# Teamwork-is it forced????



## Stealthybob (8 Oct 2005)

quoted from career_radio-checker in the forum    I'm new to all this


"We had a girl who joined up half way through the course to complete the Soldier Qualification portion of the Course. The previous year she was sent home because of *surprise* a knee injury. Sure enough, on our ruck march her knee started to hurt and she couldn't carry on. Being true to the motto "No soldier left behind" WE have to take her gear and carry it for her. While she limped along, one budy carried her riffle and webbing while another took her rucksack. Don't forget they have their own stuff too.

This, combined with her innability to do other tasks, did not make her popular and she faced a lot of pressure from the staff and students to leave. Not through hazing or abuse but through glares and stares. Plus she was approached by staff many times. She did get sent home before the end of the course."


I sure would like to know, why is it such a forcefully decision in his mind he should be considering it being such a nuisance. That girl did not need that Bull sheet, if anything, teamwork should be just like be acting like she is part of the family and treated that way, not like sheet. What if that happened to him, how would he feel. Im getting very disappointed in the army for thinking things like that period, once your in, your in as family- brothers- sisters. God he sounds like a disappointment like if he really was in battle and that happened he sounds like he would leave you behind and save his own rearend. Of course this is one of the thousands of soldiers that could be thinking the wrong way of teamwork.  Im sure there is thousands out there that wouldnt ever think of leaving a soldier male or female, behind and think its a nuisance.


----------



## paracowboy (8 Oct 2005)

teamwork, to me, means everyone doing their part, and pulling their own weight. Comes a time you gotta step aside. 
If not, then the remainder have to pull your weight as well as their own.
Not everyone is cut out to do this. Not everyone can do what is required at the time. They have to stick to what they can do, and leave the other stuff to people better suited to it.

Eat your weakest man, and carry on with the mission. 50%


----------



## George Wallace (8 Oct 2005)

"Teamwork" is not forced on anyone; but it is "strongly encouraged" of all Recruits and members of the CF.

"Weeding" and "Culling" of the "Gene Pool" is also a fact of life; in the CF and the majority of successful Organizations.


----------



## Freddy Chef (8 Oct 2005)

> "We had a girl who joined up half way through the course to complete the Soldier Qualification portion of the Course. The previous year she was sent home because of *surprise* a knee injury...."



Sounds like this girl was coming back to Basic Training for a second chance. 



> "...Sure enough, on our ruck march her knee started to hurt and she couldn't carry on..."


 
Doesn't look like her second chance was going well.



> "...This, combined with her innability to do other tasks, did not make her popular and she faced a lot of pressure from the staff and students to leave...Plus she was approached by staff many times...."



Second chance...really not going well.

Team work is about a maximum contribution from everyone on the team. Other than her injury, it did not sound like this girl was able to provide such contribution. The rest of her team mates were able to contribute, since:



> "...WE have to take her gear and carry it for her. While she limped along, one budy carried her riffle and webbing while another took her rucksack. Don't forget they have their own stuff too..."



[By the by, "rifle and webbing" translates to "weapon and survival belt". Any soldier worth their salt would rather be on a stretcher and/or unconscious before he/she gives up their rifle and webbing.]

You'd have to experience the situation to get a true appreciation of it. TQ 2/3, QL 2/3, BMQ/SQ...or whatever the h*** they call Basic Training now a days, you are under stress/pressure from your staff to perform up to standard, and you have quite a load to carry to begin with. A good team mate can contribute "above and beyond" their own duties, is spite of being tired, in spite of being in pain, in spite of despising the team mate they are helping. Not to mention, a good team mate will be driven like a man/woman possessed by a demon if he/she were given a second chance. If/when you attend Basic Training, you will have a better understanding of "teamwork", and a better definition by which to assess the members of your team.


----------



## Bartok5 (8 Oct 2005)

Four words for the "wilting daisy" and those who are sufficiently stupid to make excuses for her.  Those words are plain and simple - "suck it up, buttercup".

 Can't hack it?  Find a different line of work.  Don't expect me or the soldiers that I work with to cater to the lowest common denominator.  I am not interested in the minimum standard - whatever that is these days.  

Suck it up and soldier on.  It is a pretty simple equation where I come from......

