November 19, 2025 • 42 mins
For the Season 4 premiere, co-hosts Ted Stank and Tom Goldsby sat down with retired Rear Admiral Kevin Sweeney to explore how military leadership principles translate to the business world.
Throughout his remarkable career in the U.S. Armed Forces, Sweeney commanded the USS Cole during its historic rebuilding and served as chief of staff to Defense Secretary James Mattis. He is now a trusted senior advisor on government relations and management in the private sector. Sweeney’s conversation with Ted and Tom spanned geopolitics, defense manufacturing, cyber readiness, and building strong teams. Along the way, he offered insights into how trust and adaptability remain vital whether leading sailors, managing crises, or guiding corporate boards.
Recorded live at the Fall 2025 Supply Chain Forum, Sweeney brought decades of experience navigating complexity under pressure—wisdom that supply chain professionals can apply in their own leadership journeys.
This episode was recorded at the Marriott Knoxville Downtown on November 5, 2025.
Related links:
- Relive the Fall 2025 Supply Chain Forum
- Download free white papers from UT experts for improving returns management processes, reshoring manufacturing, procurement capabilities, and more.
- Save the date for the Spring Supply Chain Forum, April 21–23
- Learn about our SCM Academy programs, including upcoming virtual courses on Leadership (Jan. 30–May 10), Finance (March 2–May 3), and Planning (March 11–May 10).
- Join the Advanced Supply Chain Collaborative to explore advanced concepts in SCM with top industry experts and scholars
- Become a GSCI partner
- Follow GSCI on LinkedIn
- Subscribe to GSCI’s monthly newsletter
- Read the latest news and insights from GSCI
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Intro & Outro (00:00):
Welcome to Tennessee on Supply Chain
Management, where we unpack thedrivers shaping today's global
supply chains.
From innovative ideas toreal-world solutions, each
episode brings you insights fromthe leaders charting the course
for our discipline.
Now here are your hosts.
Ted Stank (00:18):
Well, hey everybody.
My name's Ted Stank,co-executive director of the
Global Supply Chain Instituteand co-host of the Tennessee on
Supply Chain Podcast, here withmy longtime co-collaborator, Tom
Goldsby.
Tom, hey.
Tom Goldsby (00:32):
Good afternoon, all.
Yeah, we're coming to you livefrom the fall supply chain forum
here in downtown Knoxville,Tennessee.
You know, I think for thepodcast listeners that'll hear
this a little later, you need tounderstand just the vastness of
what's in front of us here,right?
I mean, we've got a room fullhere in the Marriott ballroom.
I wanted to get the wave going,maybe right before this
(00:54):
session, but I I restrainedmyself.
Ted Stank (00:57):
Did you all know that this used to be the east wing
of the Marriott?
And we tore it down and put abow.
Tom Goldsby (01:05):
Hear the groans.
Audible groans from theaudience, but no bold.
unknown (01:10):
There's not.
Ted Stank (01:11):
There's not.
Hey, who's this seated inbetween us?
So I'd like everybody towelcome my good friend, retired
Navy Rear Admiral Kevin Sweeney.
I'm going to tell you a littlebit about the roles that Kevin
has played over the course ofhis career, and it's incredibly
impressive.
But more impressive than thatis that he and I have been
friends for 47 years, met eachother when we were 18-year-olds
(01:32):
as plebes at the U.S.
Naval Academy.
Kevin Sweeney (01:34):
That was 1978, if you can't.
I'm doing the math on that.
So yeah.
Ted Stank (01:39):
1978.
By the way, in this vast room,we have another classmate of
ours, class of 1982, SteveKlemensik.
Where are you, Steve?
Steve.
So there's three 1982 U.S.
Naval Academy graduates in theroom.
So Kevin is joining us today.
Kevin brings us uh anincredible background.
He's led teams in some of thetoughest situations imaginable.
(02:02):
He was commanding officer ofthe USS Cole after it was hit by
a missile in the Persian Gulf.
So he became commanding officeras it was coming back from the
Gulf and going throughreconstruction.
I remember talking to him whenhe was CO, it was a pretty
amazing time.
He also has the greatest titlethat I've ever heard.
And I'm going to change it alittle bit because I think it
(02:24):
makes it even cooler.
I remember when he got this, Iwent to his change of command
ceremony.
He became commander of CarrierStrike Group 10.
So it meant that he wascommander of a carrier battle
group and all the associatedships that went with it.
I want to call it CarrierStrike Force because that kind
of sounds like Star Wars to me.
It was like, what was thatAdmiral's name that had the head
(02:47):
of a fish?
No, I've never seen it.
In Star Wars.
Anybody remember that guy'sname?
Anyway, I'm kidding around toomuch.
He went on after that, afterhis retirement for the Navy, to
serve as chief of staff to theSecretary of Defense James
Mattis in the first Trumpadministration.
So Kevin spent two years veryclose to the pulse of what was
happening in the White House.
(03:08):
I think you told me the otherday that you probably went to
the briefings in the in the OvalOffice daily.
Since then, he's advised majorprivate sector organizations on
national security and supplychain risk.
He's on a number of differentboards, including the Airbus
U.S.
Space and Defense Board ofDirectors.
So, Kev, great to have you withus.
Kevin Sweeney (03:29):
Thanks, Ted.
Great to see you.
Tom, good to meet you.
Thank you so much.
Tom Goldsby (03:33):
I have to say, if you're reading the program, I
was going to sit this one out.
And last night during thereception, you know, we had some
good conversation on that.
And then we took it to Trivia,where we continued our winning
streak thanks to Kevin's help.
This guy knows world geography,as you can imagine, right?
But uh you invited me to join.
Thank you very much for beingpart of the conversation.
(03:53):
And I'm like, okay, I'm not amilitary guy.
I think I shared with you thatI I came within a signature of
going to Navy OCS.
The recruiter actuallycompleted the application.
He's like, all you gotta do issign.
But the idea of sailing underthe polar ice caps for six
months at a time on a sub justdidn't really appeal to me.
But I'm wearing my Navy jacketand some Navy shoes uh today,
(04:15):
navy belts.
I think I'm gonna try to fit inwith you guys, try to hang with
it.
Navy lost in football lastweekend, so we're not too old.
Okay, we'll try not to dwell onthat.
But again, just tremendousexperience, and boy, we need it
right now in the world of supplychain management, just to try
to make sense of it.
Are we gonna see the other sideof this?
We are.
(04:35):
Okay, that's a good place tostart, perhaps.
How do we get there, maybe, iswhere we want to take the
conversation.
Kevin Sweeney (04:41):
So, first of all, I'm thrilled to be here and
thrilled to be in an environmentassociated with a university.
Great vibe in a room yesterday,last night you kicked off, and
then today as well.
Uh I sat in a couple of theother presenters, it was
excellent.
A couple of comments first forme.
Uh, I looked around thisaudience.
I suspect we have a number ofveterans in the audience, folks
associated with veterans.
(05:02):
Let's see, show of hands.
Yeah, I mean, it's a big deal.
And uh next week is VeteransDay, actually.
It's not about sales at afurniture store, it's about
celebrating veterans and theirfamilies.
So uh hats off and thank youfor your service as well.
Um a quick background for me,as Ted said, both Naval Academy
(05:26):
grads, I never intended to getaround the Navy past my
five-year commitment.
Back in the 80s, I will behonest, it probably wasn't a lot
of fun to be on ships in theNavy.
And uh my intent was to get outand uh in '89 and go ahead to
uh grad school.
I actually started applying MBAprograms.
UBA.
Yeah.
UBA.
And then I ended up workingwith some great folks who said,
(05:47):
hey, you know, the Navy's got agrad school out in Monterey.
You go get a degree in financeand move on.
I did.
And uh ended up going out toCalifornia for a couple years,
and I've said, yeah, I'm 10years in, I'm probably gonna get
out again.
And then all of a sudden, youknow, you just end up working
with fabulous people, greatopportunities.
So I stuck around.
And then, you know, for asurfer ship guy like myself, and
Ted was early on in his careerwhen he was in the Navy, the
(06:09):
peak of your career, you youstrive about 18, 20 years, and
if you're lucky, you've doneokay, you get selected to be a
captain of a uh destroyer.
And I was I was slated to takecommand of USS Coal, DDG67,
homeported out of uh Norfolk,Virginia.
And I was wrapping up Octoberof 2000, 25 years ago.
I'll bring that up again in asecond.
(06:29):
Wrapping up my training, I wassupposed to head overseas and
take command of the ship ondeployment in Bahrain, about
halfway through a deployment tothe Middle East.
25 years ago, three weeks ago,we had our remembrance ceremony
for coal October 12th.
They'd been attacked.
We lost 17 sailors, another 29severely injured.
Uh, coal came back 18 monthslater, rebuilt.
(06:51):
Uh so I went from havingcommand of coal, supposedly in
the middle of the Middle East,kind of a combat environment.
Never know what's going tohappen operationally.
The ship did get attacked.
It was in Yemen Harbor,refueling when it was attacked.
And my entire experience wasnot what I expect as a captain
of a ship.
For the next 22 months, I was acaptain of a ship that was
(07:12):
being rebuilt in Mississippiwhere it was originally built.
The crew was removed, and thecrew was up in Norfolk,
Virginia, and then over time westart reassigning the crew over
time, over time, over time.
And then boom, what happensnext?
11 months later, 9-11 happens.
And then we sort of acceleratedin the Navy to bring a crew, a
new crew back together.
And we left 18 months later,returned back to Norfolk,
(07:34):
Virginia, started the basiccycle of training and readiness
for a ship.
Back in those days, a DDG costabout a billion dollars, and we
rebuilt the ship at about a costof 245 million in 18 months.
Uh it was incredible.
So again, I mentioned theremembrance ceremony.
25 years later, seeing thefamilies, uh, former crew
(07:56):
members.
You know, it's just so moving.
And it's amazing the impactthat an event like that happens
on those families, but theimpact it had greater on the
Navy at large, and quitefrankly, the country, because it
wasn't realized until reallySeptember 11th that we were
under attack in a kind of aterrorist environment that those
wars carried on for another 20years.
But again, as a sea over shipwhere you're prepared for war
(08:20):
and being overseas to nowinteracting every day of a ship
being rebuilt in a shipyard.
For me personally, as thecaptain, they don't train you
for that.
They don't train you for how tosort of try to one put a ship
back together, two, interactwith your crew that just went
through the most horrific andtraumatic event of their lives
(08:41):
and losing 17 shipmates.
And then, as it turns out, forme, I think it was roughly 31
separate family units associatedwith those 17 sailors.
And as you get the note offamilies, every individual in
the family units certainly dealtwith the pain of losing their
sailor differently.
And it was just, you know, forme, again, as a young
(09:03):
41-year-old CEO, there's justno, there was no playbook.
And it's tough.
I mean, and it was sorewarding, demanding in a sense.
