Your Pro Citizen Newsletter 52 - "He is a good guy"; Weekly Discount Code

Happy New Year!

Newsletter number 52…wow. Where did the year go? The newsletter was a 2024 initiative we started last January as a way to share readiness content away from the censor-laden platforms most of us use. To understate it, the response from our readers has been phenomenal. The newsletter host just sent us our metrics for the year: A little over 69,000 written words of content that had over 169,000 views (sets of eyes that saw at least one newsletter during the last 12 months). What an amazing year for the newsletter start, the team and I are looking forward to another 52 next year! We are committed to keeping this component of our content free for you - free in both agenda and cost. Our only ask is please share and recommend it to a friend if you find value in it. We want everyone to know and get access to it every week. Huge thanks to all of you reading this, we truly appreciate your support for The Project!

But he is a “good dude”

Let’s finish out the year with some Leadership content; overall, a subject near and dear to my heart.

We have all seen it, probably up close and personal more times than we care to remember. And it sure rubs most of us the wrong way. It happens far too often in the corporate world, in politics, and most disturbingly in professional leadership organizations like the US military.

What exactly am I talking about? The good ‘ole double standard, the “rules for thee, not for me” that’s what. It is a failure to enforce the standard because the transgressor is a friend or “a good dude”. It includes everything from your fellow employee being allowed to arrive late with no repercussions to the General Officer being allowed to quietly retire vs face the same military justice system that would have crushed a young Captain or Sergeant for the same violation. The “good dude” status is usually built up over time…almost exclusively so. It is an intentional slipping of the standard to accommodate a friend. The problem is this gross inconsistent application or all out abandonment of the rules builds resentment among subordinates. It erodes the integrity of an organization or society. “Good dude” status can also be tied to the personal relationship between the enforcer / influencer and the offender, it is not always exclusive to nepotism. The issue is one of standards and fairness. I have come to detest that fairness word due to the leftist abuse of the term, but being fair really is what we are talking about here. The larger issue being this practice of letting things slide for some but not others nullifies (in moral terms) the original rule or standard altogether. Unfortunately, the now defunct standard by virtue of non-enforcement does not get removed, that particular rule with all its consequences is still waiting there quietly to hit you over the head if YOU happen to violate it.

We have all seen guys get passes on things that others have gotten jammed up over. This leader inconsistency is infuriating to see if you are one of the subordinates who always keeps his side of the street clean. What can you do as a leader?

“You just worry about yourself, don’t worry about what others are doing”

This quote is ALWAYS the usual response from poor leaders when they are questioned about standards are being selectively violated. If you as a leader have ever used this as a response, I would recommend some serious self-reflection. Telling someone not to worry about what others are getting away with will destroy the morale of an organization. The inconsistent application of standards and justice usually rears its head in administrative ways, organizations die through the old “death by a thousand cuts”. Senior folks dodging requirements or looking the other way when their buddies choose the easier path is always an issue. Expecting they get a pass because they are someone’s buddy, or they are in a position that they consider to be above the standard. I’ve seen it first hand countless times over a career. One of my commands was an HHC (Headquarters Company). For the unfamiliar an HHC is a thankless organization all around (unless you were a scout or mortarman). HHCs were filled with the “ash and trash” of the battalion, all the truck drivers, mechanics, cooks etc as well as the leadership of the organization. So, in addition to the support folks, you essentially “own” several people who either outrank you or have so much time in the system they just don’t care about requirements. I had seen senior officers dodge PT tests and do them “on their own.” When I challenged it as an issue I was told by the XO (a major) “those kinds of events are for the troops, not the senior officers on staff”. That was not true by any stretch of the imagination, so much for the army being a standards-based organization. That incident never changed how I personally approached requirements as I progressed in my career, I always made sure I did not leverage position or relationships to get a pass on requirements. But that dirtbag major’s take on the whole thing stuck with me. It caused me to be draconian about enforcing my officers and senior NCOs participation in the events that were required of my younger dudes. Did it matter to me whether his fat ass passed the PT test? Not really. What did matter is the impact of his actions on the organization; when things like this happen the integrity of a system becomes zero and the leadership loses the moral high ground.

