Leadership and Ethics: An Individual Challenge
Abstract
This paper examines the Army's perceived need for a "written" professional ethic. Through a "Profession of Arms Campaign," the Army intends to redefine itself as a profession and publish a professional ethic. The relevant literature asserts that current doctrine, values, oaths, and creeds are insufficient to guide ethical leader behavior. It cites marquee examples of ethical failures that might not have occurred had there existed a comprehensive professional ethic to guide leaders. While there are relatively few examples of this type, the hypothesis is that these failures constitute an Army ethic problem, not an individual leader problem. The paper asserts to the contrary; that it is an individual leader problem. That Army leadership doctrine, while not perfect, is sufficient to guide leaders if it is understood, internalized, and modeled. It analyzes three of the marquee cases noted above through the lens of FM 6-22 "Army Leadership." It shows that each "ethical" failure correlates directly to an individual leader's failure to adhere to current doctrine. Just as our doctrine is not perfect, neither are our leaders. As such, it offers a "realist" approach to appreciating (and ultimately accepting) the fact that none of our leaders are perfect, and that not all are professional.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- May 30, 2011
- Accession Number
- ADA565249
Entities
People
- Charles P. Samaris
Organizations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology