Resiliency - What are your honest thoughts on the Army's Resiliency Program ?

COL Charles Williams — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:03:22 -0400

"Army morale low despite 6-year, $287M optimism program" (AKA the Army Resiliency Program)

... Or... perhaps it could because of 14 years of sustained combat, high optempo, and record/multiple deployments....

As Garrison Commander (just coming off of 15 Month Deployment in Baghdad during the surge) from 2009 - 2012, I was on the ground floor of all the work to "stop the bleeding" with regards to record suicides, sexual assaults, alcohol and prescription drug abuse, and this goes on... The "Resiliency Program" and efforts was our solution. But, I was never really sure if this was something that was needed, would work, or whether it was yet another bright idea to demonstrate we were at least trying to help?

As a Commander, at many levels, I have dealt with all these issues, and I have also put lots of thought into how to reduce and stop these issues. The resiliency program was part of the Army's solution.

I left the Army in 2013, and the program just getting off the ground.

- What are your thoughts on the Resiliency Program?

- Or... How can we help with Low Morale.... which leads to many of the other issues we are trying to get after.

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/news/nation/2015/04/16/army-survey-morale/24897455/

(http://www.army.mil/readyandresilient)

Response by CPT Bob Moore made Apr 16 at 2015 10:49 PM

CPT Bob Moore — Thu, 16 Apr 2015 22:49:16 -0400

Multiple deployments, promotions that are often too fast resulting in leadership issues, uncertainty of mission, perceived lack of support from politicians... And more....

It has had a negative impact on morale.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Apr 16 at 2015 11:14 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Thu, 16 Apr 2015 23:14:51 -0400

I would have taken that $287 million and gotten some good morale increasing results! Deployed this year? Here is $1,000 tax-free cash OR 7 days free paid leave. PCS this year? Here is $500 for your kids to blow at the Game Stop on post/base. Get passed over for promotion this year in the primary zone? Here's $500., etc. I could get more short term smiles than some optimism program.

Response by SFC Charles S. made Apr 16 at 2015 11:26 PM

SFC Charles S. — Thu, 16 Apr 2015 23:26:23 -0400

What the Hell kind of Horse Shit is this.... a $287 million campaign to make soldiers feel better about their job? Put the $287 million into a Bonus or incentive program for soldiers who come up with better ideas than the civilians running this crap.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 16 at 2015 11:29 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Apr 2015 23:29:23 -0400

I think the resiliency program has excellent intentions, but like many of the problems the Army tries to attack, it focuses on curing symptoms rather than the actual problem. When you make training like SHARP or resiliency training mandatory & frequent, it becomes a check the block situation and loses its effectiveness. As for morale, my opinions are as follows:
1) With personnel & budget cuts, we are all required to do more with less, all while repeatedly hearing that our jobs are going away.
2) we still have many of the same issues with (I hate the term) "toxic leadership." Soldiers know when their leadership doesn't actually care about them, most of them are not stupid, and they talk, a lot, and I listen a lot.
I could go on and on...mandatory SHARP comments on evals, when adhering to SHARP should be expected, and only mentioned when someone doesn't adhere...

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2015 12:20 AM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:20:45 -0400

Are these results taken from the GAT 2.0? Because I have serious doubts about how much troops actually pay attention to those questions while they click through as fast as they can because 1SG said 100% of the company needs to complete the survey by end of day.

Response by SSG Melvin Nulph made Apr 17 at 2015 12:39 AM

SSG Melvin Nulph — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:39:40 -0400

Reading it just makes me sick. But then I can say things have been this way before I was born in the 60's. Kind of funny how the so called powers that be can waist so much money on a good thing, but has to change formulas to get the results to turn out the way they want so spending or waiting $287M as well as the man hours, not to mention the time of the soldiers that already has a moral problem each year, just makes me sick.
from what I've been told and what I've just seen it's happened before, it's happening now & we can only hope it stops someday and soon. The men and women of our armed forces do not deserve this. They need the help and should be taken care of. It's to late for me, but I'd love to see it stopped for the military of today. Any ideas?

Response by SPC Angel Guma made Apr 17 at 2015 1:10 AM

SPC Angel Guma — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 01:10:36 -0400

Most people did not take resiliency training seriously.

