JOINT BASE CHARLESTON, S.C. –
Being the best at what we do is a value shared by each of the armed services. The Air Force covers this in its "Excellence in all we do" value, while the Navy covers it in its "Commitment" value. Improvement of individuals and commands is something all the services devote tremendous resources to. Individuals are called upon to further their qualifications, their education and their physical fitness levels. Commands are called upon to have the highest mission completion rates, best inspection results and highest advancement rates.
Motivations toward improvement stem from a myriad of incentives, several of which include money, medals, time off, promotions and wider public recognition. The larger the pool of people desiring those achievement incentives, the greater the competition and the better the results should be.
Leaders need to be vigilant in our continual quest for success because the demand for high achievement in the military can lead to the following: win/loss strategies, cheating and/or parochialism. Competition to achieve can be a worthy tool that we should employ; however, we need to evaluate milestone progression to ensure it facilitates organizational mission accomplishment and that it ensures it lives up to the top of our core values - "Honor."
The quest for achievement often begins with an individual's improvement as the end goal. As one proceeds, it can mature to support an organizational level goal or it can evolve, as Stephen Covey would describe it, to a competitive "I win, you lose" goal. This is an unhealthy method of competition. An example of this might be an Airman or Sailor saying or thinking "I studied all the books about how to fix this engine. I can fix this engine faster and better than my squadron mate, therefore I will get recognized and promoted faster. He should have studied hard too."
That second squadron mate sits around fumbling through the books and that second engine does not get fixed until the studious maintainer comes by to fix it himself. Improvement can be personal but it should include others when possible. In this example, the more studious maintainer could have approached the problem by saying, "Work with me on this engine. I'll teach you how to fix it. When we're done with this one, we'll go work on yours. You can fix it while I observe and quality check it."
In these examples, one maintainer's gain did not have to equate to another's loss. The second example was win-win for everyone. The studious maintainer got an extra hand to read checklist procedures or simply to hold a flashlight, while the second maintainer learned a skill. This competitive process was elevated from the individual's gain to the whole maintenance department's gain.
The desire to succeed can also lead our service members to cheat. The saying, "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying," has been used too often and the mere joking of it should be a warning indicator to any leader. Deliberately falsifying a record is clearly cheating, but sometimes it can evolve from distorting the truth to the point that a reasonable third party would not recognize it. Objective metrics should be used in evaluating success; however, we should be aware that statistics show that having objective metrics (as opposed to "fuzzy" metrics) can increase the likelihood of cheating.
Two of the most significant indicators of cheating are the importance of success and the lack of time, money, or equipment to do a job properly. We often pride ourselves in the military with our ability to excel under pressure. Outstanding performance while operating under tight timelines and scarce resources makes for easy bullets in any award certificate or evaluation. Commands need to be aware of the temptations to cheat or to cut corners as federal budgets tighten, promotion rates slow and operational tempo continues to be high. We are all susceptible to that temptation and we need to keep each other honest.
Pride comes to those that whok hard and achieve a high degree of success. That pride sometimes brings about parochialism. There are often many ways to solve a problem. In the end, the best course of action is often not one derived in the first drafts, based on each developer's personal area of expertise. It is often a blend of the best aspects of the varying courses of action. For example, what is the best way to supply a war effort? C-17's? Pre-positioned cargo ships? Local theater contracts?
The best answer probably takes advantage of all that each option provides while mitigating their weaknesses. "Sticking to your guns" is often heralded as strength but it should be tempered if it leads your highest organizations to less than optimal solutions. If you have ever served in a joint command, then you may well have seen those individuals who always tout a service parochial solution. Those individuals are usually correct about one-fourth of the time. As leaders, we need to instill pride in ourselves, our commands and our services, but we need to be aware that this pride may serve the needs of lower echelons at the detriment of higher more strategic callings.
The current Olympic spirit brings about an increased aura of competition and achievement. National heroes are made. The determination of these athletes is inspiring. We should take advantage of this competitive spirit to rejuvenate our own internal competitive drive. Stronger individuals should serve to make stronger commands, bases, and services. We should have the courage to pursue excellence. We should have the courage to challenge our peers. We should also have the courage to take a deeper examination to ensure that our achievements are honorably serving the best interests of ourselves, our military families and our nation.