Question G

[Jonetta]

Mike Crutcher pretty much accuses Nate and Lucy of job incompetence during the task force meeting. He hadn’t even read the report of the incident before making that assessment. He and Nate seemed to already have issues not related to this assignment. Aside from his behavior being unprofessional, should Crutcher have been allowed to continue leading the team? Was his later apology enough?

[Anita]

He was the agent in charge, but his behavior was horrid. To pass judgment without reading the reports was inexcusable, but it would have taken a lot more for him to be removed from leading the team. I was a little surprised he apologized. But it wasn't enough.

[Robin]

I agree, Anita. It was very unprofessional of him to place blame on Nate and Lucy, especially with other people around. He did apologize, which shocked me. But it wasn't much of an apology.

[Charlene]

Agreed. What a jerk!

[Sharon]

I agree with all of you. Also, his apology was not enough. I didn't think it was heartfelt either. Even though Crutcher was the agent in charge, I felt he deserved a dressing down or something on his employment record from his boss.

[Jonetta]

I agree with you all but am taking it a step further. How can a team have confidence in your leadership after you not only denigrate two respected team members in the way he did but also showed his unprofessionalism by coming to the meeting unprepared? Not reading that report and forming an uneducated opinion was pretty bad when planning an op. Team leaders crave as much intelligence as possible when planning next steps and this guy decided he knew enough?

He should have been sidelined. His apology was delivered grudgingly because he was smart enough to know he had no choice. But removing him as team leader? That’s how you get someone’s attention to look inward.