Do Army Officers (and other service members) lie more than other people?

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:07:46 -0500

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/19/politics/army-ethics-lying-report/

Needless to say, lying is normally a bad thing. In light of the latest scandal about Army leaders lying, it would be interesting to see how they would stack up against the average American citizen.

What's your thoughts?

Army officers routinely lie and deceive, study finds - CNNPolitics.com

U.S. Army officers often resort to "evasion and deception," and everyone at the Pentagon knows it, according to a new study conducted by the U.S. Army War College.

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Feb 19 at 2015 4:14 PM

Capt Richard I P. — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:14:45 -0500

Haven't repeated studies found military officers to be the most trusted professionals time and again?

Response by COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM made Feb 19 at 2015 4:14 PM

COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:14:59 -0500

- Very disappointing to read the article.
- Very interested in reading the study itself.
- Initial thought was that the study was conducted by a non governmental agency with a bone to pick against the Army. After seeing that the study was conducted by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute and by a former Army officer, hard to discount the study based upon that premise.
- Article does not state the next step (what does the Army do about this). Hopefully the study does.

Response by MAJ(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 4:33 PM

MAJ(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:33:00 -0500

It should read, "HUMANS resort to evasion...."

It's human nature to lie. For better or worst. I'm not excusing it, but I'm not lumping myself into that article. It's simply one article.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 4:33 PM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:33:29 -0500

LTC Private RallyPoint Member. I read the original report. It is entirely inconsistent with what I know of my fellow officers . . . both past and present. The author's report is not a broad baed study with any kind of statistical validity. The authors interviewed only a few officers . . . they don't even say how many subjects they interviewed . . . they include only a handful of quotes . . . they speculate very broadly about what those few quotes may imply . . . and they provide no statistics or statistical validity for their conclusions. The study is entirely bogus . . . and would not merit publication in any legitimate behavioral or scientific journal . . . or any news outlet with any integrity. The full report is provided below . . . for review and consideration. Warmest Regards, Sandy

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/download.cfm?q=1250

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 4:55 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:55:58 -0500

Initially I was extremely angered when a friend showed me this. Then I sat and thought about it.

The evasion of responsibility, the shirking of duties...yes...they do happen on a very small scale, but I do not believe the problem exists on as large a scale as they indicate.

[Removed by author]

I am a proud member of the United States officer corps, the United States Army, and the United States of America. We have our flaws on all levels, because we are all humans. I've been called many things, but not a liar. I don't believe in shirking duties, and I would go to the ends of the Earth to fight for a quality Soldier. I'm dedicated to mentorship and development of EVERYONE, even the "problem Soldiers", because a percentage of those will fix their behaviors if someone believes in them and doesn't slap a label on them. I want to do the best I can, because I know that my actions are indicative of all three of those groups. When I took command, my ONE goal is to leave the Army, and my unit, as a better place than it was once I left.

You don't fix a problem by calling a Soldier in front of a formation and putting them on blast in front of their entire chain. You don't fix an organization by slamming them openly. You fix them one man at a time. Start with the Privates, Specialists, and Lieutenants. Remind them as they become Sergeants, Captains, and WOCs that this is their ability to lead and train the next generation of the Army. To remember the problems and the values that were instilled in them. As they become Sergeant First Class, Lieutenant Colonels, set methods in place to begin reinforcing the values that you've been teaching, and to those that reach the lofty goals of CSMs, COLs, and GOs....set larger scale policies and endorse programs that develop leadership and foster the sense of team and family values that you've been pushing. If you hit a bad spot in the road, don't quit....PUSH!! The divorce rate in America is climbing astronomically, because marriages are considered disposable by a lot of people....divorcing the military seems to hit the same problem. People hit one toxic leader and associate that one person into the whole of the Army. You'll have people like that...but those are the times you push and remind yourself why you are fighting. Rather than ALWAYS looking up, you should be looking out and down at your peers and your subordinates to remember that this is what the future of the Army looks like. And for the love of all things Holy...don't go crying about it to CNN.
v/r,
CPT Butler

-Edited to remove the unprofessional comments on my part. The majority of the post is intact, but I was out of line to call into question the integrity of the officers that I've not met personally. Live and learn.
v/r,
CPT Butler

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Feb 19 at 2015 5:08 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 17:08:52 -0500

It's official. I'm a crotchety old man. I'm going to sound like one...

