1 / 16

Final MSA 601 Presentation

Final Presentation for Charles Gill for CMU MSA 601

gill2cm
Download Presentation

Final MSA 601 Presentation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Building an Organizational Climate of Trust in the Army COMBATING a culture of DISHONESTY IN THE OFFICER CORPS

  2. Agenda • Background: War College Study • Root Causes of the Problem • Second and Third-Order Effects • Solutions • Foundations Consulting • Conclusion

  3. 2015 Army War College Study • Officers in the Army “have become ethically numb (Gerras and Wong, 2015, pg. ix) • Extremely uncomfortable subject • Problem is not new • 2002 Army War College Report (Wong, 2002) • 1970 Army War College Report (U.S. Army War College Staff, 1970) • “An officer’s signature and word have become tools to maneuver through the Army bureaucracy (Gerras and Wong, 2015, pg. ix). “

  4. War College Study: Examples • 2012 IG Report: 0 of 16 locations inspected were compliant with ARFORGEN training requirements (Gerras and Wong, 2015, pg. 5) • “We’ve always pencil-whipped training.” (Gerras and Wong, 2015, pg. 8) • Off-post inspections • Counseling Dates • Partner Unit Readiness Assessments

  5. Roots of the Problem:Unrealistic Requirements • 2002: 297 days of mandatory training, only 265 training days (Wong, 2002, pg. 7) • Senior leaders unwilling to prioritize (Wong, 2002, pg. 8) • Leaders must report noncompliance or lie

  6. Roots of the Problem:Enacted Values • Espoused Value: Integrity • Enacted Value: Zero Defects • Giving the boss what he/she want’s to hear • Personal Courage

  7. Roots of the Problem:Investment in Human Capital • Invest $100k-$300k per new officer • Highest quality officers not sent to instruct in the officer training pipeline, the “encounter” phase of socialization • ROTC can be a career-ender for senior officers (Brown, 2015) • Need for high-integrity, high-performing officers for our future officers to emulate

  8. Second and Third Order Effects • Does not Enable Evidence-Based Decision Making • Bad data for strategic decisions • Can put the unit that gave the bad data, in a worse situation in the future • Degrades trust within the team • Undermines chain of command • “Do as I say, not as I do”

  9. Solution #1:Revamp Training Requirements • Goal Specificity • Rewrite AR 350-1 • Accepting Risk • Prioritize

  10. Solution #2: Enacting Espoused Values • Reward officers for honesty • Remove zero-defect mentality • Surprise Inspections • No more than eight hours of a company’s time per year • Accurate reporting of compliance scores highly • Inaccurate reporting scores low • Reflects on officer evaluations

  11. Solution #3: Valuing Human Capital • Treat Officer Training Jobs as “Key Developmental” • Separate ROTC boards from Battalion Command • Two options to improve quality of senior officers working in the training pipeline: • ROTC and instructor selection occurs after senior officers have completed their command time • Place Majors in charge of programs at each school

  12. Why Choose Foundations Consulting? • 50/50 mix of Prior-Military and Human Resources Professionals from Corporate American • Proven Organizational Theory behind our solutions means they will work • We do more than just ideas • You need someone committed for the long haul

  13. Conclusions • Officer Corps is becoming ethically number, but it is reversible • Erodes the Army’s effectiveness and its leaders’ abilities to make evidence-based decisions • Foundations Consulting Provides a Three-Pronged Approach: • Revamp training requirements • Enact the Army Value of Integrity and Remove the Zero Defect mentality • Invest Human Capital in the Officer Training Pipeline

  14. Questions?

  15. References (1 of 2) Brown, C. (August 2015) It’s Time The Army Got Over Its Problem With ROTC Instructors. Task and Purpose. Retrieved 6 August 2015 from: http://taskandpurpose.com/its-time-the-army-got-over-its-problem-with-rotc-instructors/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share&utm_content=tp-share This article, written by an Army Oficer, asserts that the Army does not prioritize manning billets for cadre in the Reserve Officer Training Corps. Specifically, he asserts that the positions are potentially career enders for officers and the Army needs to take steps to teach and train young officers in this impressionable phase of their development. Calaruso, M., Lyle, D., & Wardynski, C. (February 2010) Assessing Talent: The Foundation of a U.S. Army Officer Corps Strategy. Strategic Studies Institute. Retrieved 27 July 2015 from: http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB972.pdf This paper, published by three Army officers, discusses the financial costs of recruiting, training, and assessing officers into the Army. It provides cost analysis for each commissioning source and statistics to show which commissioning source provides the most successful officers as well as discusses the best options should the Army need to increase the number of officers it commissions annually. Fugate, M. & Kinicki, A (2012). Organizational Behavior: Key Concept, Skills, and Best Practices (Fifth Edition). United States: McGraw-Hill Education. The authors, professors at Arizona State University and Southern Methodist University, introduce key concepts in organization behavior in a textbook. These concepts are complemented by real-life anecdotes to relate the lessons to the business world.

  16. References (2 of 2) Gerras, S. & Wong, L. (February 2015) Lying to Ourselves: Dishonesty in the Army Profession Strategic Studies Institute. Retrieved 21 July 2015 from: http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=1250 This article, written by two professor at the Army War College, asserts that the Army officer corps has become ethically numb due to a deluge of unrealistic requirements and a zero-defect mentality in the Army. It argues that this culture has existed since at least the Vietnam War and is continuing to worsen, endangering the future of the Army. U.S. Army War College Staff. (June 1970) Study on Military Professionalism. U.S Army War College. http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/cgsc/carl/gateway/officer_education.asp This article, written in 1970 by the Army War College Staff, is a study commissioned by the Chief Of Staff of the Army. It examines the ethics, morality, and professional competence of the Officer Corps. It discovers a significant gap between the morality the Army teaches and what it practices and proposes solutions. Wong, L. (April 2002) Stifled Innovation? Developing Tomorrow’s Leaders Today. Strategic Studies Institute. Retrieved 1 August 2015 from: http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=279 This article, written by an Army War College Professor, asserts that the Army is stifling the creativity and innovation of leaders by placing unreasonable and unmanageable training burdens on Army units, leaving them no time to plan or execute any training they believe is important

More Related