A great learning experience,the highest honor of my career,
quite frankly, obviously, beingthe skipper to Cole after the
attack and rebuilding andbringing the ship back.
And when we did leave, at abouta crew of 300, I think we end
up having about 29 original crewmembers on board when we sailed
(09:26):
back to Norfolk.
By the way, the ship today isat sea.
It's operating.
It has deployed, I think, fourtimes in those 20-some years,
back into the Middle East aswell, and doing great.
And the ship was in port threeweeks ago when we had
remembrance ceremony for thecrew.
So it was it was impressive asheck.
Ted Stank (09:42):
Kev, what leadership lessons did you take away from
that?
You said there's no playbook,right?
Kevin Sweeney (09:46):
No, that's that's fabulous.
You know, military, inbusiness, you know, you hear
things called black swan events,you just can't plan or prepare.
And actually you can't, exceptyou have to be, I guess, you
position yourself where ifsomething does happen that's
different, you're not formallyschooled on.
Okay, how do you deal with it?
(10:07):
And for you know, me as a CEO,as I said, one, the ship is down
in Mississippi, we're inNorfolk, the crew's in Norfolk.
Over time, there's no plan whenthe ship was going to be
completed.
9-11 happens, it's anaccelerant for the call itself
in a good way.
I was never prepared to dealwith now, you know, national,
international media, again,interacting with the family
(10:29):
members over time.
Some wanted nothing to do withthe calls, some felt very
attached to the coal, but everyunit really did deal with it
differently.
And a completely differentfocus.
Um, you're rebuilding a newcrew and you're bringing the
ship out, you're worried aboutsafety job, number one, and two,
long-term, turning the shipover to the next captain who
ultimately did deploy after Iafter I left.
(10:49):
It was incredibly alsoimpactful for my family.
Nothing is easy, and and itdoes impact families.
That's why I mentioned, youknow, for the vets in here, it's
not just the veterans, it's thefamilies.
But every day was a learningexperience.
Every day it was somethingdifferent for me professionally
as the CEO.
And every day you just had tokind of keep focused and have a
vision of where we're getting.
The coal was there to come outat a certain date.
(11:11):
We're gonna be ready to go backto sea.
Uh, we have to operate safely,we have to get back up to
Norfolk.
It was a big deal for big Navyas well as the families and the
crew of coal itself.
And today, 25 years later, it'sit's the same attitude on a
ship was fabulous.
I visited a captain on board,and the attitude is there, the
history is there, thecommitment's there, and it's
just a great feeling.
Ted Stank (11:32):
You know, one of the things I've observed, I've
certainly never been throughadversity like that, right?
But one of the things I'veobserved over time, and I think
most of you that live throughCOVID in your organizations and
in society in general, I thinkadversity like that tends to
bring out the best in people.
You know, when we all realizethat there are really high
stakes involved here, everybodyjust kind of rolls up their
(11:54):
sleeves and goes to work anddoes things.
I I've seen your companies doamazing things in the spring of
2020, summer of 2020 that yourorganization was never prepared
to do before.
And I bet you saw that in theworld.
We did.
Kevin Sweeney (12:08):
One, obviously, with the crew and the entire
support structure actually hadthe Navy as well.
You know, the Navy was dealingwith this as well as you know,
Commander Sweeney's the captainof the ship and the crew.
I will also say, and it justdoes tie into supply chain, and
the uh the ship was builtIngalls Pascagoul.
At the time was part of NorthO'Grum, and today it's part of
Huntington Ingalls.
They did a fabulous job.
(12:29):
I mean, the commitment out ofthe organization, the commitment
out of the workforce, thededication of the community
around us down there inPascagoul was fabulous.
And really a key to why we cameout on time and quite frankly,
better shape than when the shipwent in, you know, as an
operating destroyer.
Ted Stank (12:46):
Yeah.
Well, let's shift gears alittle bit.
Times are different now, right?
We've passed 9-11 and COVID'sover, and business today is
pretty mundane and boring, andthere's not a lot of disruption
going on.
Kev, you you have been at theheartbeat of national security
policy, national defense policy.
What is your take on thegeopolitical landscape today,
(13:08):
particularly vis-a-vis how itimpacts supply chain?
You're still living that.
Kevin Sweeney (13:13):
We are.
I am on three corporate boards,an industry association aboard
for microelectronics advisor toMcKinsey's airspace defense
folks.
So every day I am involved withcertainly aerospace defense
companies and a few otherthings.
I would say right now it is atime of change, and you all see
that.
And it's maybe the catalyst inthe U.S., of course, is a new
(13:34):
administration.
It's uh November now.
And how we are, and thisadministration is taking this
country, whether it's tariffsand trade policies, whether it's
national security focus, we areno kidding, focusing now on the
borders here, if you will.
We're focusing on the homeland.
Back in 2017, the first Trumpadministration while we were in
(13:55):
the Pentagon, the big shift wasleaving essentially the global
war on terror and focusing onwhat we called really major
competition of China and Russia,a focus on Asia Pacific from a
security perspective, and atransition of shift, huge
increase in the budgets for themilitary, a focus on readiness,
a lot of atrophied over time.
(14:16):
Now you fast forward, uh newadministration with the Biden
team in the middle here.
There's a refocus on homelandsecurity, uh, the borders, South
America, and the challenges areunique.
And if you're an industry, andmy perspective from being a
board member is there's a lot ofunknowns right now.
Uh the impact of the tariffissue, quite frankly, we've been
(14:36):
pretty pleased across the boardas far as costing and the
impact of what we've been doingto date.
We don't know how it's going tocarry moving forward.
The impact of the budget, theU.S.
budget, here we are, day 36.
New record, by the way.
Yeah.
Uh of a budget uh problem and agovernment shutdown and the
impacts it has every day, notjust to the military, which the
(14:58):
focus in, but it's to everybodyin the federal government.
Uh, whether you're furloughed,you're worried about being
furloughed, you're not beingpaid, the impact to your family,
your impact to planning, but italso impacts industry.
Everybody's in, at least whatwe see strategically, it's a
pause.
I think Friday, the Secretaryof War, Pete Hexelf is going to
be meeting with key industryleaders and kind of roll out
some massive changes to federalacquisition, you know, for
(15:21):
defense and the Department ofWar.
We'll see how that plays out.
At the same time, thecompetition doesn't stop
overseas.
And the supply chain concernsthat we have, particularly, I'll
tell you one at Airbus andothers, we're all competing.
We're building satellites rightnow, we're competing with many
companies for the same limitedassets available in the supply
(15:42):
chain.
And we're also focusing on whatwe call a shored supply chain
because we can't have anythingfail when it's up in space or
elsewhere long term.
Uh I would just say, andconcurrently, what's happening
in Europe, all right?
There's stress on the EU,there's stress on NATO, we have
two wars going on, Ukraine,Russia, you got a war down.
You know, still, yeah, we maybe in a pause right now.
(16:04):
We'll see how it plays out.
Israel, Hamas.
That is all impacting kind ofwhere does the defense industry
at least what's going on?
You know, munition demand goingway up.
We know that's happening.
Uh, there's a focus onshipbuilding out of the
president and the signed back inApril.
Where is that gonna take uslong term?
And really, what's gonna happenwith the budget in the next two
(16:24):
years?
Ted Stank (16:25):
So, where do you see?
Do you have a crystal ball youcan kind of tell us?
I mean, obviously notspecifically, but over the next
couple of years.
That's a great question.
Kevin Sweeney (16:32):
I do see this.
We learned a few things at thetwo current wars, particularly
Ukraine-Russia war here.
All the modeling we had in themilitary for years about
consumption of weapons haschanged.
We realize and appreciate thatthe the usage of weapons in
today's uh environment uh isgonna go like this.
Uh you see what's happening atsea with the Navy in particular
(16:52):
in the Red Sea.
We're shooting down drones withmulti-million dollar missiles,
because that's what we haveright now.
So the cost equation is out ofwhack, but also the quantities
and an inventory is out ofwhack.
And so there will be acontinuous focus on one,
building up munitions, two, afocus on new technology,
hypersonics, autonomy, you know,really taking it beyond just
(17:14):
drones, but obviously at sea,underwater, and the larger
drones that we call basicallycollaborative combat air that
will start coordinating,operating with manned jets as
well.
So I the demands are not goingto weigh because the threat is
not going away.
That's not a good news story,but it's a fact.
Ted Stank (17:31):
Talk about that.
Talk about, again, we all livein this global world, we all
have suppliers that are all overthe globe.
What do you see coming down thepipe geopolitically?
Is there going to be anystabilization out of Europe?
Kevin Sweeney (17:42):
You know, I think Europe, I do think, is waking
up to the fact that they aregonna be much more responsible
for their own national security.
Uh NATO is still there.
NATO has been a blanket, but itreally has been a blanket that
the the U.S.
has kind of paid the bill forfor many, many years.
And the focus on NATO that theTrump administration has done
the first go-around, the secondgo-around, isn't new, as a
(18:03):
matter of fact.
I mean, we've been talkingabout it for many, many, many
years, but really had beenlittle action to kind of uh be
the catalyst for investment outof the NATO countries, throw in
the EU what is happening inEurope now.
They realize that they have tostep up financially.
And that means a big shift intheir budgets.
And then on the other side, inAsia Pacific, every day that
(18:24):
goes by, and and I sat in herethis morning to listen to Mitch,
I'll make a comment, uh buildoff of something he commented
about.
But the Chinese, every day,every day, they are just growing
regionally, regionally, andthen ultimately their goal, and
it's no surprise, this isnothing hidden, is to ultimately
be a global power and have athe global system sort of
underneath their standards andtheir rules.
(18:46):
And I think a little bit ofwhat we're doing in South
America is actually tied to thatright now as well.
So the stresses are there.
The question is, are wecommitted?
Are we positioned one from thesupply chain, two from things
like rare earth minerals?
That's a piece of the supplychain.
There is a focus of that rightnow.
But also just the manufacturingcapacity here in the US.
I look at it from uh you knowmicroelectronics, electronics
(19:09):
perspective that I'm involvedin, and we just don't have the
capacity, nor do we have theability to turn around very,
very quickly and to build out ifsomething goes wrong in Asia
Pacific or elsewhere for thatmatter.
Tom Goldsby (19:21):
And so, what is your thought then in terms of
building those capabilities?
I was hoping you all mightdistinguish ships versus boats
for me, but let's talk aboutships that you all use.
Do we absolutely have to havethat shipbuilding capacity here?
Do we need to be able to buildthese vital pieces of equipment?
Kevin Sweeney (19:37):
Well, I think it's twofold on shipbuilding.
It's both kind of commercialside as well as the military
side.
It has completely atrophied, asyou know.