How can you force people to take mental health seriously? The culture of seeing psychological difficulties as weakness probably even more prevalent because of all the powerpoint classes.

Response by SFC Stephen King made Apr 17 at 2015 10:13 AM

SFC Stephen King — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:13:22 -0400

I am the master of my fate and captain of my soul!

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Apr 17 at 2015 10:14 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:14:29 -0400

Sir. You used the phrase "stop the bleeding" which INSTANTLY made me think of trauma training.

In the Marine Corps we have these posters. They have 4 steps on them. Here's the order.

Start the breathing, Stop the bleeding, Protect the wound, Treat for shock.

Did the Army try to "Start the breathing" So to speak? Or did they try to patch up a dead man?

I know this doesn't give insight into the program itself, but... sometimes how other people explain a problem/concern/issue highlights how they are approaching it. It looks like the Army is fighting this "defensively" as opposed to "offensively" which leads to a war of attrition. No one wins a war of attrition. You just end up weaker than you were.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2015 10:18 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:18:41 -0400

I am a MRT. I might be bias...but...I learned about myself. What triggers me. And how I can help/mentor those going through the same struggles.

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Apr 17 at 2015 10:30 AM

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:30:55 -0400

I cant speak directly to the Army Program, but the AF program is a really close copy of it. The skills are valuable. Is it something that everyone is going to have buy in on? Likely not. It is pretty touchy feely on some areas.

Response by SFC Stephen King made Apr 17 at 2015 10:35 AM

SFC Stephen King — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:35:27 -0400

As a Master Resilience Trainer I pay it forward we MRTs use personal stories to assist in the skills. As CSF2 Program Manager I was part of the collective that helped develop the in-processing training to assist with the transitition to Fort Drum, AR 350-53. MRTs use these skills to help others learn what is controllable. Your thoughts drive your consquences. If a person has counter-productive thoughts about something the MRT skills (Life skills) are a tool to assist in the process of changing the counter-productive thought. This is not the solution to stop sucicide but a tool to assist in mental toughtness.

Response by Maj Chris Nelson made Apr 17 at 2015 10:40 AM

Maj Chris Nelson — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:40:42 -0400

Great concept, very difficult to implement. The other problem is how it is getting slammed down everyone's throat. At least in the AF it is that way.... May have helped some, so can't dog it completely, BUT..... I feel it is being pushed too hard.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2015 10:58 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:58:16 -0400

Soldiering morale starts at the top. No more lies. No more BS. No more homeless. No more VA BS. No more unemployment. No more suicides. No more three, four, five, deployments in combat. NO MORE DOUBT ABOUT THE FUTURE! All of this makes me sick. How can our military concentrate on their combat missions? How can exiting military concentrate on their family or future, not knowing what's next. Shame on our government and tha VA system for causing these problems. When I was in Vietnam, I didn't give my future a thought. I knew I had a job waiting for me when I got back. I felt comfortable being in the military. All that concerned me was the next beer or date. The troops today don't even have time for that. It's appalling. I would imagine a lot of today's suicides are not from combat PTSD but rather not knowing their future and giving up.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made Apr 17 at 2015 11:24 AM

COL Vincent Stoneking — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 11:24:07 -0400

I actually just had a friend post this exact article to FB yesterday, and ask me a similar question. I do have some thoughts, but they are too long for this morning.

The short version is "good initiative, bad execution." And, as always, we took a lot of really good research and tried to find the 3-4 "action item" bullets without giving any significant thought to fully understanding the issues at play - or the 2nd and 3rd order effects of our actions.

More to follow.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2015 11:29 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 11:29:38 -0400

It's a starting point.

It is hard to gauge where we are at as a force when we have had 14 years of sustained combat operations in the Active, Guard, and Reserve components. I think this helps address issues and resolve, but if you want to improve "morale", letting Soldiers perform their job functions and offering more funding for the "fun" schools (Airborne, Air Assault, etc) would go a long way with junior Soldiers and NCOs.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Apr 17 at 2015 12:04 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:04:22 -0400

It is good in the sense the program screens for physical problems but it does nothing for the stresses of the military or combat.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2015 12:27 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:27:43 -0400

The Army MRT program is a terrific model. The trainers in my organization are sincere, and put their hearts and souls into providing outstanding, quality training experiences to us. I have found a few things from this training that I have applied to my daily life and I have reaped the benefits of doing so.