Once upon a time an officer's commission contained the word "Gentleman". It's a practice that dated back to a time when British officers were drawn from the "gentry", a class of people expected to be better educated and above base behavior such as lying. However, America never had a class system and anyone could rise above base instincts and behavior.

Military academies enforced honor codes to instill such behavior in those destined to be commissioned. Even Officer Candidate Schools (at least when I attended) attempted to teach these qualities. We had an honor code and a student committee to enforce it. (I don't know about ROTC. I suspect they were simply excused from the practice inasmuch as they were all college-educated)

However, no upbringing or acculturation can offset the deleterious effects of poor leadership.

Let me give you a couple of examples...

When I was a boy, President Truman wore a fedora (that's a hat, people). Most men wore fedoras. When Eisenhower became President, he favored the homburg and most men followed him (another kind of hat. Sheesh, must I explain everything?) Kennedy wore none. Hats were incompatible with styled hair. And, yes, hats fell out of fashion.

Now, that's a simple matter of style. But all gentlemanly behavior is a matter of style. Consider...

When the White House tapes were played for the public, we heard then President Nixon and his inner circle cursing like farmers plowing rocky fields with mules. It wasn't long before cursing became generally accepted in "polite society".

Then there was Bill Clinton who lied. His wife lied. They were infamous for lying. A joke oft told in that time has it that Bill was late coming home one night. When Chelsea awoke from a nightmare, Hillary tried to comfort him. Chelsea asked for a story and Hillary responded, "Wait until daddy comes home. He can tell us both one."

Do we seriously expect our military officers to set a higher example than their Commander-in-Chief?

Yes, lying became a fact of life in the years of the Clinton Administration and is a general feature of the culture to this day.

I have no evidence that the current Administration is any more capable of lying than the Clinton Administration. (Let's not get into the Bush Administration. His purported lies are being exposed as truth every day.)

However, I find it interesting that Hillary Clinton is on the verge of being the next President. I wonder what that will do for the art of lying?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 6:01 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 18:01:22 -0500

I hate hit pieces but this is what our media does. They like to exploit mistakes as some kind of general morass in the services. It is kind of like bashing the services for all the good press they have got since President Reagan. That and they are angry because of the Brian Williams fiasco.

Response by Capt Lance Gallardo made Feb 19 at 2015 6:06 PM

Capt Lance Gallardo — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 18:06:44 -0500

I will not lie, cheat or steal or tolerate those who do . . .Words that not all of us live by.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadet_Honor_Code

Maybe we should also examine if we are putting too many things on the backs of today's officer class. Make sure your troops attend all of the following classes, Check. Make sure you have given the following briefings to all hands. Check. And the list goes on and on. When do current officer have time to train their troops, or excercise their own leadership and initiative, when they are buried under mandatory HR/Personnel requirements? I need to read the full report, but I am sure none of this is happening in a vacuum. Some of the dishonesty may be due to the force reductions and the need to look perfect to be retained by promotion boards.

Cadet Honor Code - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Both the United States Military Academy and the United States Air Force Academy have adopted a Cadet Honor Code as a formalized statement of the minimum standard of ethics expected of cadets. Other military schools have similar codes with their own methods of administration. The United States Naval Academy has a related standard, known as the Honor Concept.

Response by SFC Collin McMillion made Feb 19 at 2015 6:13 PM

SFC Collin McMillion — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 18:13:44 -0500

Officers, like everyone else, have a job to do, but all to often they are told to get it done by whatever means possible. I don't think that excludes lying, but my direct answer is, I don't believe lie more or less than anyone else, the reason just may be different.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 9:26 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 21:26:07 -0500

This is nothing new! Sr. NCOs, Company Grade Officers and Jr. Field Grade Officers have been feeling this way for years; This is nothing new coming from officers attending CGSC. Just Last summer when I attended the Army Management Staff College's intermediate Leadership Cours (Ftl Leavenworth), we discussed this topic.

