Apply Concepts and Practices of Army Professionals to Leader Situations  

Learning Objectives ELO 1: Discuss Concepts of the Army Profession Condition: In a facilitated small group environment, given a written DA Pamphlet containing concepts of the Army Profession and input from peer/instructor assessments Standard: Discussion will include: - The Army Mission - The Army as a Profession of Arms with its Culture, Ethic and Experience - Definitions of “Army Profession” and “Professional Soldier” - Overview of Civil-Military Relationships  

What does it mean to be a Professional?

Leader Professional Practice Army: Profession of Arms Pamphlet The Army, as an American Profession of Arms, practices the ethical application of land combat power and an American professional Soldier adheres to the highest ethical standards. Leadership entails the repetitive exercise of discretionary judgments by professionals, all highly moral in nature, and represents the core function of the Army professional’s military art, whether leading a patrol in combat or making a major policy or budget decision in the Pentagon.

ELO 2: Apply Ethical Practices of Professional Soldiers Condition: In a facilitated small group environment, given written, virtual and training scenarios containing ethical situations and input from peer/instructor assessments Standard: Application will include: - Discuss ethical decision-making and its importance for Army Leaders - Apply ethical decision-making to written, virtual and/or training scenarios - Apply ethical practices of Professional Soldiers to Ethical Leadership

Using the “Ethical Perspectives” (lenses) RULES Is there a Rule/Regulation that applies to the Course of Action (CoA)? Aspects of the Army’s Professional Ethic? Know the difference between guidance and orders. Think of and compare possible outcomes for the CoA. A CoA benefitting the greatest number of affected persons may be the best solution. OUT COMES FM 6-22 para 4-69 describes the three perspectives leaders use to make ethical decisions. Leaders use multiple perspectives to think about an ethical problem, applying all three perspectives to determine the most ethical choice. One perspective comes from the view that desirable virtues such as courage, justice, and benevolence define ethical outcomes (VIRTUE). A second perspective comes from the set of agreed-upon values or rules, such as the Army Values or rights established by the Constitution (RULES). A third perspective bases the consequences of the decision on whatever produces the greatest good for the greatest number is most favorable (OUTCOMES). We could call the three perspectives described by FM 6-22 “Ethical Lenses”. Rules are those specifications that a group or groups agree to follow – laws, treaties, professional ethic, norms, etc. Outcomes are the foreseeable results of action/behavior. Virtues are those components of “moral and good” human beings that transcend most cultural differences between civilized societies. Many Ethicists consider virtues to be the basis for other constructs like values and morals. Many times all these terms are used interchangeably. We want to peer through these lenses to address the different aspects of a event or problem. In general because of the way our brains work, we tend to solve problems in ways that are quick and/or have worked for us before. So we may not always look for a rule/regulation/professional norm that defines the solution, or consider the factors to produce the best outcome, or compare our personal virtues learning from similar situations. Note that it is important to “look” through all these lenses to ensure all aspects in the Ethical Situation are considered. Leaders use multiple perspectives to think about ethical conflicts, applying all three perspectives to determine the most ethical solution. Applying all three Ethical lenses considering virtue, rules, and outcomes to each Course of Action is called “Ethical Reasoning”. Finally, look at the COA in light of personal virtues. COAs that seem to be applicable to a conflict but can not be reconciled with the Army Values, Soldiers Code (Warriors Ethos), etc. and your Core Virtues are suspect for leading to moral/ethical error. VIRTUES

Ethical Situations confront us every day in the environments of our Army Profession. . Some Ethical Situations are cases of comparing or contrasting new concepts that are experienced with ones that we have held to be true for a long time. Example: For a new Soldier - How does my current way of thinking about Loyalty compare to the Army Value of Loyalty. Such differences need to be understood and resolved by Soldiers. Some Ethical Situations are cases of simple right or wrong, when the answer is easily picked out; when the solution is “black or white”. In those cases a simple Ethical Choice is made. These types of Ethical Choices are usually so ingrained into us that the decision is made like a reflex. An example is whether or not to steal. Most of us don’t even put much thought into whether to take something that is not ours. But even those ingrained values can challenged. “What if you needed to steal money to buy medicine for your child who would die without it?” A lot of thought would go into that decision. Some Ethical Situations are cases of Ethical Dilemmas which require experience and judgment in order to choose a course of action: when there are more than one course of action that do not quite fit a perfect solution due to conflicting rules, outcomes and/or moral virtues/principles. Questions to ask students/followers to generate discussion: 1) Have you ever had a decision to make where the rules did not quite cover the situation? Where one of the possible solutions looked good for the people involved but somehow felt wrong? 2) Have you noticed that decisions that seemed more complicated when you were younger are easier now? Or some of them have become more complicated because now you see more aspects and details with regard to solving them?