What is your Interpretation of being tactful in the military workplace?

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:06:29 -0400

The Army in my opinion has change so much over the years. NCO's and soldiers in general are keeping to themselves and not up holding the standards like they should. And those that do correct soldiers don't do so in a tactful manner. What is your interpretation of being tactful in the military workplace?

Give me a Thumbs Up please. Thanks for everyone's input in this discussion.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 10:12 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:12:46 -0400

Good question. However, when does "tactful" go so far that it becomes sugar coating?

Response by SGT Nia Chiaraluce made Mar 10 at 2015 10:20 AM

SGT Nia Chiaraluce — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:20:49 -0400

I have always viewed it from this perspective, if you wouldn't say it in front of your sibling, grandmother or parent you shouldn't say it in the work place.

Response by SP5 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 10:27 AM

SP5 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:27:03 -0400

1. Use proper military courtesy in address
2. Avoid personal attack
3, Talk directly about issue; what and why you see an issue
4. Request and listen to the response

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 11:10 AM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:10:39 -0400

One can be tactful or diplomatic to a point.

If one dances around an issue, it interferes with the day. I believe in being respectful but direct. Spit it out and press on.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 11:17 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:17:10 -0400

At drill, I had seen a Major from higher wearing ear rings. I had done a double take as everyone should know not to wear ear rings. Maybe she didn't know she was still wearing them.

After looking up the particular paragraph in AR 670-1, a female senior NCO approached her. The Major was not occupied and out of ear shot of others so that the NCO could correct her respectfully and to avoid embarrasment.

Response by SGT Brian Bybee made Mar 10 at 2015 11:28 AM

SGT Brian Bybee — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:28:54 -0400

Straight and to the point is the way I did it but it can be done in private and in a professional way.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 11:45 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:45:49 -0400

When I was a SSG, an SFC wanted to get into it with me because when she sent out an email on a Friday, she demanded a response by 1200 on Monday. I gently reminded her that email is not a real-time application, and she went ballistic.

A word to the commander squashed that noise.... I hate people that are full of themselves and in love with their rank.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Mar 10 at 2015 11:59 AM

SGM Erik Marquez — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:59:13 -0400

Keeping in mind I was not the most liked, but often the one asked to fix things....
Direct, professional, often viewed as harsh and succinct.

You got asked why you were doing what you are doing (because I learned appearances are not always correct and I screwed up a time or two and chewed out a SM for what was really doing the right thing) so after confirming what I saw is what WAS happening, you got told you were wrong, what was wrong, why it was wrong and what (but not how) needed to change.

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 1:11 PM

SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 13:11:00 -0400

Telling the truth in the manner that the other party can understand and accept. How that truth is phrased depends entirely on your understanding of and relationship with the other party.

I was once challenged to work on being able to tell people they needed improvement in a manner that made them thank me for it after the telling. That is being pretty tactful.

On that note as an aside, the purpose of any conversation is to make a change so if getting your point across requires more tact with some than others that's fine, you still got you point across. If being tactless is easier for you but requires you to have multiple conversations because the desired change did not take affect then you are wasting your time and the other parties by not improving you ability to communicate.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Mar 10 at 2015 1:17 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 13:17:54 -0400

Tact is an art, not a science. It can be as simple as "Excuse me "CSM, you missed a beltloop, thought you should know" or "Hey devil, you're collar is jacked."

Generally, maintain courtesy, explain the problem, explain the desired solution (directed if senior in rank), disengage.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 4:20 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 16:20:49 -0400

Moral Compass...I have one...do you? All answers to your question will say about the same thing, out of earshot and to the point.

When I make one I think about this. Heat-of-the-moment thoughts drive emotions.

Also make sure you fully understand the regulation. And above all make sure you are not jacked up before you correct someone.

Response by SSG Leonard Johnson made Mar 10 at 2015 5:56 PM

SSG Leonard Johnson — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 17:56:43 -0400

Well brotha....I'm from the ol skool (yes I spelled that right)...of thought....I use tact 1st....then I resort to kicking names and ass...no matter what the rank...man, woman, beast, foul of the earth....he'll hath no fury as a NCO scorn...;)

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 6:49 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 18:49:46 -0400