However, the flaw inherent in this training methodology is similar to that of the SHARP and Suicide Prevention models; it is mandated to the point of trumping all other priorities, to include METL-focused training necessary to maintain combat readiness. Not every Soldier needs MRT training. In fact, in an OC/T unit comprised primarily of senior Officers and NCOs, the need for such training is substantially less than it would be it a standard line company. Our lives are more stable, our support systems more solidly established. Yet the Army requires us to conduct the training; to keep "hunting the good stuff."

Rather than consume an entire organization's time on redundant, needless training, what if the Army could identify those Soldiers who may need this training and require them to take it, while excusing the rest to carry on with normal duties? I would propose linking it to a Soldier's GAT score. If the GAT indicates that a Soldier requires assistance with resiliency, you add them to the roster; if not, you allow them to Charlie Mike.

I applaud the Army's effort; and I like the tool they have developed to assist in remedying the problem Soldiers are facing. My only issue is not all Soldiers are broken, quit treating us like we are.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2015 1:23 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 13:23:09 -0400

Speaking for the AF one, resiliency days are actively sapping my morale by adding yet another item that I need to rack every quarter, take time away from the mission to hear yet another speaker tell me about how important is to be physically and mentally fit, with the same message echoed every 3 months.

It's too bad the AF doesn't recognize that actual, real interaction between leaders and subordinates would do far more to raise morale that these manufactured events.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2015 2:16 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 14:16:19 -0400

Why can't this money be spent on more tangible needs like help with moving, BAS/BAH and Per Diem costs, or help with daycare? Anything but subjecting to serving members to more government intrusion into their already harried days? Another idea is to cutback on the time spent in the classroom for pet social projects.

There are venues like VetPrevail and other sources that can accommodate the person at their leisure and not some requirement that takes away from family.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2015 3:20 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 15:20:00 -0400

"About 300,000 soldiers or nearly 40% didn't trust their immediate supervisor or fellow soldiers in their unit or didn't feel respected or valued. Thirty-two percent felt good about about bosses and peers."

This is a sad number, but I can understand. I didn't trust my immediate supervisor either. There's that ONE Sgt. that I hope I can see face to face one day. Just so that I can finally express my feelings without the fear of being written up, etc.

A program can't change the feelings of a soldier, especially if it has to do with Leadership. Some people DO NOT make good leaders. Period. And no class will change that.

But we DO have to keep on hammering on with subjects like Depression, Suicide, Marriage, etc.

Lack of sleep can cause a lot of problems as well. But we can't control bedtimes either.

There are some very disappointing results.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2015 4:16 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 16:16:54 -0400

To caveat on my earlier response: resiliency, no matter how much of it you naturally possess or acquire through training, is like physical strength and stamina. It can be drained, it can run out, or if injured seriously enough, you can lose it. The army must become better at anticipating the possible results of the numerous stressors it places on those who serve, and pay closer attention to things like command climate surveys. Those contain direct feedback from the ground up, and often brutally honest feedback. Sometimes there are often childish complaints, but more often there are legitimate issues addressed.

I

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Apr 17 at 2015 5:36 PM

Cpl Jeff N. — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 17:36:35 -0400

I'm not familiar with the program so I cannot say if it is effective or not or worth the money spent. What I can say is that if you need resiliency training for soldiers, perhaps the primary training isn't real enough, hard enough etc. It goes in the "the more you sweat in peace the less you bleed in war" category. I think that applies to mental toughness too.

If the primary training isn't rooting and keeping troops sharp and on their game, you might want to look at your basic training, schools training, and other elements first. Is it tough enough, realistic enough, are they prepared for what they are about to encounter, physically, mentally, spiritually etc. Trying to fix a moral problem that is rooted is not done easily.

