But when I find out that somebody has achieved a high rank, it instantly tells me certain things about them: (A), they have a great deal of managerial experience; (B), they have held jobs with a great deal of responsibility (often in charge of hundreds if not thousands of people, and/or responsible for budgets in the hundreds of millions); (C), they know how to make decisions.
Can you really not conceive of a situation where it MIGHT be helpful to know things like that right off the bat?
According to Debretts, in the UK, in the Army only officers of the rank of Captain or above may do so; in the Navy it’s Lieutenant Commander and above.
I would agree with you. But in the example I provided earlier, we had a guy who was a CPO. Now, I have a lot of respect for anyone who achieves any military rank at all, especially one that requires administrative duties, but I simply don’t put that in the same category as, say, a full-bird colonel who retired from the Army.
Plus, in our business, having been a CPO in the USCG was completely irrelevant to the services we provided.
I find pretentious signatures to be really amusing. I don’t know if education is worse than other fields, but it can get pretty bad: people put 5-line sigs listing a bunch of irrelevant stuff on in-house emails. And don’t get me started on assistant principals/principals who put “M.Ed” after their name. It’s a requirement for the job, so it’s totally redundant, and it seems about as meaningful as putting “B.A” after your name.
I don’t use a default sig at all: when I’m emailing someone whom I don’t know, I include whatever responsibilities/information I think might be useful. If I am emailing people who do know me, I figure if I need to remind them of my “titles”, then those titles don’t really mean much, do they?
Agreed, outside of purely professional correspondence and interractions (where the rank, title or qualification may be significant) I find such things pretentious.
“it’s* Doctor* x actually!” Is it really? I couldn’t give a shit but you’ve just given me a huge clue as to the sort of person you are. It can be fun to ask them for advice on a nasty rash and then when they tell you they aren’t a medical doctor say “oh! not a real doctor then?”
That’s nonsense. I and most of my colleagues don’t use titles (Dr., Prof.) anywhere not relevant to their positions. When I send a letter of recommendation for a student, I always signed it
My Name
XYZ Professor of Pure Mathematics
But when I was a member of our local school board representing elementary schools, I was careful to insist that I be referred to as Mr. Name. It is true that my opposite number representing high schools, who was a professor of Physics insisted on being call Dr. X, but he explained to me that he sweated blood to get that degree. FWIW, I didn’t sweat blood.
I view it as poor form. Of the hand full of times I’ve seen it done, it was done in poor taste, or in a way completely inapplicable to the conversation at hand–more for self-aggrandizement or when someone needed to lean on pedigree more than experience/knowledge. As mentioned before upthread, it’s rarely relevant to a professional civilian conversation at hand. Nobody cares what rank you were (half of the civilians here don’t understand the difference between a Corporal and a Colonel anyway), but they do care what skillsets you bring to the table.
Those that have identified them as Adm. Snootybritches USN (ret) usually get the appropriate ignoring until they get down to brass tacks and express whatever they want to express. It’s not about rank or who you were, it’s about what you know now, and how you can network with others to get the job done.
Hell, PhDs are a dime-a-dozen here, but you wouldn’t know it from talking to “Joe,” “Mike,” or “Brad.”
I only put RN after my name when signing work related documents or, here on the Dope, when answering questions in my area of expertise. A shortcut reference to my bona fides, if you will. Never in social situations or on legal documents outside of work.
I can think of many types of prior experience that might suggest such qualities/experience. I see no reason why military rank is sufficiently different/special that it should be listed in non-military contexts.
I presume/hope that anyone who is selected for a college president would have the types of qualities you suggest. And if I want to find about about them, I could check their CV.
Moreover, listing of military rank suggests to me things that might NOT be desirable. Such as someone who is not used to non-military chains of command and civilian workplace dynamics. And, as I suggested before, it impresses me as someone desiring some positive/preferential opinion based on their prior experience. Don’t tell me what you did in the past; show me what you can do now. To me it is little different than if someone included in their sig block a parenthetical (Former CEO of Fortune 500 Company). Or (Married for 30+ years and parent of 3 well adjusted, self sufficient adults).
The fact that ex-military CAN list their retired rank does not mean they HAVE to. IMO, that someone chooses to does not convey entirely positive connotations.
Seems to me that using your retired rank is looking backward and that you’re implying that your best days are behind you. You should be emphasizing what you are or what you’re trying to be, not what you were years ago.
