to s£e
in many of our regulations cou long-term benefits to all. When begin treating our enlisted men women as adults, then we can e*P
an1
,on*
Treating Adults Like Children
The average enlisted job has certainly changed since the Navy’s creation. It has become much more complex and much less physical. With many rates we cannot look at a man working and determine whether he is working hard or not, whether he is doing a good job or not. The Navy's “well-rounded” officer of today may not even understand the job of his subordinate. So we depend more now on the subordinate directing himself.
The education level of the enlisted man has also obviously changed through the years. The education gap between leader and subordinate has decreased.
The society from which our enlisted men come has changed as well. There is a greater emphasis on the individual and his rights. There is a general trend in business away from the “economic man” model toward more complex theories. The worker today is viewed as and treated more like the adult he is than like an irresponsible child. Society’s outlook on the military profession has changed. Supposedly, the military is seen today more as a job than a profession, more a source of income than a way of life. Military service itself is now voluntary. It can be inferred that there is now less perceived difference between a civilian job and a military job. Indeed, some of our recruiting material offers the learning of skills useful in civilian life.
But with all the technical and sociological changes which have taken place, have we changed the basic environment in which the enlisted man lives? The job of the enlisted man has changed. Has our leadership changed? The self-image of our subordinates has changed. Has our image of him changed? Society’s treatment of the employee has changed. Have we changed our treatment of our employees? The answers: NO, NO, NO, NO.
We do not, and sometimes cannot, treat the enlisted man as a responsible adult. If we do not treat him as an adult, can we expect him to respond as an adult? If he does not respond as an adult, can a motivational technique based on assumed adult behavior work? Can we expect responsibility while assuming irresponsibility?
In a time when civilian business is beginning to treat the employee more as a mature individual, capable of self-determination, creative contribution, and possessed of higher needs and goals, the Navy has hot kept up. Unlike most other organizations in society, we often do not allow an individual to live as an adult, make decisions as an adult, be responsible in an adult manner, or even be reprimanded in an adult fashion.
Take, for example, an adult’s need for privacy. In the civilian world, a man’s place of residence is his refuge. Be it a house in the suburbs or just a rented trailer, his home is his alone. Not even the landlord can enter under most conditions. In the Navy, however, an unmarried enlisted man does not have this same privilege. Obviously, economics dictates that barracks must be used and that privacy must be given up to some extent. But we go farther. We inspect. We tell a man how he must keep house. We check to see that he has made his bed and picked up his room. This step in barracks administration goes beyond the requirements of security of property. At that point, we have told the man he is a child.
We use some forms of punishment, also, to reinforce on an individual his less-than-adult status. We place a man on restriction. We tell a grown man that, because he has been a bad boy, he must go to his room. Then we expect that same individual to do an adult, responsible job at work. We dock his pay. With a child we take his allowance away. Where is the difference? Does the man perceive any difference at all? For positive reinforcement we give a man a good- conduct medal. Why not go a step further and stick a gold star on his forehead? Perhaps it is time to revie" our system of rewards and punishments to more closely reflect that o the society which we serve and frorn which we get our personnel.
Consider also our emphasis on a vancement. In civilian society, an ,n dividual makes his own decisions °n whether or not to try for a promot‘0(1 If he is driven by such a desire, he P ceeds to take the necessary steps- ** studies, gets extra instruction fro111 those who can help, takes whatever tests are required, and makes it or on his own. In the Navy, however, place great emphasis on all eligi^e individuals advancing. Each com* manding officer is judged to a cer extent on the advancement figures within his unit. The result is that almost badger a man at times - that he has done his courses. Did l do your homework, Johnny? Aga|(1 assume an individual is not resp°nS ble enough to either work towaru desired goal or to decide he is c°nt)( at his present position. In additi°n'je is suspected that with such an atfitU some individuals are advanced svh°’ because of technical or managerial ficiencies, should not be.
In this time of exciting discover* in the behavior characteristics of groups and individuals, perhaps lC j would be beneficial to review some our basic premises and regulations with the idea of modernizing the enlisted environment. Although d ‘ j( tic change would probably do har*11’ may be that planned gradual cha11^
id
id
them to act as adults and to resp1 to adult motivational techniques-
80
Proceedings
February