Lying to Ourselves: Dishonesty in the Army Profession

2015-02-19T07:36:14-05:00

Once on the page click view the executive summary. It's a two page read but very interesting. I am sure it is relevant to all services.

There are many posts about leadership here on RP. Most are about leadership traits like empathy and resilience. What about candor? Candor is mentioned only about three times in ADRP 6-22 Army Leadership. It is tucked up under the Army Value Personal Courage.

Are you a candid leader? Do you speak up? Are you frank, honest and sincere?

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

a href=

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 7:42 AM

2015-02-19T07:42:30-05:00

I think candor is being replaced often in the ranks of NCOs for lip service. When I think of what an NCO needs to be I often think back to good old Gunny Hightower. Not the drinking and fighting but the way he deals with brass. If we can't give no-shit assessments to seniors, peers, and subordinates then what the hell is the point.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 8:05 AM

2015-02-19T08:05:41-05:00

This is awesome. I have seen this and wondered about it but nothing to level of this. I have now booked marked this site. I have a new goal now. I want to be published for a study now. I like the Strategic Issues List. That is a great way to focus on where the Army is going and to be a part of it by reading studies on where the Army wants to go. Thanks. I feel like I just struck a gold chest of Army knowledge and insight.

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made Feb 19 at 2015 8:33 AM

2015-02-19T08:33:26-05:00

I question the validity of this "study". First "scores of officers" from O-3 to O-6 were interviewed...which means two things...the study doesn't apply to enlisted, and the numbers (say 60 to 80, because if it were over 100, they would've claimed that) are insufficient within the population to draw statistically significant results (the headline in the Washington Post article calls out everyone in the military). http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/02/18/lying-in-the-military-is-common-army-war-college-study-says/?tid=pm_world_pop

Next, some of their examples exposed the ethical dilemma for what it is, and the officers might have been making the right ethical choice by lying. If I've got guys in combat who are being told to storyboard every enemy contact, then it depends on the situation whether I force them to storyboard or I report no contact. If the storyboard doesn't go anywhere which would improve our capability or save US lives, and the time it takes for them to storyboard means they get less prep time or rack time, and they are exhausted, then I'm not forcing storyboards unless that particular enemy contact can teach us something. My point is that's why the O's get the big bucks: Make the tough ethical decisions...decide what's in the best interest of the US and your troops. If keeping your troops effective and alive involves less-than-stellar admin work, fine.

Lying in the military is common, Army War College study says

Two professors found that untruthfulness is 'surprisingly common in the U.S. military even though members of the profession are loath to admit it.'

Response by SPC James Mcneil made Feb 19 at 2015 8:36 AM

2015-02-19T08:36:00-05:00

Sometimes you just have to say it like it is. And while I agree that empathy, resilience, and other traits are very important, we cannot overlook the need for a leader with the boldness to say what needs to be said with tact. It isn't just saying what needs to be said, and it isn't just tact. Both are in needed.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Feb 19 at 2015 11:01 AM

2015-02-19T11:01:16-05:00

Throughout my reading of this, there were so many examples that stood out to me concerning every issue raised. I'm certain people will be here denouncing the study due to the very same rationalizations it discusses... Great read..

Response by MAJ Jim Steven made Feb 19 at 2015 11:14 AM

2015-02-19T11:14:23-05:00

interesting in light of all the drama about the F35 and the MG in the Air Force who more or less expected people to not speak to Congress about the A10.

I think the challenge is when you might disagree with something, but, yet your opinion is not really relevant and you are just supposed to support your boss, your commander, the Army as a whole, our President...etc etc.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 2:38 PM

2015-02-19T14:38:34-05:00

Is honesty a quality that we reward? How do you react when a Soldier tells you something when you do not want to hear?

How often have you worked with a leader who didn't know how to hear the word 'no', or 'I'm sorry, sir, but we are unable to do that" - and then proceeded to chew you out later for not making an impossible directive work?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 9:28 PM

2015-02-19T21:28:40-05:00

If they did lie, there is proof of it, and they have admitted to it then they need to be prosecuted, reduced in rank then discharged.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 10:17 PM

2015-02-19T22:17:50-05:00

I'll say this, a lot of this sounds like judgement calls, and the Army theoretically promotes those who have demonstrated good judgment.

I'm not saying I condone this type of behavior, but I can attest that it exists. I've been an NCO for the 6 of by he 8 years I have served and haven't had one quarterly counseling before my NCOERs were submitted. I've even asked for them. I'm surprised when anything above my level isn't pencil whipped.