I mean, essentially theshipbuilding commercial side of
the U.S.
is focused on essentiallyoffshore coastal vessels going
out to support, you know, localtrade movement, going out to
support oil rigs, uh, offshorewind support, things like that,
(19:59):
barges up and down theMississippi, you name it.
And we have just over the yearscommercial large ships built
overseas.
We do a few here.
Jones Act is a piece of that.
I don't think we want to getinto Jones Act, but but on the
military side, we also need toexpand capacity, which again,
you can't do this overnight.
And if you see the thrust is toencourage outside investing, we
(20:20):
have South Koreans right nowinvesting in a Philadelphia
shipyard.
We have commitments uh fromother shipbuilding companies
around the world.
We just, I think, made anagreement with a Finnish company
uh to build four newicebreakers for the Coast Guard.
Building out that capacitytakes years and years and years,
and it takes a lot of capex,quite frankly.
And so I think theadministration also looking for
(20:42):
third-party private equityinvestment, co-investment, if
you will, into our needs here inthe U.S.
is pretty significant.
Yeah.
Tom Goldsby (20:51):
So I'm curious, you serve on some boards, advisory
capacity.
Given your vast experience,given your perspective, I'm
curious what do those boards,what do those corporate leaders
look to you uh to provide uhconsent and advice?
Kevin Sweeney (21:08):
No, I think uh particularly being in the
airspace and defense industry,having people I always look at
it from a corporate boardperspective as well as from the
C-suite, you want to havecomplementary experiences and
expertise.
And I think what folks like Ibring, at least to a corporate
board in particular, is theexpertise of experience.
Kind of you were, I was an enduser of many of the products
(21:28):
that are being built, if youwill, and being consumed, if you
will.
So that's one piece.
Two, you understand how thegovernment works, you understand
how the federal governmentacquisition process works, you
understand what we call theinteragency, and of course, we
all have great relationships,you know, inside the government,
outside of government.
So I think there's a broad gapthat we help fill, quite
(21:49):
frankly.
And of course, you have thesame absolutely fiduciary
responsibility as any otherboard member, but we also bring
leadership, we bring just adifferent set of experiences and
background that folks who comeup through on the commercial
side just don't have.
Yeah.
At a senior level at least.
Ted Stank (22:06):
Hey Kev, let's talk about China for a while.
Tom and I follow this futuristnamed Peter Zion.
Uh, I think you know, we talkedabout StratFour before, right?
Peter Zion came out of thatStratFour family.
And he's been saying for yearsthat in the not too distant
future, China is gonna spinapart mainly because of their
demographic situation,population shrinking at a
(22:26):
dramatic rate.
You don't see that a lot inpolicy.
I mean, I think that most ofour policy initiatives look at
China continuing to be thispower, this global competitor,
if you will, strategically.
Do you give any credence to thenotion that China is gonna have
to confront in the very nearfuture this demographic crisis
and might spin apart and whatwould happen if?
Kevin Sweeney (22:49):
Yeah.
Uh I give little credence,except maybe from a temporal
perspective.
Short-term versus long term, insort of our society, our
perspective, I think is a lotdifferent than in certainly the
culture of China.
Uh they are taking a very,very, very long view.
They're patient yet persistent,if you will.
I look at what happened uh andis happening today still in Hong
(23:12):
Kong.
The focus on Taiwan is real.
It's only a matter of time.
And I don't think it has to beor will be necessarily kinetic.
I think the last thing theywant to do is destroy the uh,
you know, an economy that theywant.
26 million plus you know,ethnic Chinese that are in
Taiwan.
It is a democracy.
I think here in this country,unfortunately, there's a lack of
(23:32):
knowledge right now.
Isn't it democracy?
Why would we get involved tothe point of military action,
say, lose soldiers or ailmen orsailors, have a aircraft shot
out of the sky, potential shipspeeds.
I mean, how do you connect thedots to the American public
right now is a concern there aswell.
But I think uh when you are acommunist society and you're
controlled by the CommunistParty, they have many advantages
(23:55):
that we do not have in thiscountry as a democratic society.
Everything from the free pressto freedom of choice.
Their industry is supplementedtwo ways, right?
It's one by the government,two, uh, they're pretty damn
good at stealing you knowintellectual property from the
rest of the world.
You know, they don't have toinvest uh in technology.
You know, Mesh made a commentthis morning about the advantage
uh that we have in intechnology is key if we do end
(24:18):
up having some kind of uhconflict with the Chinese.
It's that, because we're notgoing to outbuild them right
now, but more importantly, quitefrankly, is the fact that they
don't have the experiences thatwe have operationally.
Our military, their experience,they can build aircraft
carriers today that replicateus.
They're building uh thecapabilities to operate like we
(24:38):
do, but they don't have ahundred years of operating off
an aircraft carrier around theworld.
They don't have thoseexperiences, and you can't steal
that.
You can't replicate that bystealing intellectual property.
But over time they willcontinue to get better, but
they're not word tested.
And it's a regime in a sensethat subordinates and loan they
(24:58):
don't empower anybody to makedecisions.
Everything is central control,just like the Russian, quite
frankly.
A different model, but but thesame concept.
The key to our success andWestern militaries in general is
we empower everyone in thechain of command, if you will,
to make decisions and do what'sright.
The quality of our training isworld class.
That's where they still lack.
But I think the timeline is wejust have a different view, I
(25:21):
think, than their culture.
Ted Stank (25:23):
That's a really interesting point.
Our perspective is uh thinkabout how our public
corporations run, right?
Every quarter is what you know,quarterly, quarterly earnings,
etc.
Yeah, interesting point.
Great point here, by the way.
Since we are doing this podcastlive, we are open to QA.
Keeps coming up with the uhwith the barcode up there if you
want to capture that and putquestions.
(25:43):
We've got a couple of goodquestions here.
Any chance we could touch onthe Belt and Road initiative?
Kevin Sweeney (25:48):
We can.
I mean, uh hopefully mostpeople know what it is, broadly
speaking.
We've been dealing with theChinese presence around the
world for years, and this is thetheir sort of their trade
initiative to buildrelationships with countries
around the world.
Essentially, in many areas theythey'll bring money, but really
what they do is they'll bring alittle money, they'll bring a
Chinese workforce, and they'llupdate or rebuild a port or a
(26:10):
facility, and then ultimatelythey take control of it and
they'll build out bases andthings like this.
You know, third world countriesmostly who quite frankly need a
boost uh economically.
In some ways, it's notbrilliant, but it makes sense.
How do you spread yourinfluence around the world?
Well, when you have the sort ofthe economic keys, it's very,
very helpful.
Ted Stank (26:29):
Some countries have pushed back on it pretty much.
They have, because at the endof the day, there's no real way.
Kevin Sweeney (26:34):
There's no jobs, there's debt, and basically
you're turning over assets tothe Chinese government at the
end of the day.
Correct.
Yeah.
But they're out there, whetherit's in Africa, South America,
in Asia, it's there.
Ted Stank (26:45):
I'm gonna paraphrase this next question a little bit.
It's about the amount of moneywe spend on defense, and can we
shift that to manufacturing?
I'm gonna talk about thepotential for a national
industrial policy, particularlyfor industries that are critical
to national defense.
Kevin Sweeney (27:00):
There's a huge focus, and it started really, I
would say, again, back in 2017in a good way, only industrial
base.
It has dithered away, whetherit's building ships, aircraft,
new technology.
The percentage of GDP that, andI I don't have the numbers, I
they're easy to find though,that the military you know
controls, you know, just goingback 20 years, is just we're
(27:22):
down to what 3% maybe, whateverthe number is, from a peak of
10, 11, 12 percent.
Right.
Mitch mentioned this morning.
There's little money going inRE.
There is little money to gointo the broader military, was
the co-investor with industryback in the 60s in particular,
50s, 60s, and technology spunout of that.
Today it's the exact opposite,and we're trying to rectify
(27:42):
that.
Ted Stank (27:43):
Well, there's an urgency in the 60s, right?
It was Cold War.
Yeah.
I mean, NASA, right?
Why do we put so much money andgo to the moon in what, nine
years from when President oreight years from when President
Kennedy said we were gettingthere?
And I think people who didn'tlive through it don't realize
that that was a militaryendeavor.
It wasn't about puttingsomebody on the moon, it was a
military endeavor.
Kevin Sweeney (28:02):
And most people in this, I mean, I looked at the
the list of attendees here, ifyou will, and whether you're
directly involved in uhsupporting anything in the
federal government, quitefrankly, but whether it's the
military in general, if you area part of the supply chain, if
you are prime, you're tier one,tier two, or there's a dotted
line in the logistics world,everything that we utilize has
(28:22):
to be moved somehow, some way,across this country and
overseas, whether it's, youknow, again, trucks and then
planes and ships, food.
We don't have another source ofuh stuff, if you will, in the
military.
So everybody in some ways ispart of that supply chain,
incredibly vital as well.
Tom Goldsby (28:38):
Something we touched on earlier, day 36, and
I'm gonna call out ScottDeGroot.
He uh co-hosted uh the last uhpodcast uh 33 days ago, and we
were trying to forecast how longthe government shutdown was
gonna last.
And I think we came down likeseven to ten days, way overshot
that.
Hopefully there will be somebreak.
(28:58):
But you've worked with thepeople and the personalities
that we're talking about here.
I'm not gonna ask you for aspecific number, but can you
maybe talk a little bit abouthow and why maybe we should care
about that?
I mean, how are organizationsand people affected by the ship?
Kevin Sweeney (29:13):
I I think, again, from your corporate perspective
in particular, I mean, prettysoon what's gonna happen, and I
say soon, like within a week orso, the impact to not just the
military, but it's across theentire federal workforce.
Whether they are gonna be paidor not paid, they get furload,
more and more organizations arejust kind of stopped working,
(29:34):
quite frankly.
And you know, we have what theyalways call the critical
organizations that no matterwhat, but you're seeing what
happened in air trafficcontrollers, and now you see the
Secretary of Transportationsaying by next week the impact
isn't going to be just a fewfolks taking vacation, it's
gonna be pretty dramatic.
That's one visible piece.
But you know, when you'reinside sort of the Washington
environment and you sort of seehow the government functions, it
(29:56):
is not functioning right now,and I think until the pressure.
Build on either party or bothparties to the point where this
is a no-win.
And ultimately, my guess is andit'll be the president stepping
in at some point and movingthis along, and we'll figure out
you know what went wrong andmore importantly, what's going
to change moving forward here.
We have $1,25 billion comingout of there out of the great
(30:20):
big bill for particularly fordefense that is now stalled.
That money is earmarked, butyet it's stalled out.
We're not starting newprograms.
I mean, the impact across theboard when you're one in a
continued resolution, but evenworse when you're in a shutdown
is nothing new is happening.
You sort of keep the lights onas best you can and continue to
do what you do every day thebest you can.
(30:41):
But as we move forward, newtechnology, new programs, new
things, nothing's being funded.
So that's tough.
