Mercy! Mercy! That Dang Nabed PERCY!

Moral Self Discipline

Moral Self Discipline

In organizations there are those with ambition who are driven to achieve the highest positions of leadership. This is a double-edged sword. We all know about the “Peter Principle” that people on this quest often tend to get promoted beyond their “Level of Competence.” What this means is that any organization has a tactical, operational and strategic level of operations, the scope of which is tied to the size of the activity. Each of these levels requires a different skill set of talent and aptitude. Thus people who do well at the tactical level get promoted to the operational level where they might or might not be well suited. Those who excel at the operational level get promoted to the strategic level where the same holds true. (Hold that thought).

The standards by which an organization operates are rules, regulations, laws and morality. Human beings can be all over this continuum given the conditions and their stage in life. Ideally when someone faces a point in their career where they don the mantel of highest responsibility they have not just demonstrated a technical competence in the three areas, but also have retained some appreciation of the “Jesus Standard.” Keep in mind that the “Do onto others” standard is way above the law that is actually a pretty low standard and rules and regulations carry even less weight. In most cases everything below these represents a minimal standard below which the organization will not suffer its members to perform.

Now it is a sad fact that a person’s sense of morality deteriorates with time. For some reason wielding corporate power has a corrosive effect on a person’s sense of righteousness. It is the norm that leaders love the heady drought of self importance which can obscure and make cynical that lofty pie in the sky standard they learned in bible school.

They begin to see themselves as above the rules and the humility that insulates from becoming too full of ourselves and believing all the nonsense subordinates heap on (and leaders love to hear), slowly brings them down the scale of human decency until they get to the low rung of the law. Whenever you hear a bureaucrat, military or civilian say, “I was operating within the regulations and breaking no law, this means that they are at best skating on the margin and at worst having intercourse with the “Dark Lord.” As a famous EX president, I still admire, once said, "I never had SEX with that woman."

Human nature being what it is, the Office of the Inspector General was created early in our Nation’s history. The purpose is to give a high level leader a tool to identify those who have lost the bubble and are operating without much of a moral compass. In positions of power, leaders in this category can get an organization in big trouble. Since it is necessary to find these high level leaders who are putting the organization at risk and find them before they do serious harm, the IG looks into their activities and reports findings to the Commander, in the military, or the Director, in the case of an civilian agency. It is then that the chief executive has an opportunity to remove these individuals who are either in over their heads or are exercising poor judgment... for which they think they can escape scrutiny or are above accountability.

In the News and the Book I read yesterday, I see three IGs operating and it is interesting to note the outcomes of their work. Over at the DIA we see an IG who was used to gather dirt in order to fire a whistle blower. At the State Department we see an investigation halted prematurely when it looked like the findings would uncover a fair haired ambassador involved in immoral activities. Finally at the IRS we see an IG who actually (sort of) accomplished his mission, albeit very slowly and using an audit instead of an investigation. Each of these cases shows that the effectiveness of the IG tool depends on both the moral fiber of the IG and the use or abuse of the Director.