Teamwork is all well and good.  Until the team has to carry a dead-weight.  At that point, the weak link is not a team-player.  He or she has become a liability.  At which point he/she is done like dinner and deserves to be punted.  No excuses, no "softy" understanding, no nothing.  Can't hack the pace?  Do everyone a favour and leave.  Go.  Get out.  We don't need nor want you.

Unduly harsh?  Perhaps - but then so is combat.  Either you make the grade or you don't.  None of us at the pointy end have the time nor the wherewithall to indulge non-hackers.  The training system is one thing.  Service in an operational battalion is quite another.  Good luck to Cinderella, whomever she (or he) may be.  Those who cannot exceed the requirement in all facets of soldiering are not welcome where I work.  

the minimum standard is nothing to aspire to......

FWIW, 

Mark C


----------



## Bert (8 Oct 2005)

There is two issues here.   One is of teamwork.   The other is the performance of a member
in SQ and the reaction to it.

Teamwork is the combined actions of some or all members to make sure the platoon
overcomes an obstacle or challenge.   In other words, the whereforall as a group to get the job 
done.   It seems in the description the platoon did just that during the ruck march.   

However, a team is made up of members and each one fulfills their part.   If one chronically cannot 
contribute to the team or cannot do the job, then its up to the chain of command to bring about
a resolution in one form or another.

Without knowing the story more, its difficult to speculate from the point of view of the member 
in question, the perceptions of the platoon, and the instructors.   The issue may be more involved
than whats presented.


----------



## Hunter (9 Oct 2005)

I think at one time or another anyone who is in the reserves long enough will encounter candidates on course like the one described in the first post.   It is incumbent on the individual candidates to show up on course physically and mentally prepared for the workload.   If her surprise injury was a pre-existing condition, she shouldn't have been on course in the first place.   If it occurred on course and was a chronic condition, she should have removed herself from the course voluntarily.   Everyone gets little ouchies on course, and it's like Mark C said - suckit it up buttercup.   The way I see it, it comes down to drive and motivation.   If her knee was too sore to tolerate marching with her ruck, she should have been in the sag wagon, otherwise she should have shouldered her ruck, gritted her teeth, and carried on.   On the last day of my BMQ I broke my foot badly enough to require surgery a couple of days later, but I still managed the 90 minute march-out carrying my full load.   Why?   Because I didn't want my last memory of basic to be riding in the meatwagon and watching my buddies do all the work.   Drive and motivation.


----------



## Stealthybob (9 Oct 2005)

Hunter said:
			
		

> On the last day of my BMQ I broke my foot badly enough to require surgery a couple of days later, but I still managed the 90 minute march-out carrying my full load.   Why?   Because I didn't want my last memory of basic to be riding in the meatwagon and watching my buddies do all the work.   Drive and motivation.




I agree with you 100% i would rather drag myself to the end, then watch my buddies do all the work. I think im just to soft on girls. lol   Very inspiring words also if i do say so, Drive and Motivation is the keyword.


----------



## armyvern (9 Oct 2005)

Please avoid the girls remarks  ;D  I have twice split up the loads of men to carry (Ironicly enough one of them also had suffered a broken ankle as well!!) I am soft on guys!!  ;D  I would like to point out though...that they both continued to carry their own weapons and webbing...we just split the contents of their rucks...OHHH Petawawa days!!


----------



## Sig_Des (9 Oct 2005)

It's kind of a trade-off....I myself hated it on course when someone didn't seem like they weren't pulling they're weight on such physical activities such as ruck marches, but I also hated the fact that someone in the platoon was lagging, it'd be prefferable if no one was falling out.

It's good training for the rest of the course, having to carry the rest of the kit, even though it's irritating, you may come across that situation in your career, where someone may not be able to go on, you need to shoulder their kit, and carry that person.

StealthyBob, keep in mind that we are very teamwork oriented, but their is a nescessity to "cull the herd" as it were. If your not pulling your weight on a competitive hockey team, your coach is probably going to drop you like a burning coal. As previously mentioned, if she had a reoccuring injury, she shouldn't have even been sent back to the course..She either dropped the ball by not mentioning it before she left, or her unit did by sending her when they were aware of it.


----------



## Stealthybob (9 Oct 2005)

I can see where your going with that Sig_Des. I will agree sure do your part, and i will help you when you need it kinda wise. As long as you keep up not drag the whole squad down there all there for each other, i think thats where your going with it right?


