[December 20, 2025] Shortly after assuming command of a Mechanized Infantry Company in the late 1980s, I was assigned a brand-new second lieutenant. Because of his actions while in my unit, the men began calling him ‘Lieutenant Mud Flap.’ That year, we would all learn lessons that helped us master the art of leadership.
A leader does the job by actually leading, not just by being technically knowledgeable or understanding the rules and processes. A true leader must accomplish the unit’s mission, properly care for those who work for them, and understand that most “rules and processes” are guides, not what make for success.
This new Lieutenant was one of the smartest people I’ve ever known. He was a master of information on Soviet military equipment and tactics. For example, he could tell us the angle and density of the steel in the front armor plate of the new Soviet T-72 tank (new at the time). He was also very familiar with the Uniform Code of Military Justice. All this was great background information for him and an advantage to the unit.
This new Lieutenant understood the core attributes of leadership. He could rattle off the Army values, standing orders, Army history, and battles fought, along with the names of those in our chain of command. These were great. He was also skilled at showcasing this, especially when higher-ranked officers were present in our company area. However, his inability to bring all this together to lead his soldiers made life difficult for his men.
Unfortunately, he had the habit of blaming others for his platoon’s failures, and could not understand that this was his failure. He would say his orders were misunderstood, his men didn’t follow his guidance, or his soldiers lacked knowledge of how the Army worked. These were typical excuses, and perhaps he was correct, but his job was to ensure the mission got done anyway. As no surprise, his men hated him for the blame he put on them.
He was correct in criticizing his platoon and often the orders I provided, nitpicking the edges of what he was directed to do. We would also receive assistance from our battalion headquarters, and the Lieutenant would complain that they were “getting in the way.” Yes, he was right. But that is not the point.
Success means focusing on the mission while also knowing when to break the rules and take calculated risks. This may appear easy, but inevitably, mistakes will be made. This is where experience comes into play. Knowing how to overcome the downside of those mistakes while keeping the main objective in sight is a key to good leadership.
In the military, this can be a significant problem, and it was a major issue for this Lieutenant. He was a commissioned officer, and the expectation was that he would lead. Since we were Infantry, leadership could not be learned in a correspondence course or through book learning. How he managed to survive officer training up to the point of meeting me remains a mystery.
The problem? He lacked the key leadership skills to accomplish our mission. Yet he desperately wanted to be successful in his position as a Platoon Leader. Initially assigned to observe leadership in action, his job was to follow me and learn leadership techniques. His failure to learn earned him the nickname Mud Flap from the soldiers.
Mud Flap was a good person, a great bureaucrat, good looking, neat and clean, well-spoken, and he might have been a successful manager in another institution, but the Army needs leaders.
Later, he resigned his military commission as an officer and returned to civilian life. As a leader, one cannot be a mud flap. Indeed, there is much to learn through observation, but it must be combined with experience.
I considered his resignation a loss to the Army. A loss because he could have learned how to be a true leader, respected by his men, and comfortable in his proper role. It is true that he needed considerable mentoring; less following me around as a Mud Flap, but to learn how I worked with the unit Soldiers. To me, my actions as a leader seemed natural, but to others like this Lieutenant, that was not the case.
NOTE: I wrote about Lieutenant Mud Flap once before (link here).
————
Please read my books:
I’ve seen too many of these kind of leaders who focus on their career above the mission and especially above their people who work for them. If you are a leader of any kind, be sure to prioritize them above yourself. Otherwise, you are just another good bureaucrat. Maybe, even a DEI hire.
Lesson = “Don’t be a mud flap.”
Must have been fun being followed around by a mud flap.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Merry Christmas! I might not be on until the new year, so wishing everyone a Merry Christmas and New Year. And a dog treat for Gen. Satterfield’s dog Bella. 🐾
Sir, I see where you might see this officer’s resignation as a loss to the Army but perhaps it was better for him. Obviously, maybe not really obvious, is that he saw himslef as not measuring up. Or perhaps he saw himself as a future failure. The US Army is highly competitive for officers, and there is a timeline for promotion that informally compares one officer to others in his/her cohort. If you fall behind, then you are always behind because it is nearly impossible to catch up. Just a few thoughts. Also, early Merry Christmas. I know others have written the same, but I just wanted to reiterate the sentiment.
I got a big laugh out of this one. Lieutenants come with an old stereotype that they are fumbling, bumbling retards. While I found this to be true in a minority of cases, usually they are excellent and more than willing to learn from their senior NCOs. That is what allows them to overcome their experience deficit.
Good point, Navy Vet. That is true, yet they still lack what is necessary to do the job right. I’ve found that junior officers – company grade level – are also highly motivated to do the proper things to help achieve their missions. Sometimes they fail, and failure can be a wonderful thing (even when it hurts), but learning from it makes for a far better person who can lead. My desire is that they fail while training in peacetime, so that they are successful in wartime.
Woof Woof Woof ,,,, chasing cars is what good dogs do. And sometimes we will catch a Mud Flap.
What a nickname to be called. I sure this guy could have been a successful leader but failed anyway. Some folks just don’t get the fact that they have to stand in front of other men and lead. Quoting Gen. Satterfield, “A leader is someone who gets others to do what they would not ordinarily do. A great leader is someone who gets them to do that because they want to.” Best definition of leadership anywhere. Howeever, I will point out that Gen. Satterfield recently expanded that definition to include leadership over time, not just at a single point. Or something like that. I’m sure he can explain it better. Be a leader. And that is much more than a manager.
Good one, Gen. Satterfield. We all had a Lieutenant Mud Flap in our units.
Army Captain, you got that right. And it seems to me that schools are turning out more and more Mud Flaps by the day. Why ROTC is not training more of them to led is beyond me. Maybe men being raised in a feminized educational institutions is part of the problem. And we all know that is true. The feminization of educational institutions goes hand in hand with the Woke mind virus and DEI. When we promote folks on the basis of their skin color (that would be racism) or sex (that would be sexism), then we destroy the very ideals that make for great leadership qualities. 👀