I do agree the operational tempo has been pretty high and the last 6 years with a command structure that seems disconnected from reality, the lost gains (Iraq especially) and the unclear direction (are we in our out) will not help. One jarheads opinion for what it's worth.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2015 11:05 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 23:05:14 -0400

The low morale is the result of misguided programs like this one taking the place of actual training, among other issues.

And I don't believe that high deployment levels are the cause for low morale levels either.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2015 11:20 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Apr 2015 23:20:41 -0400

As an MRT who had to give training, I realized it is treated like all othe mandatory training, check the block, send up the numbers. I feel it is just another waste of funds and time as most Soldiers don't want to listen and participate in the training. Those who do come to you afterwards and have issues that I as an MRT can't help with so so all Indonis point them to the right person to talk to. Does it work, no. Is it worth it, no.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 18 at 2015 12:21 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Apr 2015 00:21:38 -0400

Well to be up front I am an MRT. I will however approach this objectively. I've seen a lot of the comments and there are some valid points made, but the article that sparks this conversation feels slightly misleading like other news articles I've read.

Where to even start? The article I suppose would be a good one. It addresses stats from the required online survey by military members, mental illness, even job satisfaction.

The survey they are referring to I can only assume is the GAT. This is a tool more for the Soldier and not leadership, although you can opt in to allow it to be used for research. It can still not be used to identify someone so a Soldier is provided confidentiality. This is intended to get truthful answers. The issue is are we really getting clear data? Soldiers could very well be clicking through so they are "green" for unit stats. Another issue is this survey is derived from science but it is not 100 percent just like much in the realm of mental health, so not the best basis for figuring out whether resiliency training is working.

Another point was about mental illness. This doesn't really give me a clear indication either. Mental illness is such a large category for one. It's causes even in the mental illness community are not completely known and run from hereditary, biological or chemical imbalance, physiological trauma, and environmental stressors. I will never claim to be able to cure mental illness as a whole. I am not a psychologist or even a licensed counselor and tell people I'm training as such. Resiliency training is more focused on the environmental stresses that if not dealt with can lead to mental illness.

Another issue addressed in the article is job satisfaction. News flash, same thing exists in the civilian world. Now I will agree it's much easier to switch jobs in the civilian world, but it doesn't get me raising my eyebrows about whether resiliency training is working.

I could go on, but I don't like to be long winded. The news article doesn't show me anything in the true effectiveness of resiliency training. I am concerned about some of the comments I've seen. I do agree with some in the essence that it's another training requirement added on top of all the others. Is how the Army is implementing an issue? Sure. Is it wasted money as the article says? Absolutely not. I have the pleasure of knowing in my life and those I've had come through in-processing training come to me with their successes.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 19 at 2015 12:37 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Apr 2015 12:37:46 -0400

Personally I believe resilience and strength of character is developed at home. I thank my parents for that.

All I see as a benefit from this is the list of resources available for assistance and treatment. It's cheaper though to give everyone fridge magnets for armyonesource.com

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Apr 19 at 2015 4:17 PM

COL Jon Thompson — Sun, 19 Apr 2015 16:17:46 -0400

As a USAR officer when this came out, it became nothing other than another check the block thing we had to do during battle assembly or during an AT. There was no explanation from our higher command on what the purpose was supposed to be other than my commander could say we were XX% complete with CSF. So from my perspective, it is hard to measure its effectiveness.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 19 at 2015 4:24 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Apr 2015 16:24:07 -0400

I think it's another example of the disconnect between Big Army and Little Army, much like Sharp, EO, and other newer programs. The concept is good, and if treated seriously, has great potential, BUT there's also the side, a very vocal side, that screams how soft the Army is now. They use these programs as an example of it, when it's not a bad thing to value more than hard nosed discipline. Little Army, treats the training as a joke, and therefore the Soldiers do the same.

Personally, I've gotten a lot out of the various programs, but until we decide to put away the mindset of "being self aware and taking care of yourself" equals weak, undisciplined, liberal selfishness, it'll be a complete waste. That's a shame, because it isn't a bad program if taken seriously.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2015 1:42 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Apr 2015 01:42:47 -0400

It seems to me that most have real idea of what this program can do! I can help you all with ideas on how to make unit programs better! If your a leader and packing the theater with 500 plus people and one MRT then you missed the intent! Does the MRT give a crap about what he or she does? Did you pick the right person for the right job? Did you pad someones resume or ERB and just send them to the school? The program works! Like anything else in life you get back what you put into it!

