Core Value Of Integrity In The Military Essay

Cheating on military exams has recently been brought to the attention of the public eye due to a small group of individuals making a series of poor decisions in Charleston, SC. This was a localized incident and is not a reflection of the nuclear Navy as a whole. The core value of integrity is vital in the role as Naval nuclear operators and, now that integrity that has been brought into question by the people who rely on the Navy to protect their country. Standards within the nuclear Navy have remained steadfast since the dawn of its creation. These standards have directly contributed to the successful operation of both nuclear powered submarines and surface vessels alike for over fifty years.
When the public was informed of a potential cheating scandal at a Navy training command it immediately caused many questions

involving the nuclear Navy. Many people were curious about the details of the problem and wanted clarification. A group of sailors decided to make an immoral decision and allow themselves to use an elaborate scheme to cheat on an exam. The exam in question was a supervisory exam and had a relatively high failure rate. The negative ramifications of failure caused an undue stress on those taking the exam which paved the road to potentially violating their morals.
The nuclear Navy was founded on a set of watchstanding principles which are a set of guidelines that direct sailors what to do in all situations. Integrity is one of the principles and is defined as doing the right thing even when no one is looking. Cheating is a direct violation of a sailor’s integrity and should not be tolerated. The instance of the cheating that occurred in Charleston was determined to be localized to a very small group of people and is not an issue that is rampant throughout the entire nuclear Navy.
Personally, I have seen fellow sailors given the opportunity to be dishonest and cheat in one form or another and have not witnessed the same magnitude of cheating that occurred in Charleston. The culture that was established at Charleston did not particularly prohibit cheating and specifically, individuals did not hold each other accountable. In fact, the culture almost encouraged a form of dishonesty due to the expectations of the program and the fear of the consequence of not meeting those expectations. Individual values were cast aside by some personnel which led them to eventually violating their integrity and cheating.
Naval leadership was not exempt from a portion of the blame that allowed the cheating to occur. A leader should always allow his or her subordinates every opportunity to succeed in all endeavors of their job. In this specific example, Naval leadership failed to instill the standards and expectations of the nuclear program as a whole. Multiple signs existed that pointed to potential problems of dishonesty with regards to exams, but these problems were never investigated which ultimately led to the public being made aware. In the Navy, we are trained to seek out and correct small problems, but this did not appear to be accomplished. If this is not done, then small problems will lead to larger problems which can result in very significant problems that may affect the entire Navy. The cheating scandal in Charleston, SC had more of an impact on sailors throughout the Navy more than anything else I have seen.
Currently, I am stationed at a training command in New York. I have personally felt the ramifications of the mistakes made by those involved with the cheating in Charleston. I was required to attend hours of training to reset the standards and answer any questions we may have had related to the situation. The training command here in New York, has implemented its own mechanisms to minimize and shun cheating as a whole. Time has been allotted to allow us to improve our level of knowledge to minimize the need to even consider cheating. The training command’s culture has been reestablished and the standards made very clear. I have been promoting positive peer pressure among my fellow sailors to improve overall knowledge which would eliminate the need to cheat on an exam in the future.
A number of factors could be the reason a person decides to forgo their ethical standard and cheat.

The exam is question had a relatively high failure rate and the consequences of failing could result in the sailor being sent back to sea. Sailors spend four and a half years at sea before they go to a shore command so this alone could have provided the motivation to pursue any means to ensure success on the exam. A sailor must deal with the stress of potentially not having adequate time to prepare for the exam while understanding failure could result in his or her shore duty being taken away.
“A key to understanding the link between stress in organizational behavior and individuals is the understanding that some degree of stress in the normal workplace cannot be avoided and is not necessarily a negative factor”. (Ejim, 2015) The difficulty of the exam should encourage sailors to study, but supervisors should be mindful and ensure personnel do not become overwhelmed which could lead to cheating. Excessive stress could lead to poor decision making and a supervisor should intervene to prevent a subordinate from making a poor decision if due to stress

alone.
The contingency approach can easily be applied to this situation. It uses management tools and techniques in a situationally appropriate manner. (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013, p. 19) This approach states there is not a best way, but there are multiple factors are involved when dissecting a situation. Managers who successfully implement this approach understand the solution for one person may not work for another. Each person who may be preparing for an exam will be affected differently by different factors and supervisors must understand their personnel and assist when necessary.
Establishing a positive organizational culture will instill the values for all to have within themselves. Organizational culture is defined as a set of shared, taken-for-granted implicit assumptions that a group holds and that determines how it perceives, thinks about, and reacts to its various environments. (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013, p. 62) This has multiple components and it all begins with the leaders setting the example. Integrity must be commonplace among everyone and when a young sailor sees a senior sailor act honestly, then he or she will likely follow the example. “Key leadership, those that set the tone for the strategy and culture of the organization, must understand their own strengths and weaknesses as leaders, along with those of the entire leadership team.” (Blevins, 2015)
Ultimately, one who violates his or her integrity must be held accountable regardless of the circumstances. Cheating on an exam is the result of a lack of ethical standards, and if this violation, if not handled accordingly, can snowball into more severe ethical decision making. Worst case, lives may be lost due to one service member’s lack of personal standards. Trustworthiness in one another is vital to returning to friends and loved ones, as well as maintaining a trusting bond with the nation. This is why integrity violations within the nuclear Navy are handled quite harshly.
The ramifications of the actions of those individuals who have felt the need to forgo their integrity and act with dishonesty are felt in various ways throughout the Navy. Sailor who consciously violate their integrity are removed from the nuclear Navy. Counseling and training all sailors on a continuous basis will advocate for correct decision making and ensure integrity violations do not occur. Policies have been revised in hopes to relieve some of the stress associated with the role as a nuclear operator and, more specifically, as a nuclear instructor. The exam process has been modified to prevent cheating in the future. Evaluations and inspections occur on a regular basis to ensure all operations are conducted within the standards the Navy has established.
There is still more progress to be made, but the nuclear Navy has experienced a problem, reflected upon that problem, and are currently rectifying the issue of cheating by appropriately enforcing the standards the Navy was built upon.