Carve out billets for them in technical areas, such Signals Analysis Labs and Language Programs. Provide them with opportunities to train other Officers, or manage training of Cryptologic Technicians. Ensure they have leadership opportunities and future opportunities to excel. Assign them as the Officers in Charge of small detachments and provide them with the chance to serve as Commanding Officer of our training units.
COA3: Maintain a small number of LDO accessions each year, with clear guidance that the “program” is simply an alternate commissioning source for the greater Cryptologic Warfare Officer community.
***
Do you see value in continuing our LDO program?
Is it OK to maintain the status quo?
Are there better ways to leverage our LDOs?
v/r
Chuck
Station HYPO 
25 April 2016 at 12:34
Chuck,
This topic has come up a few times, most recently at the last IW Flag panel last month though no decisions were made or discussed. Because of the LDO Off-Ramp (dating back to ~2010), the IW LDO program is an accession source to 1810 vice a career option as you stated was the purpose of the LDO program (as it is with the rest of the IWC and Supply Corp LDOs). Your mentorship efforts and thoughts are appreciated and very timely as I have a related brief that I have been working on in preparation for a discussion with community leadership. While there are a lot of emotions tied to the LDO program for justifiable reason(s), there is likely a pragmatic solution going forward, much like what you laid out in your thoughts. Hopefully, whatever solution is chosen, we all understand the WHY as we move forward.
-Seth Lawrence
LikeLike
25 April 2016 at 21:16
Whatever path we choose to move forward has to continue offering guys like you the opportunity to earn a commission from the enlisted ranks. They need not limit them to an LDO path. Commission them as 181X for 4 years and then convert to 1810 as full lieutenants based on a standard the community chooses.
LikeLike
26 April 2016 at 14:17
It seems as though our community is using and managing its LDOs differently than the rest of the Navy.
Seth wrote that the “IW LDO program is an accession source to 1810 vice a career option as [Chuck] stated was the purpose of the LDO program.” I believe Chuck was actually describing – quoting BUPERS – about the role and purpose of the LDO program across the Navy.
Chuck was right, but the IW community has unfortunately changed how it uses the program to meets its desires.
I would suggest the community made it an 1810 accession pipeline after trying (and failing) to eliminate LDOs in the community altogether back in 2005/2006. Those efforts were led by non-LDOs who I believe did not understand or value the program. If I'm not mistaken, the only LDO directly involved in the process was an Ensign; not much horsepower in an office full of CDRs led by a CAPT.
Attempting to eliminate LDOs from our community, and now using them simply as an accession pipeline for 1810, is shortsighted and displays a continuing lack of respect and understanding for what those officers have, could, and do bring to the table.
LikeLike
26 April 2016 at 16:20
The current status of the IW LDO program was arrived at as part of a larger Navy effort to better manage LDO inventories and driven entirely by CNP and LDO/CWO Community Management. There was no attempt by the community (IW community) to eliminate the LDO program (though there was some discussion to that end in the 2005 time frame), but rather a realization that LDO designators in some communities were unable to sustain healthy inventory (bodies) against validated requirements (billets) in the control grades (LCDR and senior) that ultimately impacted operational readiness and put additional stressors on the LDO designator’s RL counterpart to accommodate manning shortfalls. Essentially with an average of 12yrs enlisted when an LDO is commissioned they can, and often do, retire after making LCDR vice staying to make CDR or CAPT. All of these things resulted in what is now referred to as the LDO Officer Sustainability Initiative (OSI) summarized with below actions:
(1) all control grade IWC and Supply Corp LDO billets were converted to RL (1810 in our case),
(2) control grade officers are authorized to redesignate to 1810 without board action (WOBA)
(3) all LT LDOs are encouraged to Lateral Transfer via the biannual board to 1810…an accession source to 1810
(4) in ~FY18 all IWC LDOs will be in the same FITREP competitive category (instruction update already routed for approval)
(5) in ~FY20 all IWC LDOs will be in their own promotion competitive category, but with no control grade billets to promote to their will be zero opportunity
While Chuck does provide the description of what the LDO program Navy wide is intended for, the combination of all above makes the CW LDO community an accession source to 1810. This is not b/c there is no known value of our LDOs or that they are not capable officers, but b/c the LDO community in its previous construct wasn't sustainable.