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2015 2:26 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Apr 2015 02:26:52 -0400

I can't say it is working or not, but the implementation has not passed the common sense test, something happens, punitive refresher training. Two months later, more training. MRT is being implemented every Monday in my unit, this is eating up more time than motor stables, and instead of it being once a year and we make it important, soldiers have to sit through it every week. We have more SHARP, MRT and Suicide stand downs than Warrior task training some months. I'd agree it has helped, but I deployed 3 times before this started and we didn't have problems.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2015 7:58 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Apr 2015 07:58:57 -0400

It means well, and is pretty well put together for an Army program, but it has come to dominate our training schedules here in the USAR like no other "mandatory" program that has come before.
It never ceases to amaze me that the Army can't figure out why retention, morale, and suicide are all on negative trend lines. Repeated deployments. Forced retirements. Resources for training severely cut. The force is stressed and has had just about enough of lip service from leaders, military and civilian.

You want to make a difference, really? Put your hand on your comrade's shoulder and take the time to listen, not coach, not consider your response, but really listen to what they are going through. For many, that is all they need. For those that need more, knowing that they aren't alone with those thoughts is helpful. For those who need more still, there are ample resources out there to encourage them to use or bring to bear on the problem.
When I was lowest, all I really wanted was some space to process it all. It took a long time to see a way out, and yes I will admit that it got pretty dark in there. I didn't know what to do, and that is a very rare event for me. The day I could see an outcome that did not involve disaster was the day it started looking better.

So I have two pieces of advice to those of you with a Soldier that is hurting:
1. If it looks like they need to take a knee for a while, make sure they do. Give them a pass. Encourage them to take leave. Don't allow the Army to take over their lives to the point they neglect what is really important at home.
2. Empathy is the best medicine. Don't try to overdo it with tales of how "you know how they feel" but be earnest and sincere in caring about your Soldier. Listen. The hardest part is waiting for the opening to say a few words. Consider them carefully. The slightest hint of insincerity will cripple your effort and cause the Soldier to tune you out.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2015 10:33 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Apr 2015 10:33:16 -0400

I realized, sitting in MRT on drill, that what we were getting was a secular sermon. I think we might have fewer problems that need this to address them if there was simply less hostility to religion.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2015 6:57 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Apr 2015 06:57:44 -0400

Honestly, I never found all that much value in it sir. What I believe helped me build resilience is being put in difficult and stressful situations and coming out on top. I learned to push through what I thought my limits were and keep moving forward. For example, after completing a 26.2 mile ruck march in Kuwait how bad can a 5 miler on a drill weekend be? I've been through worse and made it through.

I'm not going to completely knock the program, as I know it has helped some people. However, I don't think it's a silver bullet to build resiliency in our ranks by any means. For every troop the resiliency program helps there's probably at least one that just needs to toughen up some. I would argue that using that 8 hour block of MRT for some tough realistic training instead would be just as effective for a lot of our troops.

Response by CPT Jason Torpy made Apr 21 at 2015 10:36 AM

CPT Jason Torpy — Tue, 21 Apr 2015 10:36:15 -0400

Too bad spirituality leaders actively and prejudicially ignore humanists and other nontheists while chaplains advocate only for christian-specific or at least god-only resiliency activities. When will they include nontheist leaders to help nontheist troops.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2015 8:36 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Apr 2015 20:36:34 -0400

One of the issues with the increase in sexual assaults and other infractions such as alcohol related incidents, domestic violence, and so on is because the army lowered it's standards in order to put more soldiers on the battlefield. Then when those less caliber Soldiers broke the rules it was impossible to kick them out!

