He bases his conclusion on empirical data that indicate that the future strategic leaders of the Army believe that they operate on a day-to-day basis in an organization whose culture is characterized by: an overarching desire for stability and control, formal rules and policies, coordination and efficiency, goal and results oriented, and hard-driving competitiveness. Dr. Pierce recommends that the leaders of the Army profession initiate an organizational culture change effort. Specifically, he recommends changes to the more informal aspects of the professional development program, such as the less than lifelong commitment to the Army profession, the qup or outq personnel policy, and the officer evaluation system which may be creating an underlying assumption that failure will not be tolerated regardless of the circumstances. Those conditions all are representative of qtheories-in-useq that are incongruent with the concept of professionalism.^Eland, I., (2002), aVanish the Crusader, a Cato Institute Web Site, May 16, available from ... in Germany and the United States, a Public Administration Review, Vol. 49, No. 5, pp. 454-462. FAS, (2000), aCrusader, a News Update, ... Field Manual (FM) 1, (2001), The Army, Washington, DC: Headquarters, Department of the Army.
|Title||:||Is the Organizational Culture of the U.S. Army Congruent with the Professional Development of Its Senior Level Officer Corps?|
|Author||:||James G. Pierce|
|Publisher||:||Strategic Studies Institute - 2010|