Military Review English Edition March-April 2014 | Page 17

DEVELOPING TRUSTWORTHY OFFICERS

O

UR NATION’S THREE primary means of
providing the armed forces with commissioned officers are the Reserve Officers’ Training
Corps (ROTC), officer candidate schools (OCS),
and the federal service academies. Each of these
sources is duty bound to commission leaders of
character, entrusted with leading America’s soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and coast guardsmen. The importance of commissioning leaders of
character is uncontested, even axiomatic; but what
is required and expected of a leader of character
can be a source of debate. Our aim is to clarify
what it means to be a leader of character and to
recommend a holistic approach to developing such
leaders in each of our sources of commissioning.
To begin, it is essential to define and understand
“character.” Next, we must determine a theoretical
or empirical method by which character may be
developed. Third, each source of commissioning
must design and implement tangible activities
within the developmental programs. Finally, we
must agree on what observable, measurable attributes are expected.

Character Defined
U.S. Military Academy (USMA) Circular 1-101
defines character as “those moral qualities that
constitute the nature of a leader and shape his or her
decisions and actions.”1 Dr. Joel J. Kupperman, an
accomplished professor, author, and philosopher,
writes a similar definition of character: “[Cadet X]
demonstrates . . . character if and only if [Cadet X’s]
pattern of thought and action, especially in relation to
matters affecting the happiness of others, is resistant
to pressures, temptations, difficulties, and the insistent expectations of others.”2 This definition reveals
one’s character in across-the-board decisions and
actions—not just in the avoidance of lying, cheating,
stealing, or tolerating, which most schools’ honor
codes prohibit. Similarly, Dr. James Rest’s four-stage
model of moral decision making (moral recognition,
moral judgment, moral intention, and moral action)
provides support for this perspective with its focus
on recognizing that a moral-ethical issue exists (recognition or sensitivity), culminating in a behavior.
In this light, our character includes values, virtues,
aesthetics, ethics, morals (conscience), identity, and
sense of purpose.3 These qualities shape our decisions
and attendant actions. By Kupperman’s definition,
MILITARY REVIEW

March-April 2014

these are the intrinsic qualities, generating observable
outcomes and revealing our character.
Fundamentally, we expect a leader to be trustworthy. Trust is gained and sustained through the
consistent demonstration of character, competence,
and commitment. In other words, leaders earn trust
when they do their duty well, do it in the right way,
do it for the right reasons, and are persevering.
Accordingly, a professional member of the armed
services must seek to discover the truth, decide what
is right, and demonstrate the character, competence,
and commitment to act accordingly (a “right” decision must be ethical, efficient, and effective).

Accordingly, a professional
member of the armed services
must seek to discover the truth,
decide what is right, and