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2015 8:40 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Apr 2015 20:40:30 -0400

MRT, SSD, GAT, and the Myriad of other Computer based training and response is a complete waste of time and money. The Army ran fine before these programs came along. MRT and GAT have not lowered the Suicide rate or divorce rate.
But do you want to know what all of these programs do? They take away white space that command teams could use to invest in their Soldiers with quality face to face training. A Regimental Sergeant Major from Australia said it best when I worked with him down range. He Said " You know when I first worked with the US Army in the 80s I admired the way you guys trained and equipped men to fight. But, now it seems you man equipment to fight"

Response by SFC Stephen King made Apr 22 at 2015 5:37 AM

SFC Stephen King — Wed, 22 Apr 2015 05:37:07 -0400

As a young Soldier I heard "suck it up and drive on." A Resilient strategy the CSF2 problem shows or offers skills to in effect do just that. Non-verbal communication is up to 80% of the communication process.

Understanding how thoughts drive your Consequences following a trigger , positive and or negative resulting in how you feel and what you do. Gives you Self Awareness, Self Regulation, Mental Agility and builds Optimism. Ultimately, realizing that this skill will build your Connection.

Response by SPC Keelan Southerland made Apr 22 at 2015 5:58 PM

SPC Keelan Southerland — Wed, 22 Apr 2015 17:58:12 -0400

If the Army's army resiliency program was of any use why are 22 service members a day committing suicide?

The problem is the Military teaches us to kill. However, they do not teach us how to deal with what we do in the name of our country. Some of us turn to God others turn to Drugs and Booze to help with the aftermath. The current administration has demonized religion and called upon the full force of the military judicial system to deal their form of justice upon those who would try to help a struggling service member by showing a different way other than drugs and booze.

We had some guys try to kill themselves during 08-09 and the answer was take them off mission and send them to the army resiliency program. They were worse off and then ostracized when they came back to the unit. You cant fix everything with 287 million dollars. You need to tell these guys why they are fighting and discuss their religion. If they don't you need help them understand why killing is moral when protecting the life of those you deploy with.

The Army spends Hundreds of Millions on crappy programs with little to show for it. What they need to do is throw PC out of the window and talk about the morality of killing both from the religious stand point and secular view.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 3:01 PM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 15:01:11 -0400

It's about the carrot that is dangled. Moral in my Unit is low due to lack of funding resulting in a lack of "high speed" courses; combine that with military benefits that are continually decreasing or being changed for soldiers. Soldiers who work hard and are squared away typically go to the tougher "hooah" schools (as it should be). With exception to a good NCOER or APFT score, the soldiers get discouraged when they aren't rewarded with great opportunities to better themselves and their units. I'm am MRT and it has reached and affected some soldiers for the better. But to get the most branch for the buck, continue educational, retirement and military incentives to keep the SMs moral and motivation up. Classic example are two guy in our bit that trained hard for over 6 months for SAPPER school (one SM dropped out of school for the semester to train and accommodate the course. Both passed their physicals with flying colors. Their motivation and work ethic was contagious....so was the disappointment when they were dropped from the course 3 weeks and 4 weeks before their start date: reason was funding was pulled. That hurt the unit as a whole and sent a detrimental rippling statement to the rest of the Unit. Another example: State's Annual Governor's Twenty Rifle and Pistol Competion. It's an honor to go but the effort is definitely increased to better everyone's shooting performance. Again, canceled two weeks before the competition.

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 3:31 PM

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 15:31:03 -0400

I am a MRT and I have found that some of the modules are pretty helpful. I believe the low morale has stemmed from some of the completely illogical choices the senior leadership has made such as the new (and now rescinded) tattoo policy, Officers receiving "pink slips" while still serving in a combat zone, General Dempsey recently saying the capture of Ramadi by ISIS "was not symbolic in any way", the VA scandal, etc.
Also the effectiveness of any resilience program hinges on the attitudes and participation of the senior leadership. When you have XO's, Officer staff, and Senior NCO staff in the back of the room "clock watching" and making "hurry up" gestures then it is hard to effectively portray the program as something other than a waste of time or a joke or as a "mandatory" item on the training schedule.