Even though there is truth (my opinion...for many years) in the Study; I also think the release and reporting of this is another smoking mirrors attempt on the part of the Administration to take public heated attention off of the White House and Congress. After all, the study is talking about "dishonesty, evasion and deception". When I hear those three words, the first thought comes immediately to my mind is our Federal Government, Congress and Administration. Not just this Administration, but those before it as well as those to come after this one is finally gone for good.

Each and everyone of us have known Officers(Sr. NCOs also) who fit the scope of the survey, however, we all know, this is (was) a minority of the officers we knew and served with. Since retiring (18 yrs ago) and assimilating into the civilian world, it's no better here! I see it in the Civilian Leadership on the Installation where I currently work. Leaders in the civilian world, federal civilians, media, DOD, all are guilty of the same thing! Only difference here is....once again the news / media only present one side, one view; and that is the view they are paid to represent. Another example of creating news, not reporting it. In fact, the second group that comes to mind before military officers and leaders, but immediately after our federal government, would be the MEDIA.

Once again, the people will fall prey to a deceptive, dishonest, and evasive MEDIA on this one. We (military) do have our guilty parties; however, definitely no worse than those I've mentioned above.

Only if this report had been presented by Brian Williams or Geraldo Rivera could this be a true issue worthy of national release and concern. What's the saying my grandparents used to say, "The Pot calling the Kettle Black!"

I do hope to get the opportunity to read the study, as I'm very interested in what it has to say! Being a Professional Soldier (retired or not) it disappoints me, that this view is present and I
hold no doubt in it's validity.

My greatest concern is how do we fix it? One method would be, do away with the double standard in punishments between enlisted and officers. Court Martial, confinement, dismissal from the Army is not unusal punishment for an enlsited Soldier; When was the last time this has happended to a senior leader; Sr. Leaders will (may) be reduced one grade or two and then allowed to retire. REALLY, WTH! Instead, let's go to, the more senior the rank, the more severe the punishment. Military justice based upon rank is not justice at all; it's an escape hatch;

You can bet General George Marshall and Omar Bradley would not allow senior leaders to slip out the door as the system now seems to do.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 9:40 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 21:40:47 -0500

Disturbing.. Lying is wrong and this should not be allowed. If you lie you are wrong.
If you lie and do not have the courage to tell the truth please quit the service. What is even more disturbing is that they are trying to defend it. When the do that they are lying to themselves.
When I caught peers in lies, I never trusted them again. I was disturbed when caught they got away with it.

Lying is a violation of UCMJ.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 10:14 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 22:14:19 -0500

I participated in the study when one of the researchers from the War College came to CGSC. A handful of us spent a couple of hours discussing what was titled "Are Army mandatory training requirement unrealistic" In became apparent to me about 10 minutes into his talk that he was trying to get to an integrity talk or fudging the numbers. The headline is to create controversy and sell the story but the study itself did find some issues. Based on my experience and talking to the researcher I have found that the overall requirements, 350-1, FORSCOM, ITR and everything else that pops up is unrealistic. We know it is and so does everyone else. We are accepting risk at lower levels and reporting that up and getting blessed off on what we can and should do and what we cannot. At some point these accurate reports are not making it to the Chief's desk. So to say that there is an epidemic problem is an over exaggeration or a broad stroke with the brush at best. Is this an issue worth digging into more? Yes, but why accurate numbers are being changed at various level when the truth is what should be set up is beyond. Having served in 4ID as a PLT LDR I personally believe that the Army CoS would accept the truth and accept risk knowing we as an Army only have so many hours, days and weeks to get it all done and still remain married when the year is over and not run our Soldiers into the ground. I can tell you that when I served as a BN S3 and as a BN XO I reported accurately and honestly even when it was not what the boss wanted to hear, but I had a BDE CDR that prioritized integrity over everything else. When you put other things ahead of integrity, kike loyalty, career, etc. then you will always be susceptible to violating it.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Feb 19 at 2015 10:22 PM

COL Charles Williams — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 22:22:25 -0500

Disappointing article and perspective, but I suspect it based on many of the unfortunate incidents that same to happen more and more. But, I do not believe officers lie more than others, I think we just expect more (justifiably so) and have more visibility on this. If we don't first foremost model Army Values, what do we have left? If this is true, and not opinion or convent conjecture, then we have lost our way.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Feb 19 at 2015 10:33 PM

SSG Robert Burns — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 22:33:15 -0500

Ask one.

