Study of the Truth

Reading the synopsis is quite a surprise. Are our warriors relying on duplicity as much as this article seems to argue?

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=1250

I have not read the full article, but I'm not terribly surprised.
A lot of people are willing to "bend" the truth quite a bit or lie about things they don't think will hurt anyone.

As a minor example, take the guy who likes to home brew craft beer. He enjoys having a beer most evenings, maybe even a couple on the weekends. When he puts that down on his yearly medical exam survey, his doc tells him that if he had put any higher number, they'd have to automatically refer him to a substance abuse counseling program. Do you think he is going to answer accurately next year, considering the negative effects of such a mandatory counseling program would have on his security clearance and ability to do his job? He's not a drunkard, but by AF medical rules, he is very close to incurring some serious negative actions.

I couldn't read the article, got an error message. So can't tell what data authors are using other than personal observations and opinion. If so it should be an op-ed, not a scholarly writing. Read the executive summary. Do agree with some of the things, but one thing that caught my attention was the example of not reporting negligent discharge is being deceitful. Which took me back to my cadet days and remembering that a regulation violation is not necessarily an honor violation. I guess I am guilty of what authors are accusing Army officers are doing . . .

As for the good old how many drinks you have in a week, sometimes they don't give a choice for every situation. My case, I might drink one beer ever so often. Typical choices are none, one or two, several, too much during a week. Any choice I pick is untruthful, but there is no option to write in how much I drink.

As to the original question, I don't think our warriors are relying on duplicity - either they are outright liars (false reporting) or making judgement calls in unclear situations.

Headline: Study Finds that Human Beings Lie.

Actually, scratch that...

Headline: Soft-Science Study Find Whatever the **** It Wants to Find, Like All Soft-Science Studies.

raimius said:

I have not read the full article, but I'm not terribly surprised.
A lot of people are willing to "bend" the truth quite a bit or lie about things they don't think will hurt anyone.

As a minor example, take the guy who likes to home brew craft beer. He enjoys having a beer most evenings, maybe even a couple on the weekends. When he puts that down on his yearly medical exam survey, his doc tells him that if he had put any higher number, they'd have to automatically refer him to a substance abuse counseling program. Do you think he is going to answer accurately next year, considering the negative effects of such a mandatory counseling program would have on his security clearance and ability to do his job? He's not a drunkard, but by AF medical rules, he is very close to incurring some serious negative actions.

Click to expand...

Sorta...

We (tri-service and I think the VA) use a clinical scale called the AUDIT-C. The AUDIT has a low threshold for binge drinkers and social drinkers who "socialize" more than 2-3 times a week (the amount of alcohol plays a factor in the scale too). The AF and Navy aren't as forgiving with substance abuse as the Army. The Army tends to diagnose and treat over and over again, before we think about separation. The AF and Navy subscribe to "one and done" The fudging of answers applies to other mandatory surveys are well (do you feel depressed, are you angry, etc). All we can do is ask the questions. Its up to others to provide that answers (the truth would be nice). However, if we didn't at least ask the answers and someone stubbed their toe; the lairs would be the first to call "foul".

Hang on a second... This civilian is a bit surprised by the "mandatory survey" approach to employee well being.

What happened to educating and empowering leaders to invest in the well being of their team members? That is one of the basic tenants of leadership in the modern workforce. I've been privileged to work for some truly world class organizations; small, medium and global. Not once in all those decades can I remember us using a mandatory written survey in this way, even for highly stressful/dangerous roles.

As outlined above, this mandatory survey approach is fraught with problems. Further, it can also have a detrimental effect in as much as it may lull supervisors into thinking they are less responsible for the well being of their team.... "Well, the survey says no problems so guess we are good"

All that being said, I am open to being educated here. Please explain why the military thinks this is the right approach when other huge organizations do not.