----------



## Daidalous (9 Oct 2005)

Stealthbob.   I had a good friend of mine on my basic that  could not  hump a ruck to save there life,   I always  dropped behind to carry there kit, drag them, push them even fireman carry there ass the last km once,  and fail  because I missed the timing.  ( I did not get a written up about because of how it happened)  My Sgt put it to me best,  if everyone could be a solider we would not have basic.


----------



## Sig_Des (9 Oct 2005)

Stealthybob said:
			
		

> I can see where your going with that Sig_Des. I will agree sure do your part, and i will help you when you need it kinda wise. As long as you keep up not drag the whole squad down there all there for each other, i think thats where your going with it right?



pretty much... as aesop081 brought out, the 'everyone's a winner' mentality is dangerous to the military..The coddling that you see in society right now, be it kids sports, or schools, doesn't have a place in the military..

pass a kid up a grade or graduate them even though they dont deserve it = a possibly very bad employee, say

pass a kid through basic when they couldn't really hack it= May equal dead or hurt soldiers...the stakes are high.


----------



## Stealthybob (9 Oct 2005)

This info is helping me understand, a little better bout the army basics area, thank you for the information.


----------



## old fart (9 Oct 2005)

Daidalous said:
			
		

> Stealthbob.     I had a good friend of mine on my basic that   could not   hump a ruck to save there life,     I always   dropped behind to carry there kit, drag them, push them even fireman carry there *** the last km once,   and fail   because I missed the timing.   ( I did not get a written up about because of how it happened)   My Sgt put it to me best,   if everyone could be a solider we would not have basic.



To be frank, you should have been written up, you failed....it's the Trg NCO's job to conduct the motivation, not another recruit.

I would have told you to shift your own arse......


----------



## GO!!! (9 Oct 2005)

Stealthy Bob,

I can see you are beginning to understand what the majority of posters here are talking about, but I take a very fundamentalist approach to the maintenance of standards.

By dragging a person through a military course, you do them a disservice, and whoever they work for, and with, in the future.

The individual in question is left with the impression that they are competent, and able to accomplish the tasks assigned to them, which can lead to over - confidence. The rest of the team is left resentful and bitter that they had to work even harder to make this person pass, who now shares a rank, pay scale and level of responsibility with them.

Let's take a hypothetical, but everyday example. (for me anyway).

Pte Bloggins is dragged through a succession of military courses by her teamwork oriented peers, who carry her loads, help her study on tests, and generally do a portion of her work for her, on a regular basis, in order to satisfy the "teamwork" mentality. Bloggins rises to the rank of Master Corporal, and drags ass through a rappelmaster's  course, which qualifies her to check the harnesses, equipment and tecniques of other troops, and dispatch them as they rappell off of buildings, bridges, helicopters etc. At some point in the future, she forgets the skills she has been taught, and with no other knowledgeable rappelmasters around to help her do her job, hooks up another soldier incorrectly. He leans back to test his weight on a 30 foot tower - and falls to his death. Now Bloggins goes to jail, the soldier in question is dead. How did the assistance of Bloggins help anyone in the long run?

No one is better served by helping an incompetent person succeed. Teamwork is about accomplishing goals that would be impossible as an individual, not helping an individual do their job on a daily basis.


----------



## Stealthybob (9 Oct 2005)

I that was a sad story :crybaby:. But i agree no body should be doing the other persons stuff daily, for i a civilian thats just common sense, i was just mentioning for that one time. But many people have told me the true meaning of teamwork in the army.  im fine and glad with what i heard. thanks for the reply.


----------



## mavericknm (10 Oct 2005)

Nice post GO!!!

I think in the short run team work is essential. I've done my share of motivation and pushing. Getting the last cadet to walk a little faster or sing an attitude check is hard but its important to making a fun weekend. I can't speak for the real army but for us cadets, if you don't pull your own weight, you don't go up and thus theres no MCpl screwing up. In a sense its important to have that teamwork there. However at the end of the day, the evaluator better make sure the right people get the right ammount of credit. So Pte Bloggins better not get promoted. Instead the other two who helped her should be rewarded accordingly.

So yes Teamwork is forced, but in the right environement, its in your best interest to be a good team player.


----------



## Pte. Bloggins (10 Oct 2005)

All good posts IMHO.

