CHARLESTON AIR FORCE BASE, S.C. –
In the course of even a short career, most of us have had leaders we greatly respected who authoritatively stated something like "people come first, even before the mission." We have also heard equally capable leaders who, with equal zeal, pronounced "the mission always comes first." Some try to bridge the gap without explaining it by pithy slogans such as "Mission first, people always."
I have often grappled with whether or not people should take precedence over the mission and have felt pulled first by one and then by the other. What I offer is simply my perception on an issue that I don't think has any definitive answer. Each leader (and you are all leaders) must decide how they will handle the question in their own manner.
My opinion is that people and the mission are so inextricably intertwined, it is impossible to separate them or to elevate one at the expense of another. I say this because, in my mind, our ultimate mission is to serve the needs of our country. When I think of my country, I think most about the people who make up my country.
It is not the beautiful vistas or the economic prosperity of America that is our ultimate object -- it is serving her sons and daughters. Since I will never have the opportunity to know most Americans, I simplify it to thinking about my own family. This includes predecessors who left a heritage of honor I feel bound to safeguard, to my immediate family and to future generations who will have dragons enough of their own to slay without me leaving them my duty to accomplish as well.
"People" also encompasses those extraordinary Americans who serve in our armed forces, including those in my charge and those in whose charge I am placed. No one stops being an American by virtue of joining the Air Force and our ultimate mission is to serve the needs of all Americans.
Does that mean that people are more important than mission after all since they are the end and mission is the means? I don't think so. Although we serve each other, how many of us would put the needs of ourselves ahead of the needs of our other countrymen or even our own families? Those who would do so aren't typically attracted to military service. The mission includes us, but it is bigger than us as individuals.
It is not about making life easier for ourselves, it is about doing the right thing for the country and its future. Stop doing this and you will not maintain quality people, and those you do have will have low morale. Given the tremendous sacrifices that military service entails, especially in a time of war, the best men and women this country has to offer, continue to join, giving greater service and undertaking more challenges for modest fiscal rewards -- and they count it an honor to serve.
It has often been said the military can't compete with private sector wages. Perhaps that is true, but the private sector can never compete with the mission of the military. As long as we are true to that mission, inspiring young men and women will continue to fill the ranks of our Air Force and will do everything required to keep our people safe, secure and prosperous.
If you try to establish an organization that puts your people ahead of the mission, you run the risk of denying people the sense of fulfillment that made them join the Air Force in the first place. Nature has given us a desire to live in comfort and ease, but conscience and a sense of duty encourages us to serve.
There have been many times I griped and complained about having to do a task only to be grateful to have had the opportunity after I finished it and realized how important it was.
If, however, you routinely push people past reasonable limits to accomplish the mission, it might be time to step back and ask yourself what the mission really is. You might be trying to serve your boss or your own ego without realizing it.
In any case, once you spend the morale of your people, the mission will suffer irreparable harm. The bottom line is: if you neglect your people, you neglect the mission. If you neglect the mission, you neglect your people, who are not in the service of their country as a get-rich-quick scheme.
So where do you draw the line? What do you do when you have to make a difficult but recurrent choice between filling a mission requirement and meeting a people need? No philosophical discussion that I know of can make that decision easy.
Fortunately, if people know that you care about them and about the mission, they will generally give you the benefit of the doubt. If you ever leave them in doubt about your commitment to them or your conviction regarding the importance of what you are doing together, you will likely have a tough road ahead.