The follow-on question that Chuck is getting at, is really addressing the “what now?” for the remaining LDO billets. We need to consider all options from eliminating as Chuck states to keeping and making a logical decision on way ahead; however, to Mike's point, there is a lot of merit in keeping the CW LDO program (subset of or something similar) available as an accession source for 1810s in combination with OCS and CWO b/c as it stands the enlisted to officer options are:
USNA/ROTC: Open to all Sailors who meet program requirements (age, etc)
OCS: Open to all prior enlisted who can be commissioned prior to 42.
LDO: Open to enlisted Sailors with 8-14 yrs of service with proven performance.
CWO: Open to enlisted Sailors with 14+ yrs of service
STA-21: No CW quotas for foreseeable future (separate topic, but limited Navy Quotas)
*note: All of these are competitive with varying cost of entry requirements, but options none the less.
There is clearly a larger discussion here and much of it will be lost or misunderstood without a voice over, but the current status of the LDO program is very unlikely to return to the previous state…so back to what I believe Chuck is getting at, “what now?”.
(1) do we eliminate it and convert billets to CWO/1810/1840/etc?
(2) do we hold steady at 8 CW LDO accessions a year?
(3) do we change the accessions to something other than 8 a year?
LikeLike
27 April 2016 at 13:41
OK – Second attempt. First attempt resulted in a never-ending series of rivers and street numbers trying to prove I'm not a robot. I wonder what captcha was trying to tell me.
Seth,
Thanks, all great info (background and looking forward).
Still, I don't think the statement “there was no attempt by the community (IW community) to eliminate the LDO program…” is accurate. Having spent two years sitting six feet away from the folks working the issue at then-CNSG N7 turned NNWC N1, and three feet from the Ensign who was resigned to eliminating her own community, perhaps there was a difference between the public messaging and actual work being done. Some on that team were the same officers working to eliminate the CTM rating (also a misguided effort that wasted countless manhours). Now, I'm not as young as I used to be and my memory sometimes fails me, but I believe I remember this one correctly.
LikeLike
27 April 2016 at 15:27
I'm more interested in how we move forward, which takes me back to the three COAs at the end…
LikeLike
27 April 2016 at 17:26
Absolutely, Chuck, but appreciating how we got where we are today is vital to moving forward with a solid plan.
Your COA2, with some adjustments, sounds like the way to go. I say adjustments because there is no reason to limit LDOs to only small detachment OIC and training unit CO positions. If memory serves, CAPT Tom Botulinski was an LDO, and probably the best CO I had in at an operational command. And of course CAPT Hooley at Corry was great.
LikeLike
27 April 2016 at 18:25
Never worked with CAPT Botulinski but I did work with CAPT Hooley. He was a fantastic Cryptologist and Naval Officer. Interesting to note, though, that he was one of the first of many senior LDO lat/xfers who shifted to 1810 (then 1610). Makes you wonder…
LikeLike
1 May 2016 at 18:29
I was on the board that picked Captain Hooley for 1610. We were giving up our LDO Captain billets and the worry was that he would get stuck at O5. We picked up Captain Cerovsky on that same board. There was not a path to promotion otherwise.
LikeLike
28 June 2016 at 19:37
This is an appreciated topic to have out in the open, for anyone affected by the program to be aware of, and contribute to the future outlook, and potential pitfalls. I agree with COA 2, and after reading “Leaders Across the Spectrum”, I feel it strips away COA's 1 & 3: “Our teaming must imbue trust and purpose into our organization, creating opportunities for innovation and leadership at all levels”. Not taking advantage of an established Navy program to utilize the talent of our technical managers sounds like a waste of an opportunity, while going against our own imperatives.
LikeLike