I don’t know about you, but in recent years I haven’t paid much attention to what goes on in the Navy. Despite growing up with the Falklands War, I still associate the Navy with music hall songs about sailors and quaint rum-drinking ceremonies. So, when the recent strategic defence spending review appeared to hurt the Navy more than the other Services, I didn’t think twice about it.

I certainly didn’t think that there was much the Navy could do that would interest the commercial world. But having spent a day at sea aboard HMS Kent (a typical “Duke Class” Type 23 Frigate and the first ship to enter service this millennium, seeing as you’re asking), I’ve rather revised my view. These are difficult times for the Navy and yet on yesterday’s evidence, morale appears to be high.

Perhaps that’s because the men at the top have been here before. Speaking at the start of the day, Commodore Rupert Wallace, the man responsible for the Portsmouth Flotilla, read from a newspaper clipping that discussed cutting aircraft carriers and the reduction of personnel numbers to their lowest level for 100 years. The article dated back to the Nott Review, almost 30 years ago. As the Commodore put it, “That time, events got in the way”. By events he meant the Falklands. His point is that the Navy always survives. “Whenever interest lies elsewhere the Navy will always be cut,” he said. “But we’ve been here before and the Navy’s been around for 500 years.”

Part of the frustration would seem to be with what Commander Nick Cooke-Priest, captain of HMS Kent, later referred to as “sea-blindness”. For an island, maritime nation we have forgotten the significance of the Navy. And while the Navy is busy “out of sight over the horizon doing its job”, we forget about them. Another officer highlighted the lack of public understanding of the Navy’s role. He bemoaned the fact that few people think the Navy had a role in the invasion of Iraq, for example, even though the first wave of landings was launched from HMS Ark Royal.

But the focus of the day wasn’t meant to be on cuts. It was meant to be a show of what the Navy can do. And what impressed me most was how wrong many commentators and management writers are when they dismiss military models of management as top-down “command and control”. The evidence here was of a something far more nuanced and intelligent. The ship’s crew is a collection of highly trained teams, each with a clear understanding of the overall terms of engagement as well as the very specific objectives and focus of the immediate mission and their part within in it.

So far, so military. Where it differed from the usual characterisation of command and control was that everyone was empowered—and expected—to deploy their expertise according to the situation. Rather than passively waiting for commands, employees are expected to react and respond within the clearly set framework of action.

It was also impressive to find personnel at all levels able to explain coherently and eloquently what they did and how it fitted into the bigger picture and to say confidently the decisions they were expected to make and those that would be left for others. The Navy is preparing for a 14 per cent drop is personnel in coming years. As these ex-Servicemen and women land in the private sector, business leaders would be wise to consider employing them. They are highly trained, eloquent and extremely adaptable. To paraphrase one of those old music hall numbers, perhaps all the good firms should love a sailor.

What do you think?

Send us your views