Write about the importance of good order and discipline and personnel accountability; how not following order and discipline affects unit readiness, and the consequences of not being at the required place at the required time.
Write about the importance of good order and discipline and personnel accountability; how not following order and discipline affects unit readiness, and the consequences of not being at the required place at the required time.
Good order and discipline is supposed to represent a core military principle, a unique
condition critical to operational success that sets the military apart from the rest of society. In
recent years, however, critics have begun to allege a disparity between what military leaders say
about good order and discipline and the reality of how they actually use the term. They note that
in a series of proposed reforms, the military has cited good order and discipline as a primary
basis for opposing such changes without substantively explaining how or why good order and
discipline would be impacted.
Critics see this as evidence that the military uses the term simply to cover its distaste for reform rather than convey a fundamental military principle.
This paper studies whether these criticisms are warranted. It examines how modern
military leaders have employed the term in recent decades, and how senior Air Force leaders
understand good order and discipline’s meaning. It concludes that the military’s use of the phrase
has primarily focused on opposition to proposed personnel and social issues and that senior
leaders’ definitions of the term are disparate and generalized.
Thus, good order and discipline is plagued by usage that is at once narrow and amorphous, and the idea of good order and
discipline may be losing its coherence and risks losing its persuasiveness. Ironically, the very
notion of good order and discipline is itself in disarray, impaired by undisciplined use of the
phrase. The paper closes with some fundamental questions about good order and discipline in the
modern military that remained unanswered, and offers brief recommendations how the military
can begin to reclaim this important concept. The format of this paper does not allow for a full
treatment of these issues, but the hope is that this paper rekindles a much-needed and longdormant discussion.
Discipline is the soul of an army.—It makes small numbers formidable; procures
success to the weak, and esteem to all.” So wrote Lieutenant Colonel George Washington in a
1757 letter to his Virginia Regiment Captains.
If this is true, the military seems to be experiencing a spiritual crisis. The military frequently invokes the term “good order and
discipline,” asserting it represents a unique obligation to ensure mission success. Many who have
served in the military have a notion of what good order and discipline means, and seem to
assume everyone holds the same understanding. However, modern usage and understanding of
the term raise questions about whether good order and discipline really carries the weight and
meaning the military professes.
Recent usage of the term primarily comes in opposition to proposals for changes in the military’s personnel policies or military justice matters, and military officials tend to use it in a way that forecloses rather than stimulates discussion. Substantive
examination of what good order and discipline actually means today appears lacking, and it is
often difficult to discern whether the term means something concrete and distinct at all.
Meaningful discussion is desperately needed to reestablish what good order and discipline means
to the modern military. Ironically, the military’s disorderly, undisciplined use of “good order and
discipline” has imperiled the very notion of this crucial military concept.
This paper has two aims: to inform readers how the modern military uses and understands
the good order and discipline term, and to re-initiate a discussion on this important topic. After
introducing criticisms concerning modern usage of the term, the paper summarizes a study of
military officials’ public statements using the term in recent decades.