Content area
The relationship was completed in 1961 when Robert S. McNamara was appointed Secretary of Defense. "McNamara's previously headed up Ford Motor Company where he had a penchant for modern business practices, cost-benefit analysis, systems perspectives, and zero defects. He insisted that "good business practices" be applied to the development and procurement of weapons. He also believed in "managing" the Vietnam War.
Full text
Leadership
Whether or not members of the military are receiving adequate ethics training has been a hotly debated issue of late. Recent trends seem to indicate that it has not been up to par. A Code of Ethics might help.
In July 1990 the Senate Armed Services Committee sent a report to the Senate accompanying the 1991 defense authorization bill stating that midshipmen and cadets at the Service academies are not receiving enough training in "specific real life ethical situations that military officers will face." The report also cited a survey conducted at the Naval Academy that found that 90 percent of midshipmen believed that "something is only wrong if you get caught." Commenting on the study Sen Robert C. Byrd (D-W. Va), a member of the committee, was quoted in the Washington Post:
In my book it seems that something basic is missing, which goes to the core of this whole thing. These young people who graduate from the service academies should have a fundamental understanding of what is right and what is wrong . . . and if we are turning over into officers a lot of men and women who think it's only wrong if you get caught, we are not doing our jobs when a lot of lives hang in the balance.
A close examination of the Marine Corps most likely would reveal a similar situation. On average, the academies have more training in professional ethics than civilian colleges, where the Marine Corps gets most of its officers. To solve this dilemma the Marine Corps must find the "something basic [that] is missing" and correct the problem.
I believe that due to changes in the military and changes in society it is now necessary for the Marine Corps to adopt a Code of Ethics to resolve this problem. Marines need a yardstick by which to measure their decisions and guide them in their conduct.
The circumstances that have led to the present situation and make a Code of Ethics necessary are many, and they have occurred primarily over the past 25 years.
First are the changes that have occurred in society. Since the mid-1960s there has been a shift in the standard of morality and permissiveness, accompanied by a liberalization of individual rights. The traditional family and home structure has changed dramatically. More and more people entering the Services today have been raised by a single parent or by parents who both work. People no longer learn traditional values at home or in school. An increasing number of people joining the Services also lack prior work experience, thus denying them another source of developing ethical values. The survey results noted above, as well as in the increase in the number of integrity and legal violations among officers, can be traced directly to these changes.
Second is the advent of the all-volunteer force (AVF). Since the adoption of the AVF, military personnel and the general public alike have come to view the military as a "job." Increasingly, the same standards of conduct, performance, sacrifice, and discipline found in the civilian labor force are being applied to the military.
Third is the growing popularity of a management philosophy. In their book, Crisis in Command: Mismanagement in the Army, Richard A. Gabriel and Paul L. Savage credit the beginning of the relationship between the business corporation with its management system and the military to Army Chief of Staff George C. Marshall during World War II. They state:
Faced with the necessity of pulling together the multiple and diverse centers of economic and social power needed to fight a conflict on a grand scale, Marshall turned to the only model available to him which had some proven experience in the field of organization and that was consistent with the values of democracy and free enlerprise: He chose the modern business corporation. Indeed, it was during World War II that the business corporation began to develop many of the sophisticated practices that we have come to commonly associate with it: systems analysis, personnel management, computer-designed decision models, etc.
The relationship was completed in 1961 when Robert S. McNamara was appointed Secretary of Defense. "McNamara's previously headed up Ford Motor Company where he had a penchant for modern business practices, cost-benefit analysis, systems perspectives, and zero defects. He insisted that "good business practices" be applied to the development and procurement of weapons. He also believed in "managing" the Vietnam War. It was during this time that such terms as systems analysis, career management, automated battlefield, and zero defects entered the Pentagon's lexicon. As Gabriel and Savage conclude, "the functions of command were perceived as identical to the functions of departmental management."*
It is no surprise that along with the adoption of business practices the military also adopted the ethics of free enterprise. These ethics are based on the ultimate goal of maximizing profits. Individuals work independently to achieve the objectives of profit and promotion. This in turn achieves the organizational goal-profit. In business there is no conflict between individual and unit goals, and no one is expected to sacrifice.
The requirement for sacrifice is the key element that distinguishes a successful military leader from a successful corporate executive. Therefore, the forces that drive a military professional to perform his duty are quite different Because military duties involve violence, the consequences of unprincipled, unethical behavior are much greater than in business. When a lot of lives hang in the balance, we cannot afford to have leaders with questionable ethics.
The fact that the military is a profession is widely accepted. However, the thing that makes the military a profession is not fully understood. According to Gabriel:
At the very least, a professional requires a special set of obligations and requirements that make membership in one profession different from that in another.
These obligations and requirements are expressed in a Code of Ethics that emphasizes service.
Therefore, in order to be a profession, the military must have a code of ethics. It is, in fact, more of a necessity for the military than other professions because of the nature of military duties.
It is beyond the scope of this article to propose a specific Code of Ethics. This should be done by experts, aided by their experience and research. However, any code must contain the following precepts that are central to the military profession-a commitment to service, selfless devotion to duty, integrity, trust, welfare of subordinates, shared risk, leadership by example, and an abiding respect for honesty.
The Marine Corps must adopt a Code of Ethics now, before one is forced on it by Congress. Too many lives are at stake to wait for an incident to happen that will trigger Congress to act.
*This philosophy is undergoing a resurgence of popularity in the Department of Defense today under the new title of Total Quality Leadership, making the need for a Code of Ethics all the more urgent.
by Capt Stephen J. McGrane
>Cat McGrane is the CO of Company A, the 1st Bn. 6th Marines.
Copyright Marine Corps Association Aug 1992