It's tough.
My guess inside people tellingme hopefully this will be done
by Thanksgiving.
That's quite a few more weeks.
Ted Stank (30:54):
We'll see what happens.
Yeah.
Hopefully, all of you who areflying are able to get home
tomorrow or get wherever you'regoing.
Tom Goldsby (31:01):
Beautiful time to be here on Rocky Top, though.
It is.
We'll keep the lights on here.
Hey, Ted, do you think we oughtto take another question from
the case?
Ted Stank (31:10):
Yeah, let's let's do let's let's shift back to the
leadership side.
Uh there's a question heresaying, what leadership
principles have influenced yoursuccess and growth in the Navy
and the business world that youwould share with with a
merchant.
Kevin Sweeney (31:22):
You know, if I knew some of the things I think
I know now through experience, Iprobably would have been a
little better when I was youngerin a sense.
I would say, and this maysurprise some folks, but
hopefully not, the mostimportant aspect of leadership,
and by the way, I for fun lastnight I went, I don't know if
it's Google or AI or whatever,there's like right now 57,000
(31:42):
plus books in the Amazon systemthat talk about leadership.
So you can't get this onewrong, right?
But in reality, it's this it'steamwork, and it's building
teams that trust each other andwork together at any level, any
size unit, from a group, a squadof Marines to a DDG ship of 300
to a strike group of 8,000sailors and Marines to the
(32:03):
Department of Defense.
It's all about teamwork.
I don't care, you can have thesmartest supply chain folks, the
best engineers, the whatevers.
But if you can't build a team,work together for a common goal,
and take that organization,whether it's a company or a
military organization forward,you're gonna fail.
You're gonna fail.
And people are not gonna wantto be around that kind of
(32:24):
organization and they're gonnawalk.
The military is still anall-volunteer force.
And I look at from the industryperspective, and it's funny,
you know, people again back toyou know having a retired senior
military guy on a board, like,oh, people just and when we were
in the Pentagon.
Well, you know, just giveorders and people, it's it's a
joke.
There there is no order given.
(32:45):
There's guidance, hopefully,there is articulation with
vision and goals, but you'redealing with people, and you
have to have good relationshipswith all your key stakeholders.
And that's the only way anorganization in my mind is going
to succeed.
You know, when we were youngJOs, I don't think that was our
attitude or our experiences.
But now JO is a junior officerwhen we first got commissioned
(33:05):
out that out of school.
Uh, but it's without question,that is the number one takeaway
I have uh today.
Ted Stank (33:10):
And something else you you mentioned earlier, which
is empowerment.
I think one of the greatestthings I took out of my
leadership experience in theNavy is that I was a 24-year-old
ensign responsible for supercomplex fire control computer
systems and radars and stuff.
And I had no training or basisother than the very highest
(33:30):
conceptual level of it.
One of my sailors was um masterof science in electrical
engineering.
Intro & Outro (33:37):
Yeah.
Ted Stank (33:37):
And I said, How come you don't want to be an officer?
And he's like, I don't want allthat BS that you guys have to
deal with.
I just want to work on myelectric, you know, on my
computer system.
And I think the lesson for allof us is that we have incredible
talent, incredibly talentedpeople coming to work for us.
And I think our job as leadersis to empower them and make them
(33:58):
the best they can be.
I am always shocked at leaderswho feel threatened by people on
their team succeeding.
It's like empower them, doeverything you can for their
success, and then sit back andbask in the light of their
success, right?
It's not a competition here.
Kevin Sweeney (34:15):
And when those individuals are 10, 15, 20 years
younger than you are as well.
You know, age brings a littlebit of experience and wisdom,
but there are young superstarsthat, again, back to
empowerment, enablement,support, mentorship.
If there's one other thing I'llbring back, I think one of the
biggest takeaways I've hadprofessionally from day one is
(34:36):
the power of mentorship, both toyou as a mentoree and you as a
mentor to folks, both formallyand informally.
A lot of organizations,companies, you have a formal HR
process, and you have you knowstrategies and goals for the
year, you review a court,whatever.
That's a piece of it, importantpiece.
The other piece is, andparticularly for the students
(34:57):
here who are getting ready to goout into the professional
world, you've got to seek outover time folks for guidance
perspective that'snon-judgmental, but they
understand you, your background,the sort of the industry or
subsector you're in, so they cangive you quality advice.
And this hopefully is alifelong experience.
I mean, I still interact withmy mentors who who are long,
(35:17):
long retired, but are full ofwisdom.
And one of the most enjoyablethings I do professionally, both
in the corporate world as wellas you know, former military and
and folks uh from the civilianside is mentoring, connecting,
enabling, uh, giving themanother, you know, another ear
to listen to when they're makinga career decision.
And trying to balance, by theway, and one of the toughest
balances I think we all canstill have is you know career
(35:39):
demands and uh family demands.
You know, you there's got to bea balance here.
Ted Stank (35:43):
You know, we talk a lot about AI and how is AI
impacting our lives.
And I would say uh AI has thepromise of doing crazy things
later on, right?
But initially, right now, for20 bucks a month, you can get
Chat GPT.
And so many of those mundane,boring administrative jobs that
you're doing now that take youaway from spending time with
(36:04):
your people can be done by thatAI tool.
Use that AI tool to get allthis mundane, boring stuff that
you have to do every day, and iskeeping you away from your main
job, which is building theseteams and empowering your
people, and get out and spendmore time in your space with
your people.
unknown (36:20):
Yeah.
Kevin Sweeney (36:21):
One of the most impactful things I ever watched,
a couple years back, um, someof you age-wise, remember Jack
Welchek, uh, ran GE for how manyyears and probably the most
successful you know businessleader at the time.
And he was being interviewed upat Fairfield University up in
Connecticut, and it was a greatdiscussion, and but it kind of
turned negative of a bunch ofquestions at the time.
(36:42):
The GE was being kicked in hisshins a little bit about the
long-term pollution in HudsonRiver and what they're doing
about it.
And he finally turned and justsaid the impression was the
feeling he was getting likesomehow business is bad.
And and big companies are bad.
Big companies are made ofeverybody sitting in this room.
It's about you, your families,it's jobs, it's building and
creating wealth and a valuesystem.
(37:03):
And he was very frustrated bythat.
And the second piece, on theleadership piece, he was asked,
and he said, you know, if Idon't spend 80% of my time with
my subordinates and developingmy subordinates, I'm a failure.
20% of time doing the mundane,the paperwork, what you have to
do sometimes as a leader, butyou got to spend your time with
people.
Back to you know, theimportance of relationships and
(37:24):
people and developing yoursubordinates for the future.
Ted Stank (37:27):
And I think a lot of folks here are challenged by the
fact that we've had reductionin force over the years, right?
So you're now probably doingthe job that three other people
might have been doing 20 yearsago or 15 years ago.
And I think that takes us awayfrom spending the time with our
people, right?
Because you got all thispaperwork you got to do, and
it's like, geez, it's fiveo'clock, I gotta get home to
(37:47):
Sally's soccer game, but I stillhave all these reports I have
to do.
Kevin Sweeney (37:51):
You know, and there and be careful leadership
that through paperwork in asense.
A lot of folks are comfortabledoing that instead of being with
people, you know, and dealingwith issues and conflicts and
everything else that happens.
And and I guess the secondpiece is we've done this in
different organizationsthroughout my career,
particularly in the military.
You know what?
You just what happens nextmonth?
You don't send that report in.
Nobody cares, right?
(38:12):
Nobody gets feedback.
I guess it wasn't necessary.
But it's been done for 20 yearsand everybody has to do it,
right?
So anyway, I mean there's waysto do it, but certainly, you
know, taking advantage oftechnology, AI, and other things
will make that a little moreeffective.
Ted Stank (38:23):
I had a captain one time who I absolutely adored,
who had a three-drawer system.
And everything that would comein, he would decide whether it
was an A that this is thealligator that's gonna bite me
today, we've got to take care ofit.
The B was the alligator thatmight bite me tomorrow, and
we'll worry about that tomorrow.
And the C is there might be analligator out there, and he
would put stuff in the C drawer,and he said probably 80% of the
(38:46):
things he put in the C drawernever came up again.
Never came up again.
Tom Goldsby (38:50):
Hey Kevin, do you mind if we jump into another
audience question?
I'm gonna kind of paraphrase afew of these.
Uh just talking about thefuture of conflict, right?
And you alluded to some uhdemonstrative change we're
seeing, the Ukraine-Russianconflict where low-cost drones
are are being employed.
And I I guess there's maybesome question is in terms of our
you know military system ofbuilding, you know, tanks,
(39:13):
ships.
Yep.
You know, we haven't touched oncyber, for instance, here,
right?
So where are maybe our biggestthreats, do you think, into the
future and how do we prepare toaddress those?
Kevin Sweeney (39:22):
Yeah, I think space and cyber are the two
areas that we are probably nolonger at the competitive
advantage we had in prior years,particularly with China.
And those are so important andthey're so persistent, they are
one, they are manpower intensiveto a degree, and they're also
technology intensive.
But you know, the advantage ofa of a country like China has is
(39:44):
they take what we call a wholegovernment approach to
everything.
I mean, every company has aresponsibility in China to
support the military in some wayor fashion.
Technology, intelligence, uh,et cetera, et cetera.
So for us to realize, andparticularly in the cyber
domain, it's not just protectingyour IT systems, it's
protecting what's most valuable,your intellectual property.
(40:05):
And you know, ultimately notbrought down to your knees when
something goes wrong.
I mean, I've been involved in acompany that went through a
ransomware attack, and we werebrought to our knees for about
10 days.
I mean, everything just stoppedbuilding, stopped working on
the line.
We lost proprietaryinformation, we lost data on our
on our people.
We couldn't send out purchaseorders and we couldn't send out
(40:26):
billing, and all the things thatyou do, you take for granted.
If you can do that to anaerospace and defense company,
think more broadly to criticalinfrastructure and things like
that.
And we're talking about thatevery day now, uh, but it does
take investment.
It takes investment, privatesector investment, and takes
obviously investment from thegovernment as well.
Big vulnerabilities, though,without question.
Ted Stank (40:46):
Pottery shot, Kev, one piece of advice.
Remember, I told them theirchallenge was they had to come
home with one actionable idea.
What would your parting shot tothis group be about what uh a
takeaway?
Kevin Sweeney (40:57):
Two things.
I'll go back to my commentabout the power of mentorship,
honestly, both sides of thecoin, mentor, mentoring.
And I think the other thing isprobably one other thing that
I've certainly appreciated overmy career now is you gotta
listen.
You gotta listen to people.
Again, whether it's a juniorindividual in your organization
or the old guy in the cornerwho's seen this 40 years ago,
(41:18):
you gotta listen and engagepeople and not avoid that.
