An "Army of One"

Over the holidays I watched an award winning documentary called "Army of One". It was about three young people, all under 25, who joined the U.S. Army post 9/11. One particular young soldier really caught my attention because of his disillusionment. He was trying to get out of the military because he felt that he had been misled into signing up by promises of action, adventure, service to country and civilization. Instead he was driving a military truck in Fort Benning, Georgia. During Christmas Leave the camera followed him home and it became crystal clear why he felt the way he did. His mother spoke to him on camera saying “If our government cannot find something good to do with you, and something you’ll be interested in, and valuable, because you are unique”. We are left without the mother’s final conclusion as to what should happen if the government doesn’t provide what he needs, but we can assume that the advice was something along the lines of ‘Quit the Army’.

It explains so much of this soldier's crisis when the mother expresses that the government owes her son interesting experiences because he is "unique" (This programming is prevalent among Boomer parents). She forgets that the military is not an organization of service to oneself, it is an organization of service to others. Of course, proponents of Gen-Y will immediately point out that the statistics show that this generation is volunteering for community service in unprecedented numbers. However, the question isn’t whether they are willing to give to others, it is whether they are willing to sacrifice for others. The example of the young soldier above casts this value into doubt. After all, the exact same logic that the mother used to give her son an ‘out’ from the military would presumably be applied to volunteering for a charity, think again of the above words, but substitute in Habitat for Humanity “If Habitat for Humanity cannot find something good to do with you, and something you’ll be interested in, and valuable, because you are unique” (Quit Habitat for Humanity). As an outsider hearing these words, most would immediately red flag this as a flawed piece of logic that discourages self-sacrifice for the greater good.

The military indoctrinates the concept and practice of perseverance and self-sacrifice into every soldier from day one. For some, like the example above, their prior programming cannot be overridden and therefore they are extremely dissatisfied with what they experience. They fail to learn that self-sacrifice is honourable and fulfilling, though often difficult and painful. Most often this leads to them leaving the service.

Voluntarily staying with the military, on the other hand, is a clear signal that this individual has been indoctrinated with the values of perseverance and self-sacrifice. In an employment situation this means that they will be inclined to put in the hours and dirty work to contribute to the collective good. This doesn't mean that your company should overload them like beasts of burden, rather they should be raised to be leaders in your organization so that their work ethic is evident to everyone that encounters them, therefore setting the example of what the company is looking for from its young employees.

Some employers will say that hiring reservists means that they will lose productivity for periods of time. However, keep in mind, that the same organization that initially indoctrinated them with the values of perseverance and self-sacrifice, is continually reinforcing those qualities in the training that they are doing, therefore returning them to your workplace even further imbued with the personal work ethic that leads to greater productivity for both themselves, and the people that work for them. A very small loss in personal productivity is more likely to result in greater productivity for the whole.

With that explanation, this is a good time to announce that CiviSide.com is doing a joint press release with TalentEgg.ca debating whether Gen-Y should adapt to the workplace, or vice versa. From the above you can certainly see where I stand. I believe that this is an important debate that must be given very careful consideration by every employer. The result of this debate may well decide the basic philosophy of work for a very long time.