I guess it would depend on the situation. Provided it's not a safety issue or something else going on, tact is usually the way to go. Notice something off? Pull someone aside and let them know. Like the CSM said, identify the problem, make sure it is a problem, and identify the source of the problem, address the problem. At your level that could be an on the spot correction to another specialist or private or informing your chain of command and getting further guidance. An immediate, urgent safety issue might require a more "aggressive" response. Hypothetical story.
Once upon a time (November 2000), at a firing range in an imaginary army base in northern Georgia, let's call it fort Gordon, a young, recently qualified newly pinned specialist Ace (no relation) noticed a freshly arrived hwmmv. Said hwmmv did not have the requisite chock blocks and oil pan in place in accordance with every rule he had ever heard from every NCO on ft Gordon since his arrival. He also knew that it was considered very rude and unmannerly to touch a vehicle not assigned to him from the many front-back-go's he did his very first day at the brigade motor pool after offending the almighty first sergeant by touching HIS hwmmv.
Eager to save another soldier from such wrath, he turned to find the vehicle's driver or, at minimum, to find an NCO who would delight at taking this problem off SPC Ace's hands. As he walked away from the vehicle he heard the sound of leaves crunching. he thought nothing of it at first and kept going, but the noise kept at him. It wasn't the crunch, crunch of someone walking, it was a long crunch of something rolling. So he turned and ess aghast to see the vehicle rolling down the gentle slope. Worse, it was picking up speed and heading towards eight or nine soldiers about a hundred feet away, who were facing away, watching the remaining shooters on the range. SPC Ace yelled, "look out!", but no one turned. "Behind you!"
Nothing.
Finally, he screamed, "MOTHERF***ERS, YOU'RE GOING TO F***ING DIE!"
These gentle words were heard by all on the range, and as an NCO in the aforementioned group turned, his face red and jaw clenched in what surely was love and affection for specialist Ace, he saw the vehicle and pushed his comrades out of the path of the on coming vehicle which finally came to rest against a pile of sandbags.
Subsequent investigation, revealed that no one had signed for the vehicle, so the perpetrator was never found, legend has it however that a second lieutenant from a sister battalion was called into the brigade commander's office and never seen again.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 9:31 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 21:31:39 -0400

I believe there's essentially two types of corrections: On the spot for egregious issues and a developmental opportunity. For example, if PVT Snuffy is doing something unsafe and potentially life threatening you don't have time to go find his team leader or gently explain why what he's doing is wrong. You make the correction immediately. Tact and sensitivity are far less important than addressing the issue. A young PVT Goenner almost did something unsafe out of ignorance. A SGT nearby grabbed me and roughly pulled me out of the situation. After I was in a safe spot he explained what I was doing wrong. Was it tactful of him to grab me by the jacket? No. But it was necessary.

On less serious infractions I try and find out why the Soldier is doing the wrong thing and show them what right is. I had a new PVT report to me in my Office by simply walking in and sitting down. He didn't know better, so I calmly explained to him what right was and he executed correctly moving forward. He still got the ass-chewing he deserved for his earlier actions but the two issues were separate and needed to be handled differently.

Another consideration is correcting subordinate leaders. Sometimes it needs to happen, but you don't want to undermine the faith their troops have in their leader. If it's not an egregious issue I believe the better answer is to correct them behind closed doors. Most of the time your NCOs and Officers want to do the right thing, they just sometimes don't know what it is.

Finally, you need to be able to tailor the correction to the individual. All you need to tell some troops is that you're disappointed and they'll go fix themselves. Others need more direction. As long as you're professional and genuine I believe you'll be successful.

Response by SGT Jim Z. made Mar 10 at 2015 9:39 PM

SGT Jim Z. — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 21:39:38 -0400

It has been awhile since I was but I work in MACOM you may have heard of FORSCOM and it is a different world from the rest of the Army. Most action officers are punching their ticket so they can progress. Some are more timid than others and I really think the timid ones are afraid they will get rated poorly. However, I prefer the respectful but blunt answer because if you try to sugar coat it sometime the message loses its meaning.

Response by Sgt Matt Pinardi made Mar 10 at 2015 9:48 PM

Sgt Matt Pinardi — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 21:48:04 -0400

Tact is important . I would say that the level of tact is situationally dependent , and on your audience . During my time as an infantry squad leader and fire team leader, often times , if a troop was a soup sandwich , they need to know they are a soup sandich and need the corrective guidance to rectify their condition. Direct and truthful, and often time the truth is harsh. In that regard I suppose I'm anachronistic.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Mar 10 at 2015 11:29 PM

COL Charles Williams — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 23:29:16 -0400

It means treating everyone with dignity and respect. It does not mean, not making corrections. You can and must make corrections, and do it in a professional manner.

Response by CH (CPT) Heather Davis made Mar 10 at 2015 11:45 PM

CH (CPT) Heather Davis — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 23:45:22 -0400

The importance of using wisdom and realizing that every thing you say and don't say is part of your branding. Creating acceptance and modifying professionalism regardless if the other person is not professional. The last thing you want to do in your military career is get labeled as an individual and someone that does not play well with other's.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 11 at 2015 5:33 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Mar 2015 05:33:15 -0400

I attempt to be tactful when I am correcting someone regardless of what rank they are however, I become less tactful if I have to continue to make the same correction more than once (also regardless of rank).

Sometimes I am not tactful at all and it is usually directed at NCOs. If I see a NCO blatantly disregarding regulation (hands in pocket, failure to salute, hat cocked back) I blatantly destroy them on the spot and take their soul.

I am a crazy old grizzled NCO, I would recommend that you make corrections tactfully until you become old and crazy.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 11 at 2015 8:39 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:39:27 -0400

I see it too often with Soldiers doing the wrong thing and most of the time there's an NCO in the vicinity who does nothing to correct the issue. My favorite excuse is "That's how we do it in our unit"

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 11 at 2015 2:12 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Mar 2015 14:12:04 -0400

Choice. Long term or Short