Response by COL Jean (John) F. B. made Feb 19 at 2015 10:38 PM

COL Jean (John) F. B. — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 22:38:52 -0500

I would guess that a similar study of the population as a whole, compared to Army officers, would have a much higher percent of "liars". This report is troubling, but really has no meaning.

I wonder what the comparison would be if the Army was compared to members of the Obama administration, or politicians as a whole. Of course, you could not count on them to be honest in answering the questions.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 11:05 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 23:05:08 -0500

In my 22 years I would say most officers are honest and trustworthy... Now if playing politics means they take what I say and make it nicer or more palatable to the highers, to me is their job... Do we have unrealistic goals over all in the military... YES!!! As for lying to the highers giving them numbers that make something look like it's not, could be because the highers don't want the truth... They want their little graphs to be green, don't care why you may be red in some areas... We get hit all the time on things and part of it is being in the reserves we carry people on our UMR that are in school... Medical MOS schools are really long some taking up to a year to complete, yet they don't have a special category and we get the whole..."why are you not 100% in this area?" I never understood the frustrations of my leadership, until I was the one sitting in on the conference calls... It isn't that they are being lied to, they don't want the truth!!! They want the happy, rainbows and unicorns answers, and put tasks before us that are unreasonable, yet we push and complete no matter the time frame or with diminished manpower, because FAILURE is not in our vocabulary... And if the highers want honesty, well then we would gladly tell them if in fact it would change anything, or for once they would listen.... But over all I can say at least they don't lie to us juniors... They are honest frank and have integrity... I watched a very good CPT I knew get a GOMAR because he stood up for us little enlisted and told a General what he didn't want to hear... When good officers get punished for telling the truth well the rest are going to learn their lessons... Oh and by the way this has been going on for decades, I mean seriously when has the politicians ever wanted the truth in any conflict or war??? So why is CNN reporting this other to cause loss of faith by the public in the military....

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2015 2:21 AM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 02:21:02 -0500

I'm not surprised if there is lying in the Army. We did receive a disclaimer of opinion from a financial audit. It means that the auditor could not find sufficient evidence to support the disclosures on the financial statements (which could even mean the budget request). And, a lot of these metrics ( USRs, OERs,online courses) are measured against manpower, equipment, and training budgets. Yes, you can say it's beauracratic or I lied to save lives, but it's no excuse to not follow best practice and maintain internal controls.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Feb 20 at 2015 7:20 AM

COL Charles Williams — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 07:20:50 -0500

This might provide some more detailed insight... http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/army/2015/02/19/-army-lying-distrust-ethics/23678429/

Report: Army officers admit to (and defend) their lying

A study released Tuesday by two Army War College professors explains how some officers remain in compliance with ever-increasing training

Response by COL Charles Williams made Feb 20 at 2015 9:21 AM

COL Charles Williams — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 09:21:24 -0500

This is the actual USAWC SSU report and exsum - where all the articles came from:
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=1250

Response by COL Charles Williams made Feb 20 at 2015 9:23 AM

COL Charles Williams — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 09:23:16 -0500

This is actual report from the USAWC SSI - where the articles came from.