Don’t lose sight of the big picture

Whether you are leading a team of two workers, your own company, or command an Armored Division in the army you have a responsibility to hold everyone to the same standard. That being said, there is always room for judgment. A just decision is not always an equitable one (while I dislike what the “fair” word has become I can truly say I hate the equitable word). At this point you may be thinking “Whoah there Jack, you just argued against yourself, the rules should always be applied the same for everyone every time”. Yes but…

Justice isn’t always about crime and punishment and enforcement. It is also the small things. Everything gets rolled together to produce a healthy organization…or one that guys can’t wait to get away from. As leaders we must consider the entirety of the situation and the downstream / long term impact of our decisions when enforcing standards, even the small ones. Letting an employee violate the dress code seems like a non-issue, but the other employees who abide by the rule are watching your lack of enforcement and you lose credibility. If it is a “dumb rule” then get rid of it, but don’t expect your employees to respect you when you let some get a pass and others not. I am not suggesting the solution is to become the hard and fast unthinking “rules guy.” Justice is rarely a black and white affair; shades of gray are the human condition. The west point approach to absolute leadership is always a failed model that embodies this. My peer officers in the army who were academy grads are a testament to the organizational rot that occurs when leaders are brainwashed into thinking they are without sin (the institutional definition or otherwise). That unbending approach is not what we are after either.

Justice and Discretion vs Hard Line

One of the leadership anecdotes I always relay came from an administrative routine event, an event so unexciting and boring it is a non-event. But it is one of the decisions I made that had a direct and lifelong impact on a young soldier. First and foremost, I hate drug use and the normalization of weed. Always have. As a commander you are responsible for routine urinalysis to check for drug use, not one of the sexy requirements of the privilege of command but it had to be done. During one of the ten percent test events (check 10 percent of the unit at random) one of my maintenance sergeants pulled me aside “hey Sir, PFC ___ told me he was going to come up hot when he tests this morning, he was on leave and smoked weed.” My maintenance sergeant was old school and was an incredible NCO. I knew he only came to me as a courtesy, so I wouldn’t be surprised when the urinalysis report came back. He wasn’t asking for accommodation or a bypass of the test. I also knew the soldier; he was a great mechanic and a good troop. I asked the Sergeant if he wanted to handle it. He nodded his head and I told him to quietly find a detail to put the soldier on so he would miss the urinalysis that morning. By the rules it was completely out of line - and I had applied the standard differently than to everyone else. But it wasn’t because he “was a good guy” and it damn sure wasn’t because I disagreed with the urinalysis requirement or tolerated the drug use. It was because big picture I knew it would do less damage to the organization and to the individual if justice was quietly carried out in a different way. For weeks following I saw that poor dude covered in dirt and grease working in the motorpool working late into the evening. Paying for his indiscretion under the watchful eye of that wise motor sergeant. That “kid” ended up being one of the best soldiers in the company. Was it right? No. Was it just? I think it was. I am very comfortable with that decision. We didn’t have a large issue with drug use then, out of all the urinalysis we did I only ever had one Soldier come up positive - and that was for a pain med prescription that wasn’t disclosed beforehand. If I had already prosecuted countless subordinates in that unit for the same type of offense, I think I would have made a different decision due to the potential impact on the unit. As leaders we have to use judicious discretion but always guard against the buddy hookup and “good guy” syndrome. Perception is reality, if your folks think you aren’t giving them a fair shake it that becomes their reality and the culture in the unit. This isn’t easy stuff, it is a challenge in today’s environment as we watch pardons doled out like candy while others rot in prison for the same offense.

Leadership Challenges All Around

There is always a balance between the word of law and standards and actual implementation or intent. Unfortunately, the “he is a good guy” has allowed wholesale passes for people since the beginning of time. In some cases it is warranted, in others not so much. In my humble opinion it has become a runaway train in our armed forces, the gun/prepper/readiness community and our society. Loyalty is equated to never challenging someone’s messed up behavior or failing to hold prominent folks accountable for their actions. In the post GWOT social media era it is stunning to see some of the violations of integrity (or even criminal acts) that get a community pass because he was “a really good guy”. Corporate leaders, general officers, senior noncommissioned officers, and even the team lead at the supermarket all need to do better. You aren’t just giving a guy a pass or a hook up by letting them violate a standard; you are changing the standard and rotting the institution from the inside. But it is a balancing act; deep in those shades of gray is where the real justice occurs. Be sure you aren’t viewing it only through the “he is a good guy” lens.

Special End of Year Discounts. ALL will combine, so feel free to use ‘em all. Happy New Year ya animals!

Today’s Discount Code (only good ‘til midnight)