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 4:53 PM

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 16:53:54 -0400

It's a joke. It deals with unfounded pop psychology such as positive and negative emotions. There are NO positive or negative emotions. Only positive and negative consequences of those emotions. Love has negative consequences when you get obsessed or write bad checks or fail to make good decisions due to it. Fear can save your life, heighten awareness and make you stronger, faster, and tougher. This is just ONE of the new age bs lines the current resiliency program is force feeding us. AGAIN illustrating the Army's inability to deal with the root problem and its tendency to try and put a pretty little strawberry shortcake bandaid on a gaping wound.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 9:18 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 21:18:12 -0400

Sir,
The program itself is pretty solid. It's the execution at the unit level that is lacking. I trained as an RTA in 2012 and was never asked to assist any training... ever. What I sat through as "MRT" training was a BN or CO level death-by-power point session, at least annually, where the MRT could not express any practical knowledge beyond what was already written on the slides. I recently completed the MRT course and can tell you that the unit led training sessions are nothing like the materials we were taught.

If you want to use it as a morale tool, remember that it is JUST that, a tool.. or set of tools. The morale can only truly be improved, if the culture and climate of the unit are conducive to better morale. I'm not saying to coddle and hug the Soldiers. Be tough and fair, but be empathetic also. Soldiers respond well to tough leaders that are leading by example in every deed and act. If we live the Army values and attempt to take care of our Soldiers, while performing the unit's mission... the morale will be positive.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 9:26 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 21:26:27 -0400

I am an MRT and I have to agree with all of the answers honestly. They all may be working against each other, however they are all true. Here is the problem that we have. I just taught a SHARP class yesterday and one of my slides that I created was about Culture and Culture Change. The pains of culture change are real, those of us that have been in the Army for any period of time have experienced (sometimes a LOT of DIFFERENT culture shifts).

Resiliency is one of those things, the Army noticed a problem and they implemented a program to try and intervene (and we are STILL trying to stop the bleeding by getting continual training as Master Trainers, in fact as I am clearing off post, I will actually take one of my clearing days to go to a v 3.1 class). Here is the problem that I see, we are now transitioning into a Garrison Army. Sounds contradictory right? Hear me out, when we are going, going, going and then we go to war and we apply what we learned, spend a year staying alive, come back and do it again in a year then it is something while stressful to some is actually more normal to us older guys.

When we are Garrison, we train, train, train and then we go nowhere, we just continue to train, train, train and the Army is not aware that this causes a different stress that we have not really accounted for. It is like getting someone hyped up for something that they will never complete, while at the same time we tell the guys that we MAY go somewhere someday. Our guys honestly get stressed to the point that we HAVE to account for this. This HAS to be built into the program.

It is not something that we cannot just give up on. We sit there and talk to people about Suicide and honestly the people that we chose to talk to them about it, makes people turn off to the message. I just went through that yesterday, the Chaplain came down right after my brief and did his Suicide brief and our guys were pretty much shut down. It has to be addressed different. Resilience though is something different, we cannot just stop, we just have to find the right sequence. We unfortunately are not going to reach everyone, that is just the nature of the beast. We have to reach the majority of them though, those that are willing to hear, those that we can sway to a more reasonable line of thinking, and those that are willing to learn. The ones that are none of the above, we just have to figure out a way to keep their head above water.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 10:44 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 22:44:32 -0400

I am MRT as well...but I can tell you this...the skills that are being taught have always been in place before this program started. Upon my return from multiple deployments I almost lost myself and couldn't fine my way back to who I am. I seemed help and learned that these very same skills saved my life. If anyone knows what cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT)...well it teaches you how to be resilient. I think the biggest issue with the program right now is who is teaching it. If the MRT who is teaching it doesn't embrace it then the ones receiving the training will not embrace it either...that goes with the CDR as well. I think when I teach this class I receive so much praise from the Soldiers, because they really never understood how to use it. Some didn't realize it was skill they could develop and use for themselves and others. When you have someone who embraces these skills and use real life situations to explain these skills and how to use them...it then becomes more effective. I think now the Army has realized that they need instructors who what to do this instead of forcing individuals to be a MRT

Response by MSG(P) Thomas Finn made Apr 23 at 2015 11:18 PM

MSG(P) Thomas Finn — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 23:18:31 -0400

Resiliency is like many other programs in the Army such as PRT: great idea, lots of money spent but improperly enforced. I remember recalling an instructor saying we needed to do Resiliency in order to check a box and another saying we need numbers up for the Command and Staff briefing..... really

