Leadership, Character, and Personal Responsibility

“Damn Exec” is a time-honored leadership essay written by LCDR Stuart Landersman and published in the January 1965 issue of Proceedings. For years, it was required reading at officer accession points throughout the United States sea services (Navy, Coast Guard, and Merchant Marine).

The essay recounts the fictional tale of a Commanding Officer (CO) aboard the USS BOWENS (DD-891) who notices that the quarterdeck watchstander is wearing a worn working jacket. Though suitable for ship’s work, the jacket is shabby and inappropriate for the formality of the quarterdeck. The CO later tells his executive officer (XO) that watchstanders should instead wear their peacoats.

The XO relays the order to the Officer of the Deck, who passes it to the Chief’s Mess, which then passes it to the deck force. The order is met with reluctance: wearing peacoats on watch will soil them, requiring extra work to prepare them for future inspections.

When the XO first passes the order, he presents it as his own. But as it moves down the chain, each intermediary attributes the unpopular directive to the XO. No one takes ownership. Eventually, the CO overhears sailors complaining about the apparent source of the order — the “Damn Exec.”

The CO convenes the wardroom and explains how this behavior reflects poor leadership. Deflecting responsibility undermines cohesion and efficiency. Officers, he insists, must own the orders they transmit. They should not shield themselves by blaming a higher authority.

Aspiring sea service officers are meant to absorb this lesson: if you are charged with issuing and executing an order, you own it. Do not hide behind your superiors to avoid criticism.

Fast-forward from 1965 to 2025, and we face a different — though related — problem. Today, leaders often blame subordinates for policies carried out under their own authority.

Examples are plentiful. The Biden administration blamed Afghan partners and personnel on the ground for the chaotic withdrawal from Kabul. Boris Johnson blamed staff for misunderstandings of COVID restrictions after hosting gatherings during lockdown. The CEO of Silicon Valley Bank pointed to risk and treasury teams following the bank’s collapse. These cases differ in context, but the pattern is the same: leaders distancing themselves from the consequences of decisions made on their watch.

Just as junior officers aboard the BOWENS weakened their command by blaming the “Damn Exec,” modern leaders weaken their institutions when they shift responsibility downward. Blame erodes trust. It fractures cohesion. It signals insecurity rather than accountability.

LCDR Landersman was right: leaders must own the orders they issue. But the principle runs both ways. Today’s leaders in government and business must also own the policies implemented under their authority. Responsibility cannot be selectively assigned when outcomes turn unfavorable.

The phrase “pass the buck” originated in 19th-century card games, where a buckhorn-handled knife marked the dealer. Passing the buck meant passing the deal — and eventually came to mean shifting responsibility. President Harry Truman famously kept a sign on his desk reading, “The Buck Stops Here,” signaling that ultimate responsibility rested with him.

We would do well to revive that ethic. 

As the band Chicago once sang:

America needs you, Harry Truman

Harry, could you please come home?

Things are looking bad

I know you would be mad

To see what kind of men

Prevail upon the land you love