I mean, there's uh I justlistening to me, and really
listening, not just hearing, butlistening to me is probably the
most impactful tool that wehave, and I think certainly
early career days in themilitary, um the perceptions is
it's it's a very directiveorganization.
(41:38):
Well, it is, and you'll be afailure if it if it's you
maintains that way.
So that's my two thoughtstoday.
Perfect.
Thank you.
Tom Goldsby (41:46):
Nod is just a great way to kick off season four of
the podcast, right here in oursupply chain forum.
Admiral, thank you so much foryour service for your time, your
commitment.
We really appreciate it.
Intro & Outro (42:01):
Thanks for listening to Tennessee on supply
chain management.
Be sure to subscribe on yourfavorite podcast platform for
more conversations with theleaders framing the path for
practitioners, scholars, andstudents.
Have a question or idea?
We'd love to hear from you atgsci at utk.edu.
Until next time, listeners.
Welcome to Tennessee on Supply Chain
Management, where we unpack thedrivers shaping today's global
supply chains.
From innovative ideas toreal-world solutions, each
episode brings you insights fromthe leaders charting the course
for our discipline.
Now here are your hosts.
Ted Stank (00:18):
Well, hey everybody.
My name's Ted Stank,co-executive director of the
Global Supply Chain Instituteand co-host of the Tennessee on
Supply Chain Podcast, here withmy longtime co-collaborator, Tom
Goldsby.
Tom, hey.
Tom Goldsby (00:32):
Good afternoon, all.
Yeah, we're coming to you livefrom the fall supply chain forum
here in downtown Knoxville,Tennessee.
You know, I think for thepodcast listeners that'll hear
this a little later, you need tounderstand just the vastness of
what's in front of us here,right?
I mean, we've got a room fullhere in the Marriott ballroom.
I wanted to get the wave going,maybe right before this
(00:54):
session, but I I restrainedmyself.
Ted Stank (00:57):
Did you all know that this used to be the east wing
of the Marriott?
And we tore it down and put abow.
Tom Goldsby (01:05):
Hear the groans.
Audible groans from theaudience, but no bold.
unknown (01:10):
There's not.
Ted Stank (01:11):
There's not.
Hey, who's this seated inbetween us?
So I'd like everybody towelcome my good friend, retired
Navy Rear Admiral Kevin Sweeney.
I'm going to tell you a littlebit about the roles that Kevin
has played over the course ofhis career, and it's incredibly
impressive.
But more impressive than thatis that he and I have been
friends for 47 years, met eachother when we were 18-year-olds
(01:32):
as plebes at the U.S.
Naval Academy.
Kevin Sweeney (01:34):
That was 1978, if you can't.
I'm doing the math on that.
So yeah.
Ted Stank (01:39):
1978.
By the way, in this vast room,we have another classmate of
ours, class of 1982, SteveKlemensik.
Where are you, Steve?
Steve.
So there's three 1982 U.S.
Naval Academy graduates in theroom.
So Kevin is joining us today.
Kevin brings us uh anincredible background.
He's led teams in some of thetoughest situations imaginable.
(02:02):
He was commanding officer ofthe USS Cole after it was hit by
a missile in the Persian Gulf.
So he became commanding officeras it was coming back from the
Gulf and going throughreconstruction.
I remember talking to him whenhe was CO, it was a pretty
amazing time.
He also has the greatest titlethat I've ever heard.
And I'm going to change it alittle bit because I think it
(02:24):
makes it even cooler.
I remember when he got this, Iwent to his change of command
ceremony.
He became commander of CarrierStrike Group 10.
So it meant that he wascommander of a carrier battle
group and all the associatedships that went with it.
I want to call it CarrierStrike Force because that kind
of sounds like Star Wars to me.
It was like, what was thatAdmiral's name that had the head
(02:47):
of a fish?
No, I've never seen it.
In Star Wars.
Anybody remember that guy'sname?
Anyway, I'm kidding around toomuch.
He went on after that, afterhis retirement for the Navy, to
serve as chief of staff to theSecretary of Defense James
Mattis in the first Trumpadministration.
So Kevin spent two years veryclose to the pulse of what was
happening in the White House.
(03:08):
I think you told me the otherday that you probably went to
the briefings in the in the OvalOffice daily.
Since then, he's advised majorprivate sector organizations on
national security and supplychain risk.
He's on a number of differentboards, including the Airbus
U.S.
Space and Defense Board ofDirectors.
So, Kev, great to have you withus.
Kevin Sweeney (03:29):
Thanks, Ted.
Great to see you.
Tom, good to meet you.
Thank you so much.
Tom Goldsby (03:33):
I have to say, if you're reading the program, I
was going to sit this one out.
And last night during thereception, you know, we had some
good conversation on that.
And then we took it to Trivia,where we continued our winning
streak thanks to Kevin's help.
This guy knows world geography,as you can imagine, right?
But uh you invited me to join.
Thank you very much for beingpart of the conversation.
(03:53):
And I'm like, okay, I'm not amilitary guy.
I think I shared with you thatI I came within a signature of
going to Navy OCS.
The recruiter actuallycompleted the application.
He's like, all you gotta do issign.
But the idea of sailing underthe polar ice caps for six
months at a time on a sub justdidn't really appeal to me.
But I'm wearing my Navy jacketand some Navy shoes uh today,
(04:15):
navy belts.
I think I'm gonna try to fit inwith you guys, try to hang with
it.
Navy lost in football lastweekend, so we're not too old.
Okay, we'll try not to dwell onthat.
But again, just tremendousexperience, and boy, we need it
right now in the world of supplychain management, just to try
to make sense of it.
Are we gonna see the other sideof this?
We are.
(04:35):
Okay, that's a good place tostart, perhaps.
How do we get there, maybe, iswhere we want to take the
conversation.
Kevin Sweeney (04:41):
So, first of all, I'm thrilled to be here and
thrilled to be in an environmentassociated with a university.
Great vibe in a room yesterday,last night you kicked off, and
then today as well.
Uh I sat in a couple of theother presenters, it was
excellent.
A couple of comments first forme.
Uh, I looked around thisaudience.
I suspect we have a number ofveterans in the audience, folks
associated with veterans.
(05:02):
Let's see, show of hands.
Yeah, I mean, it's a big deal.
And uh next week is VeteransDay, actually.
It's not about sales at afurniture store, it's about
celebrating veterans and theirfamilies.
So uh hats off and thank youfor your service as well.
Um a quick background for me,as Ted said, both Naval Academy
(05:26):
grads, I never intended to getaround the Navy past my
five-year commitment.
Back in the 80s, I will behonest, it probably wasn't a lot
of fun to be on ships in theNavy.
And uh my intent was to get outand uh in '89 and go ahead to
uh grad school.
I actually started applying MBAprograms.
UBA.
Yeah.
UBA.
And then I ended up workingwith some great folks who said,
(05:47):
hey, you know, the Navy's got agrad school out in Monterey.
You go get a degree in financeand move on.
I did.
And uh ended up going out toCalifornia for a couple years,
and I've said, yeah, I'm 10years in, I'm probably gonna get
out again.
And then all of a sudden, youknow, you just end up working
with fabulous people, greatopportunities.
So I stuck around.
And then, you know, for asurfer ship guy like myself, and
Ted was early on in his careerwhen he was in the Navy, the
(06:09):
peak of your career, you youstrive about 18, 20 years, and
if you're lucky, you've doneokay, you get selected to be a
captain of a uh destroyer.
And I was I was slated to takecommand of USS Coal, DDG67,
homeported out of uh Norfolk,Virginia.
And I was wrapping up Octoberof 2000, 25 years ago.
I'll bring that up again in asecond.
(06:29):
Wrapping up my training, I wassupposed to head overseas and
take command of the ship ondeployment in Bahrain, about
halfway through a deployment tothe Middle East.
25 years ago, three weeks ago,we had our remembrance ceremony
for coal October 12th.
They'd been attacked.
We lost 17 sailors, another 29severely injured.
Uh, coal came back 18 monthslater, rebuilt.
(06:51):
Uh so I went from havingcommand of coal, supposedly in
the middle of the Middle East,kind of a combat environment.
Never know what's going tohappen operationally.
The ship did get attacked.
It was in Yemen Harbor,refueling when it was attacked.
And my entire experience wasnot what I expect as a captain
of a ship.
For the next 22 months, I was acaptain of a ship that was
(07:12):
being rebuilt in Mississippiwhere it was originally built.
The crew was removed, and thecrew was up in Norfolk,
Virginia, and then over time westart reassigning the crew over
time, over time, over time.
And then boom, what happensnext?
11 months later, 9-11 happens.
And then we sort of acceleratedin the Navy to bring a crew, a
new crew back together.
And we left 18 months later,returned back to Norfolk,
(07:34):
Virginia, started the basiccycle of training and readiness
for a ship.
Back in those days, a DDG costabout a billion dollars, and we
rebuilt the ship at about a costof 245 million in 18 months.
Uh it was incredible.
So again, I mentioned theremembrance ceremony.
25 years later, seeing thefamilies, uh, former crew
(07:56):
members.
You know, it's just so moving.
And it's amazing the impactthat an event like that happens
on those families, but theimpact it had greater on the
Navy at large, and quitefrankly, the country, because it
wasn't realized until reallySeptember 11th that we were
under attack in a kind of aterrorist environment that those
wars carried on for another 20years.
But again, as a sea over shipwhere you're prepared for war
(08:20):
and being overseas to nowinteracting every day of a ship
being rebuilt in a shipyard.
For me personally, as thecaptain, they don't train you
for that.
They don't train you for how tosort of try to one put a ship
back together, two, interactwith your crew that just went
through the most horrific andtraumatic event of their lives
(08:41):
and losing 17 shipmates.
And then, as it turns out, forme, I think it was roughly 31
separate family units associatedwith those 17 sailors.
And as you get the note offamilies, every individual in
the family units certainly dealtwith the pain of losing their
sailor differently.
And it was just, you know, forme, again, as a young
(09:03):
41-year-old CEO, there's justno, there was no playbook.
And it's tough.
I mean, and it was sorewarding, demanding in a sense.
A great learning experience,the highest honor of my career,
quite frankly, obviously, beingthe skipper to Cole after the
attack and rebuilding andbringing the ship back.
And when we did leave, at abouta crew of 300, I think we end
up having about 29 original crewmembers on board when we sailed
(09:26):
back to Norfolk.
By the way, the ship today isat sea.
It's operating.
It has deployed, I think, fourtimes in those 20-some years,
back into the Middle East aswell, and doing great.
And the ship was in port threeweeks ago when we had
remembrance ceremony for thecrew.
So it was it was impressive asheck.
Ted Stank (09:42):
Kev, what leadership lessons did you take away from
that?
You said there's no playbook,right?
Kevin Sweeney (09:46):
No, that's that's fabulous.
You know, military, inbusiness, you know, you hear
things called black swan events,you just can't plan or prepare.