To add my own 2 cents, I always view teamwork as a "give and take" concept. I might understand certain course material better then buddy, and will help him study to pass his test. In turn, he'll help me if I need it, maybe help me improve on my PT or something. One hand washes the other...


----------



## armyguy62 (11 Oct 2005)

I suppose  will add my 2 cents worth too....   Frankly I do not think that an individual can be forced to adopt the tenet of teamwork. I have worked with people who pretended to be teamplayers but it was pretty obvious they did not get the concept of teamwork. I believe that those who do not subscribe to teamwork as a way of life, if you will, will be culled from the military herd fairly quickly. I have also seen some people who were teamplayers but did not know it...
  We had a Cpl Rad Tech (Cpl M***)posted in to our shop in Petawawa. He had been in contact with me a few months before and had been advised that if he was not in good physical condition, NOW would be a great time to start PT. The first morning of PT he showed up for I thought would be his last... it nearly killed him. Two weeks later we did the 2 X 10 and my guys hauled him and most of his kit most of the way. Now here is where the teamwork came into play.....  for the most part my guys did not give him a hard time. We offered to stick with him through PT and do PT at lunch/after work day/on weekends. He took us up on the offer and within a couple of weeks was sticking to the pack on Troop PT (albeit at the back). After 3 months he was leading Troop PT, after 6 months he did the 2 X 10 with no problems. The next summer we had a Cpl posted in who had never been on an Army base and had done no preparatory PT. Cpl M*** took this young fellow under his wing and in no time had him to the Troop standard for PT.
.......I know...a VERY long and boring story, but here is part 2.....
  My second thought on teamwork would be this, teamwork applies in both the big and small context. When my Troop WO saw Cpl M*** on the 2X10 he nearly had a stroke (and rightly so), however his proposed solution to the problem was to get him posted Base side. In my mind teamwork means working together to solve a problem, not shifting it to someone else so it is no longer your problem. My alternative solution (to the Tp WO/SigO) was "give me 6 months, if he is not to an acceptable standard by then...release him". Either way, the problem would be solved.


----------



## Haggis (11 Oct 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> No one is better served by helping an incompetent person succeed. Teamwork is about accomplishing goals that would be impossible as an individual, not helping an individual do their job on a daily basis.



Wow, GO!!!  Bang on!


----------



## MOOO! (11 Oct 2005)

I am all for the team work.  Helping others develop to a standard is great and does increase morale in most cases.  BUT, on the other end I have instructed on a few courses were the dead weight of a few or even a individual kills the group.  From a staff side a few posts hit the head of the nail accurately.  Staff help out as much as they can,  but if the heart is not there and no effort is put into it (like GO, and his story) why keep those who might be in a leadership role from the sweat and blood of others.

You get a few chances in training no real chances in combat.  I want to have someone who is willing to try hard and sweat then people who don't even want to take the pain and do what others are doing.  

This is a old topic staff are all ways on the look out for.  Weeding is a part of the process, our business is tough and we have to keep the standards.  Yes some slip through but hopefully down the road that gets sorted out (fix the problem or remove it).

My cents worth.

"People in a mob are like cattle, they follow the crowd.  MOOOOO!"


----------



## reccecrewman (16 Oct 2005)

> pass a kid up a grade or graduate them even though they dont deserve it = a possibly very bad employee, say



My RSM never got past Grade 9 - He's an outstanding RSM.  I can rattle off the names of over 20 NCO's in my Regiment that dropped out of school before completing Grade 10 - for the most part, all great NCO's, very knowledgeable and solid soldiers.  Then theres the flip side of the coin, I can name guys who completed high school, got a college certificate, are very intelligent, but not very good soldiers.  It really just comes down to how badly you want to wear the uniform, and not disgrace yourself, your unit or your Country while doing it.  What was that saying I heard earlier? Ah, "DRIVE & MOTIVATION"


----------



## paracowboy (16 Oct 2005)

reccecrewman said:
			
		

> My RSM never got past Grade 9 - He's an outstanding RSM.   I can rattle off the names of over 20 NCO's in my Regiment that dropped out of school before completing Grade 10 - for the most part, all great NCO's, very knowledgeable and solid soldiers.   Then theres the flip side of the coin, I can name guys who completed high school, got a college certificate, are very intelligent, but not very good soldiers.   It really just comes down to how badly you want to wear the uniform, and not disgrace yourself, your unit or your Country while doing it.   What was that saying I heard earlier? Ah, "DRIVE & MOTIVATION"


you're missing his point. He's not saying a schoolin' education is vital to becoming a soldier, he's saying that if you allow a kid to pass without meeting standard, you end up with a sub-par individual.


