Take the rank off: Why authority isn’t worn on your chest

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Ken Falke, a 21-year veteran of the U.S. Navy Special Operations Explosive Ordnance Disposal community, is the founder of four companies, two for-profits and two nonprofits. He is currently the chairman of Boulder Crest Foundation, an organization focused on the teachings of posttraumatic growth. He is also the co-author of “Struggle Well: Thriving in the Aftermath of Trauma” and the author of “Lead Well: 10 Steps to Successful and Sustainable Leadership.”

While attending the U.S. Navy Senior Enlisted Academy in 1999, I wrote a point paper arguing that, in certain roles, visible rank can undermine rather than reinforce authority. Decades later, that idea has resurfaced. Recent decisions to remove rank insignia from chaplains suggest progress — but the change doesn’t go far enough.

The power of a uniform lies in clarity. Rank insignia instantly communicates who leads, who follows, and how decisions flow. In combat, that clarity is essential. It prevents confusion and sustains cohesion under pressure. But not every role in the military is about command. Some are about connection. In those spaces, rank is a barrier for many.

Chaplains are the clearest example. Chaplains do not command troops; they counsel them. They show up in the quiet aftermath — after missions, in moments of grief, in private struggles that rarely surface in formation. For a junior service member wrestling with fear, loss or doubt, the visible markers of rank can create distance. Bars and oak leaves, however unintentionally, signal hierarchy in a moment that calls for humanity.

Removing those symbols is not about diminishing authority. It is about redefining it. In these roles, authority has never truly come from rank — it comes from trust. And trust is built through openness, not hierarchy.

That logic should extend beyond chaplains. Military doctors and lawyers operate in the same space of vulnerability and confidentiality, yet they remain bound to visible rank structures that can complicate their effectiveness.

Consider a young private sitting with a military doctor. The issue may be physical, but it is often more than that — mental health concerns, substance use, or anxiety about remaining fit for duty. When the physician wears the rank of major or lieutenant colonel, the interaction carries unintended weight. The patient may see not just a caregiver, but an authority figure tied to evaluation and consequence. That perception can lead to hesitation, incomplete disclosure, or avoidance of care altogether. In that moment, rank undermines the mission.

The same dynamic exists in military legal services. A service member seeking counsel must believe the conversation is confidential, impartial, and free from command influence. Yet visible rank can blur that perception. It can make the lawyer appear less like an advocate and more like a representative of the system the service member may already distrust. Even if that perception is inaccurate, it still shapes behavior — and limits candor.

In all three roles — chaplains, doctors and lawyers — the mission is not to direct operations but to support people in their most vulnerable moments. Effectiveness depends on approachability. And approachability is fundamentally at odds with visible hierarchy.

Critics will argue that rank is essential to discipline and order. They are right — in operational contexts. On the battlefield and within the chain of command, rank is indispensable. But we should be precise about where it adds value. A surgeon does not need insignia to perform a life-saving procedure. A lawyer does not rely on rank to give sound legal advice. A chaplain does not require visible authority to provide spiritual care. Their credibility comes from expertise, ethics and empathy — not from what is pinned to their chest.

Removing rank insignia in these contexts could strengthen the force as a whole. When service members feel safe seeking help — when they trust they can speak honestly without fear of judgment or career impact — they are more likely to address problems early. That leads to better outcomes: improved readiness, strength, and fewer crises.

There is also a broader cultural message in this shift. Allowing certain roles to step outside traditional hierarchy acknowledges that leadership is not one-dimensional. Influence does not always flow from command; it often comes from listening, from presence, from trust earned rather than authority imposed.

This is not a radical departure from military values. It is a return to fundamentals. The military exists to accomplish missions, but it does so through people. And people require more than structure — they require trust and connection to perform at their best.

If removing rank insignia makes it easier for a service member to walk into a chaplain’s office, to be honest with a doctor, or to confide in a lawyer, then it is more than a symbolic change. It is a practical one.

Authority has never been defined by what you wear. It is defined by how you serve those who depend on you.