Posted on May 15, 2017
Why Our Military Should Consider a Don’t Care, Don’t Trust Policy
47.8K
233
36
73
73
0
In 1994, the military implemented a policy called Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) that prohibited discrimination and harassment against LGBTQ personnel in the military. DADT was reversed in 2011. With LGBTQ personnel now fully integrated into the military, today we face a different challenge from an erosion of caring. Perhaps today, we should consider a Don’t Care, Don’t Trust (DCDT) policy that addresses the central issue of trust among Soldiers, trust in leaders, and trust in the Army as an institution. A DCDT policy might directly address leaders who don’t genuinely care for or about the soldiers, civilians, and families under their watch.
Have you ever trusted someone or something you didn’t care about? Of course not. Caring is the progenitor of trust. We care about our family and friends and we trust them; well, most of them anyway. We trust our doctors, but do we care about them? You probably should care about them if you want the best care and treatment from them. Although they took a Hippocratic Oath, the human side of them may spend more time with someone they have an emotional connection with. So what does caring have to do with Soldiers, leaders, and the Army as an institution?
Each year, the Army requires all units to take a command climate survey that measures the level of trust amongst Soldiers, trust in leaders and trust in the Army in general. Having completed this survey numerous times and viewed results over the last three decades, I have a few anecdotal observations.
First, trust among Soldiers is built on the “Band of Brothers” concept. If Soldiers don’t care about one another and they act as individuals who are out for themselves, then trust is low. If they build unit cohesion and start to really care about one another, then they look to their left and right and trust that those people will have their backs when the going gets tough. Second, trust in leaders is built on the foundation of leaders caring for and about their soldiers, civilians, and families in their units. If leaders are self-serving and place themselves ahead of those they lead, they are seen as uncaring and untrustworthy. On the other hand, if leaders truly care about their soldiers and look after their soldiers’ interests ahead of their own, they appear to be more genuine, caring, and trustworthy. Finally, for Soldiers to trust the Army as an institution, they must believe that they are being treated fairly and being cared for. When the institution fails, it is because Army leaders fail in caring for others and in applying Army rules, policies, and guidelines fairly and equitably across the ranks. The Army foundation of trust is built with bricks and mortar (caring) and it is only as strong as the degree to which a philosophy of caring permeates the institution.
So, why not consider a Don’t Care, Don’t Trust (DCDT) policy. If you don’t care, why should I trust you?
**
This editorial represents my opinion and does not reflect the views or policies of the United States Army Reserve, the US Army or the Department of Defense.
Have you ever trusted someone or something you didn’t care about? Of course not. Caring is the progenitor of trust. We care about our family and friends and we trust them; well, most of them anyway. We trust our doctors, but do we care about them? You probably should care about them if you want the best care and treatment from them. Although they took a Hippocratic Oath, the human side of them may spend more time with someone they have an emotional connection with. So what does caring have to do with Soldiers, leaders, and the Army as an institution?
Each year, the Army requires all units to take a command climate survey that measures the level of trust amongst Soldiers, trust in leaders and trust in the Army in general. Having completed this survey numerous times and viewed results over the last three decades, I have a few anecdotal observations.
First, trust among Soldiers is built on the “Band of Brothers” concept. If Soldiers don’t care about one another and they act as individuals who are out for themselves, then trust is low. If they build unit cohesion and start to really care about one another, then they look to their left and right and trust that those people will have their backs when the going gets tough. Second, trust in leaders is built on the foundation of leaders caring for and about their soldiers, civilians, and families in their units. If leaders are self-serving and place themselves ahead of those they lead, they are seen as uncaring and untrustworthy. On the other hand, if leaders truly care about their soldiers and look after their soldiers’ interests ahead of their own, they appear to be more genuine, caring, and trustworthy. Finally, for Soldiers to trust the Army as an institution, they must believe that they are being treated fairly and being cared for. When the institution fails, it is because Army leaders fail in caring for others and in applying Army rules, policies, and guidelines fairly and equitably across the ranks. The Army foundation of trust is built with bricks and mortar (caring) and it is only as strong as the degree to which a philosophy of caring permeates the institution.
So, why not consider a Don’t Care, Don’t Trust (DCDT) policy. If you don’t care, why should I trust you?
**
This editorial represents my opinion and does not reflect the views or policies of the United States Army Reserve, the US Army or the Department of Defense.
Leadership
Service
Teamwork
Policy
Command Post
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 28
4
4
0
I don't trust command climate surveys to have any influence. They're completely worthless.
A better approach would be to conduct an external evaluation, similar to what we used to do in the field. Won't happen, though, as that would reveal all the holes in the system.
A better approach would be to conduct an external evaluation, similar to what we used to do in the field. Won't happen, though, as that would reveal all the holes in the system.