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=1250

Lying to Ourselves: Dishonesty in the Army Profession

a href=

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2015 10:45 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 10:45:35 -0500

LTC Private RallyPoint Member, if I met an officer who told me that he or she has never once checked the box or pencil-whipped something for a briefing, I would think that I am being lied to. I managed to read the monograph and I think it is something that should be read and discussed in OPDs Army wide. It is true that some degree of dishonesty is sadly expected these days. As the monograph explains, "Company commanders somehow have to fit 297 days of mandatory requirements into 256 available training days" (page 4). The thing is, I do not believe that officers truly want to lie (based on the info given in the monograph). I think that most of us feel like we have no choice (the ethical fading that it talks about). I've seen this happen throughout my relatively short career and I must admit that I have been guilty of box checking and pencil whipping on occasion. As one officer said "We can probably do two or three things in a day, but if you give us 20, we're gonna half-ass 15 and hope you ignore the other five" (page 6). I have to agree with this. I have seen it firsthand. The recommendations at the end are spot-on I think. Acknowledging the problem is essential, and then exercise restraint (in mandatory requirements, priorities, etc.) and lead truthfully (tolerate risk, be honest - even brutally, and stop mutually agreed deception). This seems like the right way to reinforce the foundation of trust that our profession is built upon. I am glad a discussion is starting on this. I am curious how long it will take for a 2/3rds majority of us to admit that this is a systemic problem. Once we reach that threshold, there may be enough consensus to affect a culture change.

(Edited for grammar/spelling)

Response by SGT Kristin Wiley made Feb 20 at 2015 7:47 PM

SGT Kristin Wiley — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 19:47:05 -0500

We don't need to compare ourselves to civilians. Regardless of what civilians do we need to hold ourselves to a higher standard. It's not about how much our officers lie when compared elsewhere, but why they think its acceptable to lie in the first place.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2015 9:50 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 21:50:27 -0500

I think there's a difference between lying with the intent to deceive for personal gain...and playing the game within a system that expects a certain level of exaggeration and misdirection

Response by MSG Scott McBride made Feb 20 at 2015 10:15 PM

MSG Scott McBride — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 22:15:28 -0500

I certainly don't think some officers lie any more than some NCOs or civilians when they're trying to cover up something or to obtain a benefit. I do think that some officers et al think they are above any type of suspicion by virtue of who they are or the position they hold or just the sole fact that you wouldn't suspect any impropriety of said persons...it's aad really...anyone remember MAJ John Cockerham?

Response by 1LT Nick Kidwell made Feb 21 at 2015 3:08 PM

1LT Nick Kidwell — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 15:08:05 -0500

Response by 1SG Don Stand made Feb 23 at 2015 7:11 PM

1SG Don Stand — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 19:11:05 -0500

LTC, sad to say but most officer's in leadership positions don't have a choice. Officer's don't have integrity they have loyalty to the command. With that being said it will always be a bias and compromised leadership.

Response by 1SG Don Stand made Feb 23 at 2015 7:19 PM

1SG Don Stand — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 19:19:02 -0500

COL,

Here at Fort Polk we're having service members discharged from service because of those types of officer's. We have cases on SHARP go to court martial with no evidence at all.

There is no way to fix it because those same officer's are OIC's. DODIG is just a name that doesn't provide anymore. Service members don't have a way around leadership. The Army has failed in many ways and its not a one day fix.

Integrity doesn't exist within anymore its only throughout depending on the individual.

Response by 1SG Don Stand made Feb 23 at 2015 7:25 PM

1SG Don Stand — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 19:25:00 -0500

CPT,

You are correct Polk is notorious for that. I agree twice, thumbs up you'll make a great Commander stick to integrity.

Response by CPT Zachary Brooks made Feb 23 at 2015 8:50 PM

CPT Zachary Brooks — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 20:50:17 -0500

My father knows the people who did the survey and he plans to look into it, mostly out of curiosity (retired O-6). Once I hear back from him or get ahold of the original study to read myself I will be glad to write back. If we can get ahold of pieces of the study or some of the research for distro I can try to get it out here.

