Destructive Zero Defect

Army leaders must balance the link between the Army’s culture and it’s climate and institutional practices. When there is a proper balance it has a huge impact on the mindset of the Army’s Soldiers. Their actions or inactions impacts the five key attributes of the profession, and the four fields of expertise, and have long term effects on the Army’s culture and climate. These actions influence Soldiers’ perceptions that they are serving professional who have answered the call of service to the republic, it is important that Soldiers understand that their role is a calling and not just a job.

Blame for misconduct, falsity, deception in military actions ultimately falls upon leadership and even extends to political policy makers, however, the enlisted Soldiers on the sharp end bears an equal responsibility where every misstep is documented real-time in the multi-media age we live in today. Therefore, it is essential that leaders train and educate all ranks on the importance of building trust with each other and with the civilian population while also maintaining professional behavior on and off the battlefield. The adage that it takes years to build trust but a moment to lose trust most always be on the back of a Soldier’s mind.

Our nation’s military continuously evolves to ensure success in future operations. This change is only be possible if our top leaders work in concert towards a common goal. The purpose of this document is to highlight how General Stanley McChrystal changed the manner in which the U.S. Military operates and communicates in an ever-changing environment.

The United States Army is always constantly changing as we are a living breathing organization. From the time that Soldiers were drafted into the Army and went straight to war, to the Soldiers just signing up and doing their time and getting out. In today’s Army there are more and more of our service members staying in twenty years or even longer turning the Army profession into their careers and livelihood. As the Army continues to change we have begun to shift to be a better professional Army. “Professionals require years of study and practice before they are capable of expert work” (DA HQ, 2010, p. 2). Professionals use life-long pursuit to build their knowledge to become an expert in their field. In turn, they then lead, train and develop other Soldiers to become skilled professionals in their

Turn on the TV or read a newspaper and it won’t be long before you hear or read about a high ranking military member being charged with or facing allegations of misconduct. As a result of recent headlines, we as a military organization are losing the sacred trust invested in us by the very people we are in uniform to protect, the American people. This includes the young men and women who will join our ranks on a daily basis. We as a professional organization need to bring about a cultural change, a re-calibration of sorts, within the ranks of our Officers and Non-Commissioned Officers. Only after we realign our leaders can we begin to eliminate the ineffective leaders and nurture a new professional organization, one that can rebuild

The United States Army is in a state of decline. The Army’s senior leaders are either oblivious to the decline or only care about the popular issues such as sexual harassment or hazing. Today’s junior leaders are either incompetent, feel their hands are tied, or simply do not get the backing from their senior leaders in order to effectively make changes. Our senior leaders blame their junior leaders, and our junior leaders blame their senior leaders. The fact of the matter is that all leaders, from the Chief of Staff of the Army to newest Corporal that was recently promoted this month, have to lead.

On August 2, 2011, Congress passed the Budget Control Act (BCA) of 2011 which cut $487 billion from projected defense spending over the next 10 years.1 The act also established a system of sequestration, which would cut an additional $495 billion from the defense budget.2 Altogether, the BCA would cut almost $1 trillion dollars from the Department of Defense (DoD). The passing of the BCA and the subsequent loss of funding mark an end to a 13-year period of robust budget allocations to support the global war on terrorism. From 2001 to 2013 over $1.6 trillion has been allocated to the DoD to support preparations for and execution of operations in various overseas areas.3 Within this $1.6 trillion, 94% of the funding was allocated to support operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.4 This robust amount of funding cultivated a culture within the DoD that there would always be funding available to cover costs at home and abroad. This culture is deeply entrenched within the United States Army due to large budgets provided to the Army over the past 13 years. In today’s environment of shrinking budgets, this culture can no longer stand true and must be changed. Establishing a cost-conscious culture (CCC) within the Army is critical to our ability to sustain the current Army force structure and make the needed modernization investments to ensure our capability to fight and win our nations wars.

Contractual standards under which new recruits joining the Army apply through have been under extreme scrutiny. As leaders brought up in a high operational tempo, we have spent a lot of time discussing what we believe to be lax standards. Serving as a detailed recruiter has changed my perception of what I felt I knew, and opened my eyes to the Army’s plan for the future. The challenges we face may not necessarily be those that we see right in front of us. Rather the challenge is what are we leaving behind when we depart the service? The Army spends vast amounts of money every year in the recruitment, and training of new recruits every year. The commanders, senior leaders, and American people entrust us to train the future of The United States Army. Formations have spoken and the Army has listened, but have we as leaders misinterpreted the answer? Topics I will cover will be the Army’s renewed and more stringent qualification process

The military has the ability to provide a new set of social opportunities and is one of the few social institutions with the capability to initiate long-term change. This change begins immediately when the recruit enters basic training. At this time, the recruits are

branches have to change their mindsets and judgments of its soldiers and military personnel. If

It has had time to fail on several occasions but most importantly, perfect its craft and come up with creative ways to make it better than it was. The Army has shaped millions of Professionals starting with World War I through now Operation Freedom’s Sentinel. With the pressure of these wars, Professional men and women composed of military, civilians and contractors have seen first-hand what creates a better workplace environment and what works against it. In order to support the culture of being theoretical and practical when it comes to continuously creating Professional leaders in the Army, they have to steadily self-assess and conduct testing operations to decide whether the results are worth meeting the standards of Profession and

In the history of our great nation, the one constant factor that has separated us from the rest of the world has been the Core Values that we uphold as a nation. The military service has to uphold these values at all times, as both our citizens and the citizens of countries worldwide look up to us to do so. Charles W. Pickering states, “A healthy democracy requires a decent society; it requires that we are honorable, generous, tolerant and respectful” (Pickering, Unknown). By not upholding the values of our society, the reputation of our military, and ultimately that of our country suffers. The way that our Army abides by these Core Values is a set of standards known as the Army Values. The Army Values is the code by which all Soldiers

The purpose of this essay is to expand my understanding of the importance of following instructions and why is it critical in a military setting. The United States Military is the most lethal and well trained armed force on this planet. It did not start out this way, it was started out by a handful of colonists that had unresolved grievances with their king. A few hundred years later, that very same military is able to drop a bomb or move troops anywhere in the world within a day. I will be explaining why discipline, the value of teamwork, the chain of command, and the importance following orders all play essential roles in ensuring the United States military “machine” continues to function in every theater it operates in.

The military is unified under the ethos of mission and teamwork that helps to establish task and purpose while also molding a service members’ identity. Therefore, two issues military leaders must address are psychological capital and social loafing.

The military mindset seems to be moving toward a corporate way of thinking, but differences still exist. Recruiting and human resource functions are separate, which can lead to a candidate’s unrealistic expectations. Also, the lack of continuous performance feedback and training opportunities develop a gap between the organization’s expectations and the quality of output from the fleet.