Resiliency would benefit the Soldier and the Army if it was taking seriously. Command needs to fully engage it, take it seriously and reep the rewards. If properly applied it will benefit more than soldiering but also greatly improve life outside the Army. Giddy up Leaders!!!!!!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 11:29 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 23:29:41 -0400

Everything that is taught as part of the program is common sense, or at least generally understood by anyone who has established individual resiliency by experiencing life. Of course it is better to think optimistically as opposed to pessimistic ally. Obviously open communication is more effective than passive aggressiveness. Everyone understands that certain things trigger emotional responses. And everyone experiencing emotion should have learned in life that controlling emotions allows greater control over circumstantial outcome. I think the Army should invest less in all these ridiculous programs and more into selectively disqualifying those who lack resiliency and confidence. Also should disqualify anyone who cannot meet 30 points each event on the APFT prior to basic training as well. Some people do need focused resiliency style mentorship, but that should come from empathetic, competent and confident leaders who can provide that one on one. Being more selective at MEPS would lead to a far more capable corps of leaders who would be effective at such things. My opinion is that the Army standard for recruitment eligibility has allowed weak and under qualified citizen volunteers to populate the ranks and the NCO corps. This has created a force that needs a band aid that we call MRT. Hard to talk resiliency to a group of IET trainees who at an astonishing rate desire to quit in the first week because they didn't know the course would be slightly demanding. And even more who don't even posses enough self-pride to push themselves to achieve success. Hard to bitch about failing your APFT after you chose to walk for 1/3 of it when it got a little hard to keep going. It is slightly generational, but everyone in this generation is not lazy. The Army just appeals more to those who consider it a last resort because they haven't or cannot negotiate the demands of life to that point. At least, that seems to be the majority of those who show up these days. Those are the types who need resiliency training.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 11:37 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 23:37:35 -0400

Here is the way i see it. The army and its components along with the other branches have sought, over the years to "mainstream" our martial society. As a result, we have come more online with mainstream society's problems (suicide, alcoholism, etc). That these rates are going up is,in my opinion the result of achieving parity. That said, if we want to solve the problem of suicide rates (by the way a lot of those who atempt have never been deployed ) we have to decide if we want to continue down this road or move back to a more martial lifestyle. Or i am just getting older and the water used to taste better lol.

Response by COL Roger Cotton made May 28 at 2015 1:03 PM

COL Roger Cotton — Thu, 28 May 2015 13:03:31 -0400

I attended MRT school in 2009 and started a program in our unit. I found it very helpful to begin to understand the inner dimension of myself. I began to see connections between thoughts, emotions and my behavior. Later, I conducted suicide investigations where I interviewed the family and friends to understand the issues that led to the event and lessons we could use for prevention. In these two lives, and in many, many more reports I read, a common thread was commonly a lack of emotional regulation. These soldiers felt emotional pain, usually from relationship stress, and took the quickest solution they saw. Without hope, or healthier alternative, they chose to end it all. I'm also ASSIST trained, and while that is great to "talk someone off the ledge", we have no better approaches to strengthening the inner dimension than the MRT program and religious expression to provide hope.

I also see where the Army Center for Enhanced Performance (ACEP) linked into CSF2 to add the mental preparedness of combat skills. Great idea to begin to explore and improve training our mental game. The goals aren't always complementary, but the skills they provide are useful, and can be enhanced beyond simple life skills, like goal setting, to more specialized skills for combat requirements.

It's not a waste, it won't save every life or situation, but it's been a great efforts with dedicated trainers. Behavior change is challenging; just try to start or stop a habit. Training Soldiers on positive coping mechanisms when life gets unexpectedly tough, will take years of "rewiring" but it's eventually going to result in life change.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made May 29 at 2015 3:13 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Fri, 29 May 2015 15:13:50 -0400

Blood tests. Lecture on having a healthy family. Two pills per day. Then I crashed and burned.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 11 at 2016 11:50 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 23:50:02 -0500

The training is seen as more of a burden than a tool to be used and learned. The skills are great and do help, but only if the leadership has buyin and integrates the skills into training.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2016 6:31 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 06:31:19 -0500

Just like anything else, Sir, you get out of it what you put into it.