Response by SPC Carl K. made May 6 at 2015 6:32 PM

SPC Carl K. — Wed, 06 May 2015 18:32:48 -0400

I would actually agree. I noticed the whole time I was in the army, it seemed to me that it was like pulling teeth from a Congressman to get any information about anything. When I did get information about whatever I was looking for, it was often times wrong. This was from all levels, from fellow soldiers, PSGs, 1SGs, even my commander. This was even the case when I was ETSing about the exit physical counting toward the VA for disability purposes, when I found out later it was totally different. I felt like I was being intentionally deceived throughout my entire time in the army.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made May 6 at 2015 6:41 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Wed, 06 May 2015 18:41:17 -0400

If you actively put people in enough ethical dilemmas sooner or later they will fail them.

Response by COL Charles Williams made May 6 at 2015 7:09 PM

COL Charles Williams — Wed, 06 May 2015 19:09:40 -0400

This is not a new topic, investigation or article. This keeps popping up. The issue is not blatant lies, which I believe are uncommon. This is about what many would call cooking the books with regards to the ever growing myriad of training, maintenance, and administrative requirements. I think in most cases, all military officers and NCOs understand what a lie is, and will not cross that line. The issue here is the gray area of pencil whipping many perceived needless training, maintenance, administrative requirements, in order to focus on what is believed to be more important.

If you ask a leader if they would lie, or have they lied, they would generally all say absolutely not. If you asked them if they have ever fudged paperwork, rosters they thought was unnecessary, excessive, etc... I am sure, if they were honest, there would be many more yes answers. Yet, most would also believe they would never lie, cheat, or steal. If you asked them if they that what they did (cooking the books etc) was dishonest... then then light comes on and they would likely say yes...

You need to read the examples they cite, as that makes a world of difference. Still not right by any means, but it provides perspective on what the actual issues are.

Still an issue we need to address, and Integrity rules over all over values, barring perhaps respect.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 7:14 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 06 May 2015 19:14:04 -0400

More bullshit... the administration is at the center of this.. smearing the military...

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 7:37 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 06 May 2015 19:37:40 -0400

"I will neither lie, cheat, or steal nor will I tolerate any among us who do. " That was the honor code when I was seeking a commision. A Violation could result in failure.

Is the culture there? I doubt it. But neither is it "I will lie, cheat, and steal and cover for anyone among us who does."

Response by LTC John Shaw made May 6 at 2015 9:19 PM

LTC John Shaw — Wed, 06 May 2015 21:19:45 -0400

MSG Sommer Brown This is a great article and topic, we go through the article in some detail for our two hour leadership and ethics discussion in Command and General Staff Course.

To boil down to the simple statement the Army culture is rife with Dishonesty and Deception at all levels and use that to judge the entire system as fatally flawed is over reaching. I believe this is report should be read as a Red light and significant warning and as leadership, we must be willing to call it out when we see it and fix it. We also have to be willing to allow leaders to take risk and properly prioritize.

As leaders we need to reflect on the results and be willing to change elements of our process to improve.

Now, I will summarize as no one wants to read 33 pages and like most summations I will not be able to incorporate all lessons:
BLUF: No easy answer

1) When the process causes people to lie (knowing misstatement of fact or critical assumption) we have a professional obligation to call it out and fix the issue. The critical question is 'Why don't we?'

Because the punishment is too severe for the 'real' priority & the consequence of fixing is prevented or made impossible by structure or process. Examples: USR, maintenance reporting, APFT, HT/WT, Supply, Budget, knowingly false statements to match or satisfy a higher ranking point of view.

2) When the process causes people to 'mislead' (omission of facts) what is the cause and why?

Typically it is information traversing the layer of bureaucracy that MUST be made simpler to process. Example: In Yearly Training Brief a CO Commander has 10 min to brief a General and will claim his unit is Proficient in a METL task, when in fact, they are borderline and could be Training the task.

Why misrepresent? Assumed risk, based on the training plan he will be P when he goes to execute the missing. If he tells the GO 'T' he will have so much management overhead from BN, BDE, Div that he may not make 'P' mission.

Is the Captain omitting the information, yes, is it correct to omit, perhaps, this is up to the CPT judgement. (that is why we have Commanders).

What is the cause? For any project the key resources are time, people or money and leadership is unwilling or incapable of changing the process. Leaders have limited time we must trust people to execute.

Good God, I hope this is not as painful to read, as it was for me to write.