And actually you can't, exceptyou have to be, I guess, you
position yourself where ifsomething does happen that's
different, you're not formallyschooled on.
Okay, how do you deal with it?
(10:07):
And for you know, me as a CEO,as I said, one, the ship is down
in Mississippi, we're inNorfolk, the crew's in Norfolk.
Over time, there's no plan whenthe ship was going to be
completed.
9-11 happens, it's anaccelerant for the call itself
in a good way.
I was never prepared to dealwith now, you know, national,
international media, again,interacting with the family
(10:29):
members over time.
Some wanted nothing to do withthe calls, some felt very
attached to the coal, but everyunit really did deal with it
differently.
And a completely differentfocus.
Um, you're rebuilding a newcrew and you're bringing the
ship out, you're worried aboutsafety job, number one, and two,
long-term, turning the shipover to the next captain who
ultimately did deploy after Iafter I left.
(10:49):
It was incredibly alsoimpactful for my family.
Nothing is easy, and and itdoes impact families.
That's why I mentioned, youknow, for the vets in here, it's
not just the veterans, it's thefamilies.
But every day was a learningexperience.
Every day it was somethingdifferent for me professionally
as the CEO.
And every day you just had tokind of keep focused and have a
vision of where we're getting.
The coal was there to come outat a certain date.
(11:11):
We're gonna be ready to go backto sea.
Uh, we have to operate safely,we have to get back up to
Norfolk.
It was a big deal for big Navyas well as the families and the
crew of coal itself.
And today, 25 years later, it'sit's the same attitude on a
ship was fabulous.
I visited a captain on board,and the attitude is there, the
history is there, thecommitment's there, and it's
just a great feeling.
Ted Stank (11:32):
You know, one of the things I've observed, I've
certainly never been throughadversity like that, right?
But one of the things I'veobserved over time, and I think
most of you that live throughCOVID in your organizations and
in society in general, I thinkadversity like that tends to
bring out the best in people.
You know, when we all realizethat there are really high
stakes involved here, everybodyjust kind of rolls up their
(11:54):
sleeves and goes to work anddoes things.
I I've seen your companies doamazing things in the spring of
2020, summer of 2020 that yourorganization was never prepared
to do before.
And I bet you saw that in theworld.
We did.
Kevin Sweeney (12:08):
One, obviously, with the crew and the entire
support structure actually hadthe Navy as well.
You know, the Navy was dealingwith this as well as you know,
Commander Sweeney's the captainof the ship and the crew.
I will also say, and it justdoes tie into supply chain, and
the uh the ship was builtIngalls Pascagoul.
At the time was part of NorthO'Grum, and today it's part of
Huntington Ingalls.
They did a fabulous job.
(12:29):
I mean, the commitment out ofthe organization, the commitment
out of the workforce, thededication of the community
around us down there inPascagoul was fabulous.
And really a key to why we cameout on time and quite frankly,
better shape than when the shipwent in, you know, as an
operating destroyer.
Ted Stank (12:46):
Yeah.
Well, let's shift gears alittle bit.
Times are different now, right?
We've passed 9-11 and COVID'sover, and business today is
pretty mundane and boring, andthere's not a lot of disruption
going on.
Kev, you you have been at theheartbeat of national security
policy, national defense policy.
What is your take on thegeopolitical landscape today,
(13:08):
particularly vis-a-vis how itimpacts supply chain?
You're still living that.
Kevin Sweeney (13:13):
We are.
I am on three corporate boards,an industry association aboard
for microelectronics advisor toMcKinsey's airspace defense
folks.
So every day I am involved withcertainly aerospace defense
companies and a few otherthings.
I would say right now it is atime of change, and you all see
that.
And it's maybe the catalyst inthe U.S., of course, is a new
(13:34):
administration.
It's uh November now.
And how we are, and thisadministration is taking this
country, whether it's tariffsand trade policies, whether it's
national security focus, we areno kidding, focusing now on the
borders here, if you will.
We're focusing on the homeland.
Back in 2017, the first Trumpadministration while we were in
(13:55):
the Pentagon, the big shift wasleaving essentially the global
war on terror and focusing onwhat we called really major
competition of China and Russia,a focus on Asia Pacific from a
security perspective, and atransition of shift, huge
increase in the budgets for themilitary, a focus on readiness,
a lot of atrophied over time.
(14:16):
Now you fast forward, uh newadministration with the Biden
team in the middle here.
There's a refocus on homelandsecurity, uh, the borders, South
America, and the challenges areunique.
And if you're an industry, andmy perspective from being a
board member is there's a lot ofunknowns right now.
Uh the impact of the tariffissue, quite frankly, we've been
(14:36):
pretty pleased across the boardas far as costing and the
impact of what we've been doingto date.
We don't know how it's going tocarry moving forward.
The impact of the budget, theU.S.
budget, here we are, day 36.
New record, by the way.
Yeah.
Uh of a budget uh problem and agovernment shutdown and the
impacts it has every day, notjust to the military, which the
(14:58):
focus in, but it's to everybodyin the federal government.
Uh, whether you're furloughed,you're worried about being
furloughed, you're not beingpaid, the impact to your family,
your impact to planning, but italso impacts industry.
Everybody's in, at least whatwe see strategically, it's a
pause.
I think Friday, the Secretaryof War, Pete Hexelf is going to
be meeting with key industryleaders and kind of roll out
some massive changes to federalacquisition, you know, for
(15:21):
defense and the Department ofWar.
We'll see how that plays out.
At the same time, thecompetition doesn't stop
overseas.
And the supply chain concernsthat we have, particularly, I'll
tell you one at Airbus andothers, we're all competing.
We're building satellites rightnow, we're competing with many
companies for the same limitedassets available in the supply
(15:42):
chain.
And we're also focusing on whatwe call a shored supply chain
because we can't have anythingfail when it's up in space or
elsewhere long term.
Uh I would just say, andconcurrently, what's happening
in Europe, all right?
There's stress on the EU,there's stress on NATO, we have
two wars going on, Ukraine,Russia, you got a war down.
You know, still, yeah, we maybe in a pause right now.
(16:04):
We'll see how it plays out.
Israel, Hamas.
That is all impacting kind ofwhere does the defense industry
at least what's going on?
You know, munition demand goingway up.
We know that's happening.
Uh, there's a focus onshipbuilding out of the
president and the signed back inApril.
Where is that gonna take uslong term?
And really, what's gonna happenwith the budget in the next two
(16:24):
years?
Ted Stank (16:25):
So, where do you see?
Do you have a crystal ball youcan kind of tell us?
I mean, obviously notspecifically, but over the next
couple of years.
That's a great question.
Kevin Sweeney (16:32):
I do see this.
We learned a few things at thetwo current wars, particularly
Ukraine-Russia war here.
All the modeling we had in themilitary for years about
consumption of weapons haschanged.
We realize and appreciate thatthe the usage of weapons in
today's uh environment uh isgonna go like this.
Uh you see what's happening atsea with the Navy in particular
(16:52):
in the Red Sea.
We're shooting down drones withmulti-million dollar missiles,
because that's what we haveright now.
So the cost equation is out ofwhack, but also the quantities
and an inventory is out ofwhack.
And so there will be acontinuous focus on one,
building up munitions, two, afocus on new technology,
hypersonics, autonomy, you know,really taking it beyond just
(17:14):
drones, but obviously at sea,underwater, and the larger
drones that we call basicallycollaborative combat air that
will start coordinating,operating with manned jets as
well.
So I the demands are not goingto weigh because the threat is
not going away.
That's not a good news story,but it's a fact.
Ted Stank (17:31):
Talk about that.
Talk about, again, we all livein this global world, we all
have suppliers that are all overthe globe.
What do you see coming down thepipe geopolitically?
Is there going to be anystabilization out of Europe?
Kevin Sweeney (17:42):
You know, I think Europe, I do think, is waking
up to the fact that they aregonna be much more responsible
for their own national security.
Uh NATO is still there.
NATO has been a blanket, but itreally has been a blanket that
the the U.S.
has kind of paid the bill forfor many, many years.
And the focus on NATO that theTrump administration has done
the first go-around, the secondgo-around, isn't new, as a
(18:03):
matter of fact.
I mean, we've been talkingabout it for many, many, many
years, but really had beenlittle action to kind of uh be
the catalyst for investment outof the NATO countries, throw in
the EU what is happening inEurope now.
They realize that they have tostep up financially.
And that means a big shift intheir budgets.
And then on the other side, inAsia Pacific, every day that
(18:24):
goes by, and and I sat in herethis morning to listen to Mitch,
I'll make a comment, uh buildoff of something he commented
about.
But the Chinese, every day,every day, they are just growing
regionally, regionally, andthen ultimately their goal, and
it's no surprise, this isnothing hidden, is to ultimately
be a global power and have athe global system sort of
underneath their standards andtheir rules.
(18:46):
And I think a little bit ofwhat we're doing in South
America is actually tied to thatright now as well.
So the stresses are there.
The question is, are wecommitted?
Are we positioned one from thesupply chain, two from things
like rare earth minerals?
That's a piece of the supplychain.
There is a focus of that rightnow.
But also just the manufacturingcapacity here in the US.
I look at it from uh you knowmicroelectronics, electronics
(19:09):
perspective that I'm involvedin, and we just don't have the
capacity, nor do we have theability to turn around very,
very quickly and to build out ifsomething goes wrong in Asia
Pacific or elsewhere for thatmatter.
Tom Goldsby (19:21):
And so, what is your thought then in terms of
building those capabilities?
I was hoping you all mightdistinguish ships versus boats
for me, but let's talk aboutships that you all use.
Do we absolutely have to havethat shipbuilding capacity here?
Do we need to be able to buildthese vital pieces of equipment?
Kevin Sweeney (19:37):
Well, I think it's twofold on shipbuilding.
It's both kind of commercialside as well as the military
side.
It has completely atrophied, asyou know.
I mean, essentially theshipbuilding commercial side of
the U.S.
is focused on essentiallyoffshore coastal vessels going
out to support, you know, localtrade movement, going out to
support oil rigs, uh, offshorewind support, things like that,
(19:59):
barges up and down theMississippi, you name it.
And we have just over the yearscommercial large ships built
overseas.
We do a few here.
Jones Act is a piece of that.
I don't think we want to getinto Jones Act, but but on the
military side, we also need toexpand capacity, which again,
you can't do this overnight.
And if you see the thrust is toencourage outside investing, we
(20:20):
have South Koreans right nowinvesting in a Philadelphia
shipyard.
We have commitments uh fromother shipbuilding companies
around the world.
We just, I think, made anagreement with a Finnish company
uh to build four newicebreakers for the Coast Guard.
Building out that capacitytakes years and years and years,
and it takes a lot of capex,quite frankly.
