Capt roberts didnt give a specific reason for not

This preview shows page 171 - 174 out of 245 pages.

Capt Roberts didn’t give a specific reason for not helping. Is he performing less than excellent in his duty? Based upon the Core Value of Service Before Self, when must you respond to requests for help?
172 Case Study #5 2d Lt White is summoned to the front office and informed of the commander’s decision to nominate her for a quarterly award at the end of the next quarter. “This should give you enough time to study the awards packages of past winners to figure out what the board wants,” says the commander. “Think seriously about performing a few extra duties around here to beef that package up.” 2d Lt White does as her commander suggests and, at the appropriate time, provides to the commander a list of accomplishments for the quarter. A week later, she is again summoned to the commander’s office and given the awards package to read. “Piece of cake,” says the commander. “I think you have more than a fighting chance to bring home the bacon!” At first the commander’s enthusiasm is unavoidably infectious, but then 2d Lt White begins to look closely at the specific points made in the awards package. There is no doubt the commander has ‘massaged’ the truth on some of the bullet statements and, in one or two cases, the truth has been stretched to the ripping point. She points out these problems to the commander, and he assures her “everything will be taken care of.” 2d Lt White goes into the interview for the organizational-level award believing the commander cleaned-up the problems in the nomination package, but that belief is quickly destroyed when one of the board members asks her a question based on one of the problematic bullet statements. After the interview, 2d Lt White reports this persistent problem to the commander, who again promises to “take care of it.” Two days later, the commander relays the information that White won at the organizational level and will compete, the following week, at the base level. “Good luck,” he says to White, “it’s all up to you now.” The next week, 2d Lt White wins at the base level, but this time it is impossible to tell from the questions whether or not the package still contains the problematic bullet statements. What was the primary Core Value not being adhered to in this case? Who was not adhering to this Core Value and why? Did this case bring the other Core Values into question? How? What will happen in the workplace if others find out about the lack of integrity and excellence demonstrated? Whom could 2d Lt White have consulted if she thought she was unable to handle this situation herself? What should 2d Lt White do after winning the base-level award and realizing her package may still have contained problematic bullet statements?
Air Force Core Values: The Price of Admission 173 Case Study #6 The investigation board for a CT-43 accident concluded there were three causes for the accident: failure of command (to enforce Air Force instructions), aircrew error (with

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture