Moral guidance in battle follows a command structure from top to bottom. The command environment and structure are where it all starts. One of the topics that military personnel see the most and understand the least is command climate. Maintaining a positive command culture and a strong unit is a priority for every commander. The credibility of the leader, communication, trust, and confidence are essential components of a successful command environment. In light of this, command climate may be defined as a state or situation resulting from common views and attitudes among troops towards their unit, their leaders, and the activities and policies of their unit. In war, a commander is responsible for sustaining an ethical command climate. This is a difficult but essential task, as it can prevent the military from falling into unethical behavior and protect the organization’s integrity. To achieve this, the commander must be aware of the major factors contributing to an unethical command climate and be vigilant in addressing any issues.
The first factor that contributes to an unethical command climate is a lack of clear guidance and expectations. This was evident in the “Fall of the Warrior King” case study, where the commander did not provide clear direction or guidelines to his troops (Filkins, 2005). This lack of clarity led to confusion and uncertainty, creating an environment where unethical behavior was more likely to occur. To prevent this, a commander must ensure that all troops are aware of the ethical expectations and that these expectations are consistently enforced.
A lack of accountability is the second factor contributing to an unethical command climate. In the “Fall of the Warrior King” case study, the commander allowed unethical behavior to go unchecked, ultimately leading to disastrous consequences. To prevent this, a commander must ensure that any unethical behavior is addressed and that all troops are held accountable for their actions (Filkins, 2005). This could be done through regular reviews and inspections and by instituting a system of rewards and punishments. Finally, a commander must ensure that they are role-modeling ethical behavior. In the “Fall of the Warrior King” case study, the commander engaged in unethical behavior, further contributing to the organization’s overall climate (Filkins, 2005). Commanders must be conscious of their actions to prevent this and ensure they set a good example for their troops.
In conclusion, a commander is responsible for sustaining an ethical command climate. To do this, they must be aware of the major factors contributing to an unethical command climate and actively work to address any issues. Examples from the “Fall of the Warrior King” case study illustrate the importance of providing clear guidance and expectations, holding troops accountable for their actions, and role-modeling ethical behavior. A shared set of beliefs and behaviors among soldiers towards their unit, its commanders, and the activities and policies of their unit creates a command environment, which is a condition or scenario. To maintain an ethical command climate, the commander must be aware of the primary elements that lead to an unethical command climate, such as a lack of clear expectations and direction. The “Fall of the Warrior King” case study demonstrated this. A shady command environment might result from a lack of responsibility and clarity. A commander must ensure that all troops are aware of the ethical standards and that they are regularly upheld to prevent this. They should also know what they are doing and lead by example for their soldiers.
Reference
Filkins, D. (2005). The Fall of the Warrior King. The New York Times Magazine.