Thought you all might find this of interest based on recent posts:

Sir,

A well-written article indeed and it shows, at least, that the Army does want find and separate those leaders which it finds as toxic from the ranks.&nbsp;<div><br></div><div>I agree that over the 23 years I have been on active duty that I have seen both good and bad leaders; were any of them toxic -- by today's definitions the answer would be &nbsp;a resounding YES.&nbsp;</div><div><br></div><div>But unfortunately over the last two decades the Army has wanted RESULTS and they wanted measurable results at that. The actions ALMOST (and I do emphasize almost) always justified the outcome as those that could produce results would get promoted and would move up the ranks. Unfortunately, that was before the 24-hours news cycle, perpetuation of everything and virtually everyone connected to the internet with multiple means of getting their story and information out to the general public, and the drawdown that has the Army (and the Department of Defense) in the lime-light amongst the media, Congress, and the public.&nbsp;</div><div><br></div><div>During the last few years in the Army I have listened to many a flag officer (across all four services) talk about their rise through the ranks -- and I would venture that through their self-proclaimed actions that greater than 1/3 of them would today be considered Toxic in their actions as a Company and Field-Grade Officer. Their actions at the time had created results. And many of those NOW Flag-Officers shared their stories, methods, TTPs, etc with their subordinates -- creating many of the toxic leadership examples we see today.</div><div><br></div><div>Were their actions of the time justified? Hindsight being what it is, I think probably not, but at the times and over the years many were rewarded for their results -- and the actions that got them there were completely overlooked.&nbsp;</div><div><br></div><div>Bottomline, it will take us MANY years to rid our Army and the Department of Defense of the Toxic Leaders and Leadership Styles that were accepted by the previous leaders. Whether that acceptance was explicitly or tacitly accepted -- it was accepted. There is no question that there is no place in our military for bad leaders. The current drawdown of the Army will hopefully help identify and separate the good leaders and reward their positive leadership styles.</div>

Too little, too late?
or the "future is here"?
The Army is down sizing. Which metrics are going to be used to determine the keepers? The success bullets on OERs or the items like Chapters, UCMJ, IG complaints, EO, SHARP reports, suicide, mental health and sick call rates that show on QTBs, but not OERs? Are red flags going to get recognized for CMD teams or glossed over?

We've seen a recent purge of Flag and GOs for violations ranging from inappropriate or disparaging comments of civilian leadership to fraud, waste and abuse to sexual misconduct with subordinates. These are the Officers that raised the current generation of Field Grades, the ones who brought entitlement culture and toxic leadership to today's military. Are current measures to clean up adequate? Are we getting the worst of the bad apples out?