As far as the instance where the officer increased the distance of the blast to keep his junior offer out on mission... the NCO creed states that, "...My two basic responsibilities will always remain uppermost in my mind; the accomplishment of my mission, and the welfare of my soldiers..." I would argue that his concern for his soldiers being led by someone else not only comprised the mission, but his soldiers as well. Further, I can bet that the jr. Officer wanted to make sure he was with his troops the next time they rolled out of that wire.

Once again, judgement calls; they are not black and white. But you make them and don't question them. He who hesitates in war is lost.

As far as mandatory training, especially the annual online training- come on... enough said.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2015 4:08 PM

2015-02-20T16:08:46-05:00

The authors use the absolute definition of "lie" to highlight that if we really want the military to be this transparent, accountable institution that can steward the taxpayer's dime and resources as well as it can defend the Constitution, then something's got to give. It has realistic assertions - we tend to think of everything as just another "leadership challenge" that we can "accept prudent risk" in not doing the trivial, bureaucratic hordes of tasks - but when it comes time to throw those stats of progress on a PowerPoint for the big boss - it's somehow always "green", except for the important stuff, because we ask for help with what we really need for our people and mission.

While we need to have a higher standard to protect our people than other organizations, there is clearly no filter and little thought to what is realistically effective or possible with regard to all of these requirements, or the detrimental impacts they have. Instead of spending time with Soldiers getting the daily business done, learning who they are, becoming qualitatively better leaders, developing trust - the Soldiers are waiting in line to take computer classes they share the answers with while we prepare generic counseling statements and frantically put together reports and products for higher.

It's as if all risk of not accomplishing the band-aid policy requirements were shifted from Washington down to the company-level officer, with the assumption that all those leaders in between would put up a block and filter, or at least prioritize, the effective and necessary tasks. It doesn’t seem to happen – there are no more priorities because everything is a priority, mandatory, and clearly not necessary. If you can’t do all of the requirements all the time, then the ones you can’t physically accomplish are liabilities (“that brief to tell the Soldier not to drink and drive before the weekend would’ve saved their life! Nevermind the previous 18 weeks of classes and the mandatory quarterly briefs.”) So success for officers, in some aspects, amounts to the ability to predict the future (luck) - so if you can't do the impossible, you better make it look like you are.

Response by SFC Francisco Roman made Feb 21 at 2015 2:45 PM

2015-02-21T14:45:02-05:00

Personally, I chose to not post my photo, as pass member of the Army Reserve there have been moments where in part of my job qualifications, had to post as person that I cannot be seen as part of the unit . for those who have worked with under cover work with the DEA, it's hard to place your face on a professional profile that you wish you could. so if you're having a problem with me, because I won't complete my profile. just don't have a conversation with me.

Response by LTC Barry Hull made Feb 24 at 2015 5:34 PM

2015-02-24T17:34:21-05:00

Here is what I think is the problem. the Army leadership, in bowing to political correctness is trying to cover its proverbial ass for every possible situation from SHARP to combat training. as the paper states, tasks may be added to our required training, but apparently not deleted. at some point you just flat run out of time to do everything. I have been in situations where we tried to explain that but the only response we receive was you have to figure it out. No one offered a solution because everyone knew the problem but no one at least above us had the courage to say it.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Mar 1 at 2015 12:27 PM

2015-03-01T12:27:33-05:00

I'm reminded of two particular things.

The first is the old security questionnaire. "Have you ever stolen from the government?" used to be a question on it. Everyone used to have to answer yes on it. Until they finally changed the question to "Have you ever stolen from the government (with the exception of minor office supplies)?" I'm not sure still remembers the original question, or having to annotate "minor office supplies" when they checked yes back when we still did paper forms, but I laughed my butt off when they changed the form. It wasn't because we were dishonest, but because we were overly honest, at least "officially" when it came to paperwork.

The second was when I was out, and talking to a friend in the FBI, and he was doing a security update, and they asked him if he every lied. He said "yes." They did the follow on questions of ,how often "All, the time, constantly, everything." The interviewer was just flabbergasted. Just didn't know how to respond. It wasn't that he was dishonest, it was that he provided non-answers to inconsequential questions. Lies by omission. "SWAG" answers, "sure, I'll get it done" to tasks he knew would get dropped, etc.

What does all this mean? I tend to be very black & white when it comes to matters of personal integrity. My big deciding factor on it, is the "intent to deceive." What is the person trying to get away with. What are they trying to profit?