And so I think theadministration also looking for
(20:42):
third-party private equityinvestment, co-investment, if
you will, into our needs here inthe U.S.
is pretty significant.
Yeah.
Tom Goldsby (20:51):
So I'm curious, you serve on some boards, advisory
capacity.
Given your vast experience,given your perspective, I'm
curious what do those boards,what do those corporate leaders
look to you uh to provide uhconsent and advice?
Kevin Sweeney (21:08):
No, I think uh particularly being in the
airspace and defense industry,having people I always look at
it from a corporate boardperspective as well as from the
C-suite, you want to havecomplementary experiences and
expertise.
And I think what folks like Ibring, at least to a corporate
board in particular, is theexpertise of experience.
Kind of you were, I was an enduser of many of the products
(21:28):
that are being built, if youwill, and being consumed, if you
will.
So that's one piece.
Two, you understand how thegovernment works, you understand
how the federal governmentacquisition process works, you
understand what we call theinteragency, and of course, we
all have great relationships,you know, inside the government,
outside of government.
So I think there's a broad gapthat we help fill, quite
(21:49):
frankly.
And of course, you have thesame absolutely fiduciary
responsibility as any otherboard member, but we also bring
leadership, we bring just adifferent set of experiences and
background that folks who comeup through on the commercial
side just don't have.
Yeah.
At a senior level at least.
Ted Stank (22:06):
Hey Kev, let's talk about China for a while.
Tom and I follow this futuristnamed Peter Zion.
Uh, I think you know, we talkedabout StratFour before, right?
Peter Zion came out of thatStratFour family.
And he's been saying for yearsthat in the not too distant
future, China is gonna spinapart mainly because of their
demographic situation,population shrinking at a
(22:26):
dramatic rate.
You don't see that a lot inpolicy.
I mean, I think that most ofour policy initiatives look at
China continuing to be thispower, this global competitor,
if you will, strategically.
Do you give any credence to thenotion that China is gonna have
to confront in the very nearfuture this demographic crisis
and might spin apart and whatwould happen if?
Kevin Sweeney (22:49):
Yeah.
Uh I give little credence,except maybe from a temporal
perspective.
Short-term versus long term, insort of our society, our
perspective, I think is a lotdifferent than in certainly the
culture of China.
Uh they are taking a very,very, very long view.
They're patient yet persistent,if you will.
I look at what happened uh andis happening today still in Hong
(23:12):
Kong.
The focus on Taiwan is real.
It's only a matter of time.
And I don't think it has to beor will be necessarily kinetic.
I think the last thing theywant to do is destroy the uh,
you know, an economy that theywant.
26 million plus you know,ethnic Chinese that are in
Taiwan.
It is a democracy.
I think here in this country,unfortunately, there's a lack of
(23:32):
knowledge right now.
Isn't it democracy?
Why would we get involved tothe point of military action,
say, lose soldiers or ailmen orsailors, have a aircraft shot
out of the sky, potential shipspeeds.
I mean, how do you connect thedots to the American public
right now is a concern there aswell.
But I think uh when you are acommunist society and you're
controlled by the CommunistParty, they have many advantages
(23:55):
that we do not have in thiscountry as a democratic society.
Everything from the free pressto freedom of choice.
Their industry is supplementedtwo ways, right?
It's one by the government,two, uh, they're pretty damn
good at stealing you knowintellectual property from the
rest of the world.
You know, they don't have toinvest uh in technology.
You know, Mesh made a commentthis morning about the advantage
uh that we have in intechnology is key if we do end
(24:18):
up having some kind of uhconflict with the Chinese.
It's that, because we're notgoing to outbuild them right
now, but more importantly, quitefrankly, is the fact that they
don't have the experiences thatwe have operationally.
Our military, their experience,they can build aircraft
carriers today that replicateus.
They're building uh thecapabilities to operate like we
(24:38):
do, but they don't have ahundred years of operating off
an aircraft carrier around theworld.
They don't have thoseexperiences, and you can't steal
that.
You can't replicate that bystealing intellectual property.
But over time they willcontinue to get better, but
they're not word tested.
And it's a regime in a sensethat subordinates and loan they
(24:58):
don't empower anybody to makedecisions.
Everything is central control,just like the Russian, quite
frankly.
A different model, but but thesame concept.
The key to our success andWestern militaries in general is
we empower everyone in thechain of command, if you will,
to make decisions and do what'sright.
The quality of our training isworld class.
That's where they still lack.
But I think the timeline is wejust have a different view, I
(25:21):
think, than their culture.
Ted Stank (25:23):
That's a really interesting point.
Our perspective is uh thinkabout how our public
corporations run, right?
Every quarter is what you know,quarterly, quarterly earnings,
etc.
Yeah, interesting point.
Great point here, by the way.
Since we are doing this podcastlive, we are open to QA.
Keeps coming up with the uhwith the barcode up there if you
want to capture that and putquestions.
(25:43):
We've got a couple of goodquestions here.
Any chance we could touch onthe Belt and Road initiative?
Kevin Sweeney (25:48):
We can.
I mean, uh hopefully mostpeople know what it is, broadly
speaking.
We've been dealing with theChinese presence around the
world for years, and this is thetheir sort of their trade
initiative to buildrelationships with countries
around the world.
Essentially, in many areas theythey'll bring money, but really
what they do is they'll bring alittle money, they'll bring a
Chinese workforce, and they'llupdate or rebuild a port or a
(26:10):
facility, and then ultimatelythey take control of it and
they'll build out bases andthings like this.
You know, third world countriesmostly who quite frankly need a
boost uh economically.
In some ways, it's notbrilliant, but it makes sense.
How do you spread yourinfluence around the world?
Well, when you have the sort ofthe economic keys, it's very,
very helpful.
Ted Stank (26:29):
Some countries have pushed back on it pretty much.
They have, because at the endof the day, there's no real way.
Kevin Sweeney (26:34):
There's no jobs, there's debt, and basically
you're turning over assets tothe Chinese government at the
end of the day.
Correct.
Yeah.
But they're out there, whetherit's in Africa, South America,
in Asia, it's there.
Ted Stank (26:45):
I'm gonna paraphrase this next question a little bit.
It's about the amount of moneywe spend on defense, and can we
shift that to manufacturing?
I'm gonna talk about thepotential for a national
industrial policy, particularlyfor industries that are critical
to national defense.
Kevin Sweeney (27:00):
There's a huge focus, and it started really, I
would say, again, back in 2017in a good way, only industrial
base.
It has dithered away, whetherit's building ships, aircraft,
new technology.
The percentage of GDP that, andI I don't have the numbers, I
they're easy to find though,that the military you know
controls, you know, just goingback 20 years, is just we're
(27:22):
down to what 3% maybe, whateverthe number is, from a peak of
10, 11, 12 percent.
Right.
Mitch mentioned this morning.
There's little money going inRE.
There is little money to gointo the broader military, was
the co-investor with industryback in the 60s in particular,
50s, 60s, and technology spunout of that.
Today it's the exact opposite,and we're trying to rectify
(27:42):
that.
Ted Stank (27:43):
Well, there's an urgency in the 60s, right?
It was Cold War.
Yeah.
I mean, NASA, right?
Why do we put so much money andgo to the moon in what, nine
years from when President oreight years from when President
Kennedy said we were gettingthere?
And I think people who didn'tlive through it don't realize
that that was a militaryendeavor.
It wasn't about puttingsomebody on the moon, it was a
military endeavor.
Kevin Sweeney (28:02):
And most people in this, I mean, I looked at the
the list of attendees here, ifyou will, and whether you're
directly involved in uhsupporting anything in the
federal government, quitefrankly, but whether it's the
military in general, if you area part of the supply chain, if
you are prime, you're tier one,tier two, or there's a dotted
line in the logistics world,everything that we utilize has
(28:22):
to be moved somehow, some way,across this country and
overseas, whether it's, youknow, again, trucks and then
planes and ships, food.
We don't have another source ofuh stuff, if you will, in the
military.
So everybody in some ways ispart of that supply chain,
incredibly vital as well.
Tom Goldsby (28:38):
Something we touched on earlier, day 36, and
I'm gonna call out ScottDeGroot.
He uh co-hosted uh the last uhpodcast uh 33 days ago, and we
were trying to forecast how longthe government shutdown was
gonna last.
And I think we came down likeseven to ten days, way overshot
that.
Hopefully there will be somebreak.
(28:58):
But you've worked with thepeople and the personalities
that we're talking about here.
I'm not gonna ask you for aspecific number, but can you
maybe talk a little bit abouthow and why maybe we should care
about that?
I mean, how are organizationsand people affected by the ship?
Kevin Sweeney (29:13):
I I think, again, from your corporate perspective
in particular, I mean, prettysoon what's gonna happen, and I
say soon, like within a week orso, the impact to not just the
military, but it's across theentire federal workforce.
Whether they are gonna be paidor not paid, they get furload,
more and more organizations arejust kind of stopped working,
(29:34):
quite frankly.
And you know, we have what theyalways call the critical
organizations that no matterwhat, but you're seeing what
happened in air trafficcontrollers, and now you see the
Secretary of Transportationsaying by next week the impact
isn't going to be just a fewfolks taking vacation, it's
gonna be pretty dramatic.
That's one visible piece.
But you know, when you'reinside sort of the Washington
environment and you sort of seehow the government functions, it
(29:56):
is not functioning right now,and I think until the pressure.
Build on either party or bothparties to the point where this
is a no-win.
And ultimately, my guess is andit'll be the president stepping
in at some point and movingthis along, and we'll figure out
you know what went wrong andmore importantly, what's going
to change moving forward here.
We have $1,25 billion comingout of there out of the great
(30:20):
big bill for particularly fordefense that is now stalled.
That money is earmarked, butyet it's stalled out.
We're not starting newprograms.
I mean, the impact across theboard when you're one in a
continued resolution, but evenworse when you're in a shutdown
is nothing new is happening.
You sort of keep the lights onas best you can and continue to
do what you do every day thebest you can.
(30:41):
But as we move forward, newtechnology, new programs, new
things, nothing's being funded.
So that's tough.
It's tough.
My guess inside people tellingme hopefully this will be done
by Thanksgiving.
That's quite a few more weeks.
Ted Stank (30:54):
We'll see what happens.
Yeah.
Hopefully, all of you who areflying are able to get home
tomorrow or get wherever you'regoing.
Tom Goldsby (31:01):
Beautiful time to be here on Rocky Top, though.
It is.
We'll keep the lights on here.
Hey, Ted, do you think we oughtto take another question from
the case?
Ted Stank (31:10):
Yeah, let's let's do let's let's shift back to the
leadership side.
Uh there's a question heresaying, what leadership
principles have influenced yoursuccess and growth in the Navy
and the business world that youwould share with with a
merchant.
Kevin Sweeney (31:22):
You know, if I knew some of the things I think
I know now through experience, Iprobably would have been a
little better when I was youngerin a sense.
