| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Army morale declines in survey |
| 2012-08-20 |
| Only a quarter of the Army’s officers and enlisted soldiers believe the nation’s largest military branch is headed in the right direction — a survey response that is the lowest on record and reflects what some in the service call a crisis in confidence. The detailed annual survey by a team of independent researchers found that the most common reasons cited for the bleak outlook were “ineffective leaders at senior levels,” a fear of losing the best and the brightest after a decade of war, and the perception, especially among senior enlisted soldiers, that “the Army is too soft” and lacks sufficient discipline. The study, ordered by the Center for Army Leadership at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas, also found that one in four troops serving in Afghanistan rated morale either “low” or “very low,” part of a steady downward trend over the last five years. But the most striking finding is widespread disagreement with the statement that “the Army is headed in the right direction to prepare for the challenges of the next 10 years.” “In 2011, [active duty] agreement to this statement hit an all-time low,” according to the survey results, a copy of which were provided to The Boston Globe. “Belief that the Army is headed in the right direction is positively related to morale.” In 2010, about 33 percent of those surveyed didn’t agree with the statement; the number was 38 percent in 2006. The apparent lack of confidence poses a new set of challenges to the Army as it undergoes budget cuts and shrinks its ranks. The Army’s top officer, General Raymond T. Odierno, says he is taking the findings to heart. A major concern that the survey identified was whether the Army would be able to keep top-notch leaders as it cuts its ranks, as well as fears it would be stretched too thin to meet unforeseen demands. Junior officers were particularly concerned about retaining good leaders. The active-duty Army, which is currently about 570,000 strong, is preparing to reduce its ranks by about 90,000 soldiers in the coming years, as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan wind down and the Pentagon budget is subject to a government-wide belt-tightening. |
| Posted by:lotp |
| #3 How about OPTEMPO all out of proportion to the size of the force, a meaningless commitment to wars that will be dismissed as useless in the near future, the waste of national treasure into countries that only suck out our money into their correupt maw and conspire to harm us even as it flows, and a silly force structure that makes conventional forces quasi-MPs, but degrades the preparedness for the main enemy, China, and is ill prepared to fight a force of near comparable strength and capabilities, since everything we face is stolen technology from us. ANd into this, when was the last time, as P2K asks, has there been a led to leader ratio this low? I have friends that are on their 4th deployment in 10 years, and they wonder what's the point? |
| Posted by: NoMoreBS 2012-08-20 12:49 |
| #2 "ineffective leaders at senior levels," At senior level the politicians start to out number the leaders. Hell, the number of managers clearly out number the leaders. Anyone one want to fill in the blanks? Number of active divisions in WWII? Number of general officers in WWII? Number of active divisions [or equivalent] today? Number of general officers today? |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2012-08-20 11:48 |
| #1 The Army's top officer, General Raymond T. Odierno, says he is taking the findings to heart. I believe we may have just identified at least a small part (but possibly much, much more) of the problem. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-08-20 04:17 |