Does anyone (Do we) ever get good at adverse counselings?

COL Charles Williams — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 23:05:14 -0500

I was in the Army for almost 33 years, and I always hated when I had to do an adverse counseling on someone.... Luckily they were far and few between, but I did them, and did not like them nonetheless. I had to counsel subordinates as PL (to a PSG that was 15 years my senior), as a Company Commander, a Battalion Commander, a Brigade Commander, and even now in retirement... (or semi-retirement.)

I can teach it, I have Masters degree in Counseling, but I still do not like it, and will never like the ones that are adverse, and hence are adversarial.

This is also the topic we are working on in my class... "counseling and performance indicators"... So, I am interested in your thoughts to help be a better teacher. I am training the next generation of Leaders.

I am interested in your thoughts and guidance.

Response by LTC Yinon Weiss made Feb 23 at 2015 11:31 PM

LTC Yinon Weiss — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 23:31:49 -0500

I think that the key is that it's not a surprise. If somebody receives a strong adverse counseling, but thought everything was fine, then it can lead to the adversarial situation you describe. However, if the supervisor has been open with the subordinate the entire time, then the counseling should just be a formal summary of what is going on, and not an unexpected discussion. Ideally, the formal counseling should be a summary of events, not an initial introduction of their observations.

The irony is that people will not give continuous feedback if it's negative for the same reason they don't like to give adverse counseling, but of course, that only leads to an even worse counseling experience when it finally has to be done.

Response by SPC(P) Jay Heenan made Feb 23 at 2015 11:43 PM

SPC(P) Jay Heenan — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 23:43:32 -0500

I think if you are to counsel a Soldier, whether it is good or bad, it is imperative that you know your Soldier prior to that. The idea is that we can notice changes in behavior before an incident happens. If you have to counsel a Soldier, than you must have a plan, stick to the facts and it doesn't hurt to allow the Soldier to explain (even if an explanation is a moot point). Letting the Soldier explain allows them to feel as part of the solution and to become accountable. They may not show it at that moment, but they will reflect later respect you as a leader. My two cents anyway...

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 24 at 2015 7:25 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 07:25:46 -0500

Sir - I usually handle adverse counseling just like any other counseling session. When I counsel I am definitely looking for dialogue so I ask a lot of open ended fact finding questions. For adverse counseling I definitely try to get to the root of the issue, why did the Soldier do that.

I always treat them civilized and explain the plan of action to correct the adverse action and any punishment they are being recommended for and what it entails. I always close the counseling session on a positive note even if it is a serious violation. I usually do this by telling the Soldier that I will be there with them every step of the way to assist them in getting through it and help them recover.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 24 at 2015 7:28 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 07:28:57 -0500

Adverse counseling is always a hard thing to do, but is necessary for good order and discipline, as well as ammunition for reduction in rank and/or discharge later down the road. I recently within the last 4 days submitted a SGT for an Article 15 for disrespecting me. The nature of the incident did not give me a choice, adding the fact that he had developed a pattern of disrespect not only for enlisted superiors but commissioned as well. Other than his being stubborn, hard headed and opinionated, he is one of my best NCO's. It killed me to write him up knowing he is going lose his rank for it.
In the end it is not just to straiten him out, but everyone else around him as well. There was an experiment we read about in my psychology class in college that helps us understand not only the counseling process, but group punishment as well:
Place 10 monkeys in a large cage with a platform in the middle with a banana hanging from the roof of the cage. The monkeys must climb up onto the platform to get the banana. When one monkey climbs up to get it, you spray the rest of the monkeys with water (group punishment). Keep doing that until no monkeys go to get a banana because the others stop him when he tries. One by one replace the original monkeys with new monkeys. The new monkeys will attempt to get the banana and get attacked by the others. Eventually, you will have replaced all the original monkeys with new ones who have no idea why they are enforcing the law of not touching the banana, but enforce it nonetheless.
Now reverse it and spray the monkey going to get the banana instead (individual punishment), and leave the rest alone. the other monkeys will see the punishment and simply avoid going to get the banana and stay in line.
As a Drill Sergeant for 3 years, I have used both of these techniques to complete success. So in the end, it is necessary to keep your subordinates in line. If one person gets away with something, everyone will think they can get away with it. Remember, you are not their superior to be their friend, you are their superior to accomplish the mission and get the job done.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made Feb 24 at 2015 10:14 AM

COL Vincent Stoneking — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:14:30 -0500

I have had to do formal negative counseling a lot more in my civilian role(s) than in my military ones - though I have had to do it there as well.

I find four related things things to be key:
1. I am not interested in what was intended or "meant". I am here to discuss performance, not "attitude" or state of mind.
2. I am interested in facts. What happened. The factors that lead up to the event. There is a lot of confusion between #1 and #2 in most people's minds. Can require a lot of patience going over the same ground until they get it.
3. I have a behavioral outlook. I don't desire for you to "fix your attitude." I desire for you to exhibit the behaviors I expect of a computer programmer/project manager/NCOIC/Soldier/Employee/Other Role.
4. Counseling is about desired future behavior. I touch on what was done in the past, but only to conduct a gap analysis (how does it compare to the desired behavior?). It is NOT disciplinary in nature (see below).

The above is written with a bias towards negative/corrective counseling, but it is exactly the same for positive counseling. "You did X well, Continue doing that!"

A major issue in my mind is that we conflate counseling (focused on desired future behavior) with discipline (adverse action because of behaviors already done). Thus, we tend to view counseling as adversarial. This in turn means that it is seen as a "big deal" and dreaded, which has the perverse effect of leading to less POSITIVE counseling. It also means that the counseled individual feels threatened and feels the need to "defend themselves."

There are various reasons, of course. A major one being the need to document counseling and attempts at correction before formal "discipline." Which gives us the famous "magic bullet" counseling statements.... For those who are wondering, it is essentially the same in civilian organizations. Except in the civilian organizations, you can often get away with not counseling or disciplining, if you are OK with not doing your job.

I don't know a good systemic approach to overcoming this. I know what I do, but I accept a certain amount of risk, and would not recommend it as an organization-wide policy.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Feb 25 at 2015 12:16 AM

COL Charles Williams — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 00:16:05 -0500

Thanks all... had another one today... seems common place with kids...

Response by MSgt Jim Pollock made Feb 25 at 2015 12:50 AM

MSgt Jim Pollock — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 00:50:47 -0500

If it is an adverse counseling versus a disciplinary proceeding, then , clearly, the member is valued team member that has erred in some way.

Explain the erroneous behavior, and why it is unacceptable.

Detail how the counselee must improve or atone and especially to what standard. This is most important. The person must know what remediation will satisfy you and regain your confidence.

Finally, outline what the individual is doing right. If they weren't valued, the counseling wouldn't be happening (they would be punished, discharged, etc)

The individual should depart the meeting feeling valued despite their Indiscretion or departure from standards and have a clear plan for recovery.