I would say, and this maysurprise some folks, but
hopefully not, the mostimportant aspect of leadership,
and by the way, I for fun lastnight I went, I don't know if
it's Google or AI or whatever,there's like right now 57,000
(31:42):
plus books in the Amazon systemthat talk about leadership.
So you can't get this onewrong, right?
But in reality, it's this it'steamwork, and it's building
teams that trust each other andwork together at any level, any
size unit, from a group, a squadof Marines to a DDG ship of 300
to a strike group of 8,000sailors and Marines to the
(32:03):
Department of Defense.
It's all about teamwork.
I don't care, you can have thesmartest supply chain folks, the
best engineers, the whatevers.
But if you can't build a team,work together for a common goal,
and take that organization,whether it's a company or a
military organization forward,you're gonna fail.
You're gonna fail.
And people are not gonna wantto be around that kind of
(32:24):
organization and they're gonnawalk.
The military is still anall-volunteer force.
And I look at from the industryperspective, and it's funny,
you know, people again back toyou know having a retired senior
military guy on a board, like,oh, people just and when we were
in the Pentagon.
Well, you know, just giveorders and people, it's it's a
joke.
There there is no order given.
(32:45):
There's guidance, hopefully,there is articulation with
vision and goals, but you'redealing with people, and you
have to have good relationshipswith all your key stakeholders.
And that's the only way anorganization in my mind is going
to succeed.
You know, when we were youngJOs, I don't think that was our
attitude or our experiences.
But now JO is a junior officerwhen we first got commissioned
(33:05):
out that out of school.
Uh, but it's without question,that is the number one takeaway
I have uh today.
Ted Stank (33:10):
And something else you you mentioned earlier, which
is empowerment.
I think one of the greatestthings I took out of my
leadership experience in theNavy is that I was a 24-year-old
ensign responsible for supercomplex fire control computer
systems and radars and stuff.
And I had no training or basisother than the very highest
(33:30):
conceptual level of it.
One of my sailors was um masterof science in electrical
engineering.
Intro & Outro (33:37):
Yeah.
Ted Stank (33:37):
And I said, How come you don't want to be an officer?
And he's like, I don't want allthat BS that you guys have to
deal with.
I just want to work on myelectric, you know, on my
computer system.
And I think the lesson for allof us is that we have incredible
talent, incredibly talentedpeople coming to work for us.
And I think our job as leadersis to empower them and make them
(33:58):
the best they can be.
I am always shocked at leaderswho feel threatened by people on
their team succeeding.
It's like empower them, doeverything you can for their
success, and then sit back andbask in the light of their
success, right?
It's not a competition here.
Kevin Sweeney (34:15):
And when those individuals are 10, 15, 20 years
younger than you are as well.
You know, age brings a littlebit of experience and wisdom,
but there are young superstarsthat, again, back to
empowerment, enablement,support, mentorship.
If there's one other thing I'llbring back, I think one of the
biggest takeaways I've hadprofessionally from day one is
(34:36):
the power of mentorship, both toyou as a mentoree and you as a
mentor to folks, both formallyand informally.
A lot of organizations,companies, you have a formal HR
process, and you have you knowstrategies and goals for the
year, you review a court,whatever.
That's a piece of it, importantpiece.
The other piece is, andparticularly for the students
(34:57):
here who are getting ready to goout into the professional
world, you've got to seek outover time folks for guidance
perspective that'snon-judgmental, but they
understand you, your background,the sort of the industry or
subsector you're in, so they cangive you quality advice.
And this hopefully is alifelong experience.
I mean, I still interact withmy mentors who who are long,
(35:17):
long retired, but are full ofwisdom.
And one of the most enjoyablethings I do professionally, both
in the corporate world as wellas you know, former military and
and folks uh from the civilianside is mentoring, connecting,
enabling, uh, giving themanother, you know, another ear
to listen to when they're makinga career decision.
And trying to balance, by theway, and one of the toughest
balances I think we all canstill have is you know career
(35:39):
demands and uh family demands.
You know, you there's got to bea balance here.
Ted Stank (35:43):
You know, we talk a lot about AI and how is AI
impacting our lives.
And I would say uh AI has thepromise of doing crazy things
later on, right?
But initially, right now, for20 bucks a month, you can get
Chat GPT.
And so many of those mundane,boring administrative jobs that
you're doing now that take youaway from spending time with
(36:04):
your people can be done by thatAI tool.
Use that AI tool to get allthis mundane, boring stuff that
you have to do every day, and iskeeping you away from your main
job, which is building theseteams and empowering your
people, and get out and spendmore time in your space with
your people.
unknown (36:20):
Yeah.
Kevin Sweeney (36:21):
One of the most impactful things I ever watched,
a couple years back, um, someof you age-wise, remember Jack
Welchek, uh, ran GE for how manyyears and probably the most
successful you know businessleader at the time.
And he was being interviewed upat Fairfield University up in
Connecticut, and it was a greatdiscussion, and but it kind of
turned negative of a bunch ofquestions at the time.
(36:42):
The GE was being kicked in hisshins a little bit about the
long-term pollution in HudsonRiver and what they're doing
about it.
And he finally turned and justsaid the impression was the
feeling he was getting likesomehow business is bad.
And and big companies are bad.
Big companies are made ofeverybody sitting in this room.
It's about you, your families,it's jobs, it's building and
creating wealth and a valuesystem.
(37:03):
And he was very frustrated bythat.
And the second piece, on theleadership piece, he was asked,
and he said, you know, if Idon't spend 80% of my time with
my subordinates and developingmy subordinates, I'm a failure.
20% of time doing the mundane,the paperwork, what you have to
do sometimes as a leader, butyou got to spend your time with
people.
Back to you know, theimportance of relationships and
(37:24):
people and developing yoursubordinates for the future.
Ted Stank (37:27):
And I think a lot of folks here are challenged by the
fact that we've had reductionin force over the years, right?
So you're now probably doingthe job that three other people
might have been doing 20 yearsago or 15 years ago.
And I think that takes us awayfrom spending the time with our
people, right?
Because you got all thispaperwork you got to do, and
it's like, geez, it's fiveo'clock, I gotta get home to
(37:47):
Sally's soccer game, but I stillhave all these reports I have
to do.
Kevin Sweeney (37:51):
You know, and there and be careful leadership
that through paperwork in asense.
A lot of folks are comfortabledoing that instead of being with
people, you know, and dealingwith issues and conflicts and
everything else that happens.
And and I guess the secondpiece is we've done this in
different organizationsthroughout my career,
particularly in the military.
You know what?
You just what happens nextmonth?
You don't send that report in.
Nobody cares, right?
(38:12):
Nobody gets feedback.
I guess it wasn't necessary.
But it's been done for 20 yearsand everybody has to do it,
right?
So anyway, I mean there's waysto do it, but certainly, you
know, taking advantage oftechnology, AI, and other things
will make that a little moreeffective.
Ted Stank (38:23):
I had a captain one time who I absolutely adored,
who had a three-drawer system.
And everything that would comein, he would decide whether it
was an A that this is thealligator that's gonna bite me
today, we've got to take care ofit.
The B was the alligator thatmight bite me tomorrow, and
we'll worry about that tomorrow.
And the C is there might be analligator out there, and he
would put stuff in the C drawer,and he said probably 80% of the
(38:46):
things he put in the C drawernever came up again.
Never came up again.
Tom Goldsby (38:50):
Hey Kevin, do you mind if we jump into another
audience question?
I'm gonna kind of paraphrase afew of these.
Uh just talking about thefuture of conflict, right?
And you alluded to some uhdemonstrative change we're
seeing, the Ukraine-Russianconflict where low-cost drones
are are being employed.
And I I guess there's maybesome question is in terms of our
you know military system ofbuilding, you know, tanks,
(39:13):
ships.
Yep.
You know, we haven't touched oncyber, for instance, here,
right?
So where are maybe our biggestthreats, do you think, into the
future and how do we prepare toaddress those?
Kevin Sweeney (39:22):
Yeah, I think space and cyber are the two
areas that we are probably nolonger at the competitive
advantage we had in prior years,particularly with China.
And those are so important andthey're so persistent, they are
one, they are manpower intensiveto a degree, and they're also
technology intensive.
But you know, the advantage ofa of a country like China has is
(39:44):
they take what we call a wholegovernment approach to
everything.
I mean, every company has aresponsibility in China to
support the military in some wayor fashion.
Technology, intelligence, uh,et cetera, et cetera.
So for us to realize, andparticularly in the cyber
domain, it's not just protectingyour IT systems, it's
protecting what's most valuable,your intellectual property.
(40:05):
And you know, ultimately notbrought down to your knees when
something goes wrong.
I mean, I've been involved in acompany that went through a
ransomware attack, and we werebrought to our knees for about
10 days.
I mean, everything just stoppedbuilding, stopped working on
the line.
We lost proprietaryinformation, we lost data on our
on our people.
We couldn't send out purchaseorders and we couldn't send out
(40:26):
billing, and all the things thatyou do, you take for granted.
If you can do that to anaerospace and defense company,
think more broadly to criticalinfrastructure and things like
that.
And we're talking about thatevery day now, uh, but it does
take investment.
It takes investment, privatesector investment, and takes
obviously investment from thegovernment as well.
Big vulnerabilities, though,without question.
Ted Stank (40:46):
Pottery shot, Kev, one piece of advice.
Remember, I told them theirchallenge was they had to come
home with one actionable idea.
What would your parting shot tothis group be about what uh a
takeaway?
Kevin Sweeney (40:57):
Two things.
I'll go back to my commentabout the power of mentorship,
honestly, both sides of thecoin, mentor, mentoring.
And I think the other thing isprobably one other thing that
I've certainly appreciated overmy career now is you gotta
listen.
You gotta listen to people.
Again, whether it's a juniorindividual in your organization
or the old guy in the cornerwho's seen this 40 years ago,
(41:18):
you gotta listen and engagepeople and not avoid that.
I mean, there's uh I justlistening to me, and really
listening, not just hearing, butlistening to me is probably the
most impactful tool that wehave, and I think certainly
early career days in themilitary, um the perceptions is
it's it's a very directiveorganization.
(41:38):
Well, it is, and you'll be afailure if it if it's you
maintains that way.
So that's my two thoughtstoday.
Perfect.
Thank you.
Tom Goldsby (41:46):
Nod is just a great way to kick off season four of
the podcast, right here in oursupply chain forum.
Admiral, thank you so much foryour service for your time, your
commitment.
We really appreciate it.
Intro & Outro (42:01):
Thanks for listening to Tennessee on supply
chain management.
Be sure to subscribe on yourfavorite podcast platform for
more conversations with theleaders framing the path for
practitioners, scholars, andstudents.
Have a question or idea?
We'd love to hear from you atgsci at utk.edu.
Until next time, listeners.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com