America’s Dilemma: U.S. Army Senior Leader Misconduct
One of the most respected professions among any ethical society has shown a significant weakness among its leadership at an alarming rate in recent history. More specifically, in the United States (U.S.) the Armed Forces are in an ethical dilemma. Among all of the U.S. Armed Forces, the U.S. Army has seen a staggering spike in senior leader misconduct in the twenty-first century, by the likes of which has never been recorded (Tan). In reaction to this, the U.S. Army has committed to ethical transparency involving misconduct among all of its members, including the most senior, most respected leaders. The Army has attempted to use transparency to combat this dilemma. This transparency …show more content…
Soldiers that live by these values Honor the trust of their country’s people and make it second nature when making valuable choices. Integrity is, of course, doing things right, legally, morally and ethically. Finally, gumption or Personal Courage is the characteristic that encourages the Soldier to confront ethical, political, and physical dangers with a moral compass that leads a situation in the right direction. Each of these are what a leader is and does and encourages others to be and do (Goarmy.com). Every organization’s leadership is important to stability and strength in that organization. The Army is no different and even more so due to the great amount of danger that the missions that its membership undertakes. The risks associated with the Army’s operations, must be eased with the loyalty and trust shared through each rank of the membership. The membership of this institute, the largest employer in the country, must know for which it stands. Brigade General Bryan T. Roberts publicly warned his troops at Fort Jackson, S.C., last spring that he and the Army had …show more content…
Whether a young private does not know any better in a certain incident is not important if they have lost vision on the values. The difference between the young Soldier and the senior leader, when it comes to misconduct and lapses in judgement, comes down to time available to recover. When a junior enlisted Soldier makes a misconduct mistake it will usually take a couple of years in order for them to completely recover and redeem themselves. The senior leader, however, is not afforded the couple of years. Plus, the seasoned member, with the experience, should know better. They have been instructed and reminded for years prior to the misconduct. These doctrines are exactly what the Soldier is supposed to be and what the Soldier expects from others in the organization (Goarmy.com). With each new tier of importance and stature, the one enduring theme is that when each individual does right, everyone will emulate and do right. However, if a Soldier makes poor decisions, the matter often brings down the unit around them until the values are applied (Bozarth). When it brings down the units their work efficiency declines. Many organizations, at all levels, publicize a zero tolerance for misconduct among commissioned officers and senior non-commissioned officers. Any level of excusal or enabling of a senior leader’s poor behavior and/or decision making can become toxic to the unity of the
One of the most respected professions among any ethical society has shown a significant weakness among its leadership at an alarming rate in recent history. More specifically, in the United States (U.S.) the Armed Forces are in an ethical dilemma. Among all of the U.S. Armed Forces, the U.S. Army has seen a staggering spike in senior leader misconduct in the twenty-first century, by the likes of which has never been recorded (Tan). In reaction to this, the U.S. Army has committed to ethical transparency involving misconduct among all of its members, including the most senior, most respected leaders. The Army has attempted to use transparency to combat this dilemma. This transparency …show more content…
Soldiers that live by these values Honor the trust of their country’s people and make it second nature when making valuable choices. Integrity is, of course, doing things right, legally, morally and ethically. Finally, gumption or Personal Courage is the characteristic that encourages the Soldier to confront ethical, political, and physical dangers with a moral compass that leads a situation in the right direction. Each of these are what a leader is and does and encourages others to be and do (Goarmy.com). Every organization’s leadership is important to stability and strength in that organization. The Army is no different and even more so due to the great amount of danger that the missions that its membership undertakes. The risks associated with the Army’s operations, must be eased with the loyalty and trust shared through each rank of the membership. The membership of this institute, the largest employer in the country, must know for which it stands. Brigade General Bryan T. Roberts publicly warned his troops at Fort Jackson, S.C., last spring that he and the Army had …show more content…
Whether a young private does not know any better in a certain incident is not important if they have lost vision on the values. The difference between the young Soldier and the senior leader, when it comes to misconduct and lapses in judgement, comes down to time available to recover. When a junior enlisted Soldier makes a misconduct mistake it will usually take a couple of years in order for them to completely recover and redeem themselves. The senior leader, however, is not afforded the couple of years. Plus, the seasoned member, with the experience, should know better. They have been instructed and reminded for years prior to the misconduct. These doctrines are exactly what the Soldier is supposed to be and what the Soldier expects from others in the organization (Goarmy.com). With each new tier of importance and stature, the one enduring theme is that when each individual does right, everyone will emulate and do right. However, if a Soldier makes poor decisions, the matter often brings down the unit around them until the values are applied (Bozarth). When it brings down the units their work efficiency declines. Many organizations, at all levels, publicize a zero tolerance for misconduct among commissioned officers and senior non-commissioned officers. Any level of excusal or enabling of a senior leader’s poor behavior and/or decision making can become toxic to the unity of the