Why has being mediocre become the standard?

The moral of this is with what the Army is going to now should weed out the complainers and the minimal achievers because they won't compete with their peers and after too long will get a pink slip. Don't stress or waste your time worrying about what you can't change and lead from the front...

From my experience, it all started going down hill since 9/11. It has a lot to do with our leadership being too concentrated on being politically correct rather than making our Military strong.

Thank you for asking this question! In the 90's during the draw down the phrase "no more task foce smiths" spread throughout the Army. I submit continued justification of mediocracy in order to avoid hard work, offense, or political correctness errors will cause another task force smith. When will we understand combat has changed, but we are not AT&T, GM or Disneyland. We win in combat or die.

SSG, I don't believe meeting the standards is a detriment to the force. In fact, meeting the standard is simply the minimum effort a Soldier needs to maintain to continue their career in the military. Those who choose to exceed above the minimum are rewarded through promotions above the zone, placed in leadership positions and given opportunities to specialized schools. It is my opinion, that a the duty of a leader is to motivate soldiers to exceed the minimum by showing them the benefits and rewards. We all know there are those "that will" and "will not" we must show that the will to do is worth it!

When you enter a command, someone should introduce you to the commander and he should explain his expectations....which will always be meet HW and pass all areas of the PT with 75% or above

This is an excellent discussion topic. As an instructor, I talk about this with my students in every class (WO candidates, WOILE, and WOSSE). In my 26 years, I have also seen a shift from 'striving for excellence' to 'good enough.' Why do leaders allow this good enough mentality? As a young sergeant, my JAG Offices let everyone know what the high PT score, low PT score, and office average (for both enlisted and officers). There was an implied office or unit standard well in excess of the minimum Army standard. Failing to meet the the unit standard meant remedial training.

This is the same for duty performance as well. if a Soldier, or officer for that matter, was not up to par, they were counseled and provided all of the tools they needed to improve. At some point, some were let go. There is nothing wrong with that; some people are just not meant for this line of work under the stresses that we must be able to endure.

This 'just good enough' mediocrity that is rampant in society, schools, and even in some units of the military is disastrous to our economy, our national pride, and our effectiveness as a world leader. Leaders at all levels must take the hard right over the lazy, emotionally less stressful tolerance we are accepting now.

As every good Sergeant Major used to say, 'without correction you are setting a new standard.' We have allowed the new standard of mediocrity to take over. I like to say, we do not have subordinates, we have junior leaders. Push your junior leaders to be better than you.

Here is one. Our job is to destroy the enemy. Why is so little emphasis placed on marksmanship vs PT? I know many have seen it. Punish a soldier for being off by barely a second on a run, then later that week give some NCO or officer or soldier 80 rds to qualify marksman on m4, or more commonly they get 40 rds, don't qualify and nothing bad happens.

1SG (Join to see) Standards are established to rate personnel who excel and challenge those who don't. Simple concept, but society has watered this down and the products of that water down society are now fully engrained in all professions, including ours.

When children are told score doesn't matter, passing is excelling, and success only has one level, we have established a culture where excelling is no longer required.

On the opposite side of this are raters (in the civilian and military world) who use a "bell curve" approach to rating. This means if you are rating five Soldiers only one may be rated as among the best or excellent three as fully capable or successful and one as marginal or meets the standard. This system does not reward true performance but instead pigeon holes personnel into ratings. This system results in employees whose morale is poor and who do not care or feel valued when they exceed the standard consequently they have no motivation to exceed the standard.

The there are personnel who receive false ratings or extended ratings. These personnel are convinced they are better than they are and are shocked when they are accurately rated.

Standards must be met, enforced, and personnel trained and educated as well as informed on what the standards are, how to meet them, and how to exceed them. Job knowledge is no excuse for not meeting APFT or AR 600-9 standards. While I believe in a whole person concept, I embrace the whole person meeting the minimum standard.

You may have an excellent Soldier from a technical perspective who barely passes APFT, but always passes. The NCOER is a good tool for rating that Soldier. If the same Soldier fails the APFT, but is not flagged, received a favorable NCOER, is PCSd, and receives an award when PCSing to his or her next unit is upon arrival immediately flagged for APFT, we as NCOs have failed that Soldier.

NCOs enforce the standard. That is one of our primary missions on behalf of our Commanders.

PT matters, Body Fat Matters, technical and tactical proficiency matter, good order and discipline matter. It all matters. Depending upon your MOS one may need to be more emphasized than another. But minimum standards are the minimum.

We have a society that give every kid an award for just showing up. Everyone or team cannot win first place or get a trophy. If you come in second; you need to evaluate, make changes, and compete again. The military is just a reflection of society, but historically has been a test bed for change.

1SG (Join to see) I knew a friend from the Missile Silos of the Titan II Program. He admitted was to the hospital to lose weight which did not happen. He was not overweight but he had a large frame and muscular. So the weight issue may be at best, subjective. I ran the 1 1/2 in 7:45 and sports everywhere I went and was slim but some people have physiological factors that preclude their ability to fight the weight problem.