Via MindSpring

“I was trained for [a different class of] submarine. My guys were trained to do what they were told. That’s a deadly combination. We all know organizations where people just follow the leader into disastrous situations. So I got my guys together and I said, “Hey, we got a problem here.”

— MindSpring Presents: “Greatness” by David Marquet, at 0:19

---

Most organizations run on a dangerous default: a leader does all the thinking; everyone else follows.

David Marquet, a former US Navy submarine commander and author of Turn the Ship Around!, diagnosed this bluntly when he took command of an unfamiliar submarine: “I was trained for one submarine. My guys were trained to do what they were told. That’s a deadly combination.”

The solution he arrived at was straightforward:

• Give intent instead of instructions. Instead of giving direct orders, Marquet first confirms that his officers understand the mission. “What are we trying to accomplish here today?” This question gives them the opportunity to reason through the goal, share their assumptions, and propose a solution.
• Replace requests for permission with statements of intent. Instead of “Captain, request permission to submerge the ship,” his officers say, “Captain, I intend to submerge the ship.” This small change in language forces the officer to think through their proposed action. They take ownership of execution rather than blindly following orders.

Two pillars must be in place for intent-based leadership to work:

• Technical competence. The person proposing the action must have the knowledge to execute it. In the ‘submerge the ship’ example, Marquet responds: “Convince me it’s safe.” In a work setting, an equivalent response would be, “Tell me why we should take this course of action.“
• Organizational clarity. Knowing how to do something the right way is different from knowing that something is the right thing to do. The person expressing intent must understand the mission well enough to know their proposed action is the right one for the current context.

With both Technical Competence and Organizational Clarity present, leaders can move decision-making authority to where the information is. The engineer closest to the code knows whether it’s ready to ship. The salesperson working the deal knows what’s needed to close it. When authority moves to where knowledge lives, decisions are made faster (and often better!) because the people making them have the most direct information.

---

Things To Try Today

For leaders and managers:

• Identify one decision you currently approve that could be fully owned by the person closest to the information.
• Replace your next instruction with a question: “What are we trying to accomplish here, and how do you think we should get there?”
• When a team member asks for approval, ask them to explain why it’s safe and the right call before you respond.

For shifting team culture:

• Introduce “I intend to…” language to your team — in standups, Slack, or 1:1s — to signal ownership rather than permission-seeking.
• Map your team’s decisions: which ones require technical competence to delegate safely? Which ones require clearer organizational goals first?
• Have an honest conversation about what “organizational clarity” means on your team: do people know the mission well enough to make aligned decisions independently?

For personal practice:

• Notice when giving an order feels most natural: those are your highest-leverage opportunities to try the intent-based approach instead.
• When you slip back into old patterns (and yes, you will), treat it as data, not failure, then recommit.