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 1 at 2015 12:48 PM

2015-03-01T12:48:19-05:00

Courage, Candor, Competence, Commitment, the 4 C's of Leadership used to be taught in NCOES. I believe it was FM 22-100 Military Leadership that had the dissertation about "Candor"

The massive amounts of requirements pushed down to the tactical level are time consuming and restrict time for other METL related tasks. I heard a MAJ recently state that we needed two Armies, one for PC training and the other for warfighting. I'm not sure that I agree with his sentiment, but, I understand his frustrations.

Centralized planning, decentralized execution. From my fox-hole Big Army has a lot of priorities and a lot of tasks that don't appear to be warfighting functions. I understand the need for ASAP, SHARP, EO, MRT, etc. But I see tactical units either rush through the mandatory stuff to get to the tactical stuff or vice versa. I spend a lot of my time on 350-1 training that will not improve METL proficiency.

To get back to the original post...It may not be the most popular COA for some, but, I report my requirements with the metrics I have. If I am at 60% trained, I'll explain why. I am also candid about why we may not have meet a suspense. The training calendar is full, and I mean full, make-up training or stand-downs are extremely hard to get. There has to be a discussion about amount/frequency of training. But, I will not allow my integrity to come in to question just to save myself from an ass-chewing. Also, always remain professional and try and check emotion at the door. It's not an easy task...

Add on top of this, sequestration, and the troop draw-down, this becomes an even greater challenge.

Response by CW5 Jim Steddum made Mar 1 at 2015 8:03 PM

2015-03-01T20:03:05-05:00

Center for the Army Professional and Ethic response: http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/army/officer/2015/03/01/army-secretary-mchugh-ethics-experts-tackle-report-on-officers-lying/23971189/

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 21 at 2015 1:41 PM

2015-05-21T13:41:39-04:00

Not a prime perfect example but if you read somethings about John Basilone, this is what we need more of.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made May 21 at 2015 2:42 PM

2015-05-21T14:42:53-04:00

I did try reading the report, I did, but it seemed like a bureaucrat was complaining because Army bureaucracy was not being maintained and people were lying about completing all the bureaucratic nonsense that was required? Additionally, the report was additional bureaucratic nonsense and seemed almost offended that people think bureaucratic nonsense is what it is and people do not place more importance on completing their reports.

Response by MAJ Keira Brennan made May 21 at 2015 2:51 PM

2015-05-21T14:51:43-04:00

I am going to read that one... I spent my last 4yrs in joint commands. But I can tell you from the time I was commissioned 1992 until maybe 2004 the Army was a ZERO DEFECT Army. Officers who were slackers, slugs, cheats would never see CPT and the same for NCOS --- maybe retire at E7 but never E8. My question to you is what your take is on our Army and honesty. Ill read this nugget latter. VR

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made May 21 at 2015 6:46 PM

2015-05-21T18:46:15-04:00

All I can say is it takes moral courage to tell the truth and accept the consequences, and without the truth, we become an unprincipled military.

Response by SPC David Hannaman made Jul 15 at 2015 12:01 PM

2015-07-15T12:01:53-04:00

This reminds me of Basic training... we'd had a long day of BRM, I was tired and wanted a shower and sleep. Still too early in the day though, and the DS's were rejecting turning in weapons for the the insignificant.

We all know that it's pretty much impossible to get into every part of the M-16 lower receiver, so I found a quiet corner took mine apart and cleaned the parts individually.

Upon presenting an impossibly spotless weapon to the Drill Sergeant he looked at me and asked "Private Hannaman, did you take apart the lower receiver?" to which I of course responded "No Drill Sergeant, I am not authorized or trained to take apart the lower receiver." He looked at me and smiled, "Good answer PVT Hannaman, you are dismissed."

That tactic was taught several times in basic... "Do what it takes to win, but if asked say you did it by the book.".

Is it wrong? By the book, yes it is, but we all know that ROE will sometimes get you killed, and I've seen monster body builders that would have stayed until retirement barred to reenlist because they failed height/weight.

I don't have a solution... just an observation.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 20 at 2015 6:19 PM

2015-11-20T18:19:43-05:00

I just saw that article a couple of days ago and found it interesting. As with any study, take it with a grain of salt, but it does make one think about all the training requirements we must complete now and the "Troops to Tasks" spreadsheets you inevitably have to do. I found the quotes within the survey the most interesting.