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
MG Bosse; I would agree with everything you have commented on, however the line of care and trust needs to be across the board. I have noticed in the last few years that upper echelon leaders are failing to care for their Soldiers of a lower capacity. When a leader in the trenches fight for their Soldiers a lot of them are being targeted by their superiors. A lot of military leaders have the "It's not me attitude" and only care about what directly affects them. Toxic leadership is becoming more prevalent across the military due to a lot of failed policies. I remember a time when a SFC could fight for his Soldiers and there was little that could be done to them, however that is changing now and senior NCO's are being disrespected and not valued by the officer appointed over them.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
MG Peter Bosse, Sir, I absolutely agree that demonstrating care begets trust -- or at the very least is a necessary progenitor in developing trust. What I don't see, however, is a cohesive model for how to instantiate that sense of caring among Army leaders that don't demonstrate it presently. It's one thing to call out caring as the root of the trust problem, but it's something all together different to have a plan of action to bootstrap that in where it isn't currently present. Existing leaders, unless at the earliest points in their career, may already be too far along to effectively change their management style to take the "care" factor fully into consideration. Do you have any thoughts, then, on how to account for that?
As an aside, Sir, I was with the 335th for several years, including deploying with them, nearly a decade ago (~2007-2010), and the lack of feeling like the unit and its leaders gave a damn beyond lip-service really hurt morale for many. I saw quite a few troops decide to leave the Army altogether because of the 335th's leadership style -- one that at the time exhibited the exact problem you spoke about -- and people went so far as to be ashamed to wear the patch. By now, pretty much everyone I once knew has long-since shifted out, but I wonder what your take is on how the unit has changed since.
As an aside, Sir, I was with the 335th for several years, including deploying with them, nearly a decade ago (~2007-2010), and the lack of feeling like the unit and its leaders gave a damn beyond lip-service really hurt morale for many. I saw quite a few troops decide to leave the Army altogether because of the 335th's leadership style -- one that at the time exhibited the exact problem you spoke about -- and people went so far as to be ashamed to wear the patch. By now, pretty much everyone I once knew has long-since shifted out, but I wonder what your take is on how the unit has changed since.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Not sure what, exactly, you are trying to get at here, but the basic notion, I think, is detrimental to good discipline. In most cases it does not matter if you trust your CoC, you must still obey their lawful orders. This hypothetical policy gives even the lowest ranking an excuse for not obeying lawful orders. If a commander, or senior NCO, does not have the trust of their subordinates, then they will not have their loyalty. Eventually it will show in the leader's inability to get anything done.
(3)
(0)
LCpl Shane Couch
Agreed. This proposed policy would be an easy out for someone who is and continues to be derelict in duties. Basically creating the worlds largest "adult" baby sitting service in the U.S. Military.
(2)
(0)
SGT Edward Wilcox
PO2 Liston Penningtom - You must have had a very short and blessed time in the Navy if you think no one is going to die obeying orders. It happens, especially in the military. Sometimes it's an accident, sometimes it's because of incompetence, and sometimes, especially in combat, it is unavoidable. None of these is an excuse for not obeying orders.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
That's a good question, how can you trust someone you don't care about? And can the person you don't care about trust you? Do you think they REALLY got your six?
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
The ones with shit attitude are prone to friendly fire because broken teams and lack of trust. The recruiting just going for bodies and quotas. Screening recruits could be refined.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
The first thing I can say is that every commander needs to work with the top enlisted to start building a climate for cohesion within the unit. Second you need leadership by example and always being a professional. Unfortunately some units don't have that luxury because accomplishing the mission should be paramount. You accomplish the mission and then you take care of your people. There is no other way around that. If you take care of your men and when the decision comes that you need to send them to war and they need to follow orders and they don't do it,what is going to happen? Are you still going to take care of them? The military is an organization where you have to grow up quick or you are going to get washed out. You are a full grown man/woman or other. If you are doing the right things and learning from you upper ranks and do what you are supposed to be
doing people are going to take care of you but you have to hold up your side of the bargain as well like following regulations, showing up on time to formations, showing a positive attitude, willing to learn and just showing some initiative and motivation. If you are an individual that has all kinds of problems like bouncing checks, always being late fro formations not caring about your job always complaining about everything and bad mouthing you NCO's. They are only going to take care of you for a while and then they are going to cut the strings and send you on your way by counseling you all the time until they force you out.
doing people are going to take care of you but you have to hold up your side of the bargain as well like following regulations, showing up on time to formations, showing a positive attitude, willing to learn and just showing some initiative and motivation. If you are an individual that has all kinds of problems like bouncing checks, always being late fro formations not caring about your job always complaining about everything and bad mouthing you NCO's. They are only going to take care of you for a while and then they are going to cut the strings and send you on your way by counseling you all the time until they force you out.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
Being is gay is irrelevant to a job. I was in the military in the 70s. Being gay was a definite no-no. You got an Article 15, you were harassed and discharged. My roommate was gay. We trusted each other as friends. I made allowances and learned a person's proclivities made no difference.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I had some really good leaders and some really bad leaders. The best leader I ever had was a Platoon Leader who did everything he could to keep us safe in Iraq. He even stuck his own neck and career on the line to make sure we were not "cannon fodder". The worst leader was the exact opposite, put us on a 9-5 schedule like a regular job and left the insurgents plenty of time to set up nice little IEDs for us to run over the following morning. I think the military needs to look at their own history and realize we are not a political organization but a combat organization and politics has never helped us do our jobs.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google