----------



## reccecrewman (16 Oct 2005)

I understood his point paracowboy, I was simply raising the point that you have to dig a little deeper than what you see on the surface.  Very valid points were made on his post, however, I was simply raising the point that just because somebody got passed in high school courses because the teaching staff didn't want to have to deal with the problem for another year doesn't nescessarily mean you have a future "bad-employee"


----------



## paracowboy (16 Oct 2005)

granted, but I think we can agree that the likelihood is greater. Someone who pushes harder in school to meet or exceed the standard, is more likely to do the same once employed. SOmeone who slacks off in school is more likely to do the same once employed.
Exceptions abound. Case in point: me. I was a lousy student because it bored me. I try very hard to be a good soldier, however. But, looking back at the people I hung out with, the ones who skipped classes with me, or never did their homework because they were out partying with me, I am the only one who isn't living hand-to-mouth, in their parents' basement, or on some sort of government hand-out. (Although, one could stretch it a bit, and say I am on government pay, so...)


----------



## combat_medic (18 Oct 2005)

The one thing I'm surprised no one has addressed is the classroom portions of courses. I have found that it is often those who have little problems with PT are the ones who have more difficulty in the classroom. Part of the teamwork aspect of a course often involves other people helping carry these individuals through this by helping them study, review, take notes etc... should they be made to fail because they're weak? Everyone has their own strengths and weaknesses. The tiny little guy may not be the best 84 gunner, but I'm willing to bet he'd be a good scout - since he's quick and little. Contrarywise the big, brick-$hithouse guys who have all the stealth of a Panzer tank may not be the best at, say, Recce, but I'd bet they'd be great machine gunners, and wouldn't even notice an extra 20 pounds of kit. 

Employ people up to their abilities, right? I'm not saying to make everyone pass - God knows there are people out there who just couldn't pour pi$$ out of a boot if the instructions were written on the bottom. But just about everyone has something to contribute, and a good leader will know how to use people's strengths, and help them improve their weaknesses. How many soldiers have you met who are instantly good at classwork, PT, drill, shooting, and fieldcraft right off the bat? Probably not a damn one. Everyone needs help with something, and that's where teamwork comes in.


----------



## Old Ranger (18 Oct 2005)

But this is about Basic Training.....

Minimum standards before finding someone's neich!


----------



## combat_medic (18 Oct 2005)

Fair enough. If they aren't passing the PC/ECs, they should be gone.


----------



## Old Ranger (18 Oct 2005)

Agreed!


----------



## mover1 (18 Oct 2005)

When birds fly in the right formation they need only exert half the effort, even in nature teamwork results in collective laziness.


----------



## reccecrewman (22 Oct 2005)

Thats not nescessarily a terrible thing..................... as long as you have everybody in your Troop/Platoon pulling together for a common goal, the job gets done that much quicker and more efficiently, rather than only having a couple guys doing all the work and taking alot longer to do it.  Of course, there is the bad side of this practice as well, as there are undoubtedly going to be one or two guys making puppies while the rest of the guys do the work - since everybody is moving around and doing a job, they will be able to slack off and be overlooked as people are too budy to pay them attention. But, it has been my experience that these people get noticed by their peers as slackers and end up being ostracized for it. (And damn rightly so)


----------



## Glorified Ape (24 Oct 2005)

Seems to me that everyone has their off-days. If someone in the platoon needs a little help once in a while, no problem, so long as they do the same when others come up short. If someone's constantly screwing up, lagging behind, etc. then I have to agree with GO!!! - helping that person pass isn't doing anything but lowering the aggregate quality of CF personnel. Like I said, everyone has the occasional bad day, bad task, etc. and deserves help when they have one. If the "bad day" is the norm more than the exception, helping them pass is destructive to the person and the CF. 

I don't understand how chronic laggers/screw-ups can live with themselves; constantly being propped up by the others. I personally find it embarassing and guilt-inducing as hell when I need help from the others because of some deficiency on my part. To have that constantly occuring would be absolute hell. That embarassment and guilt, I find, is the greatest motivation not to be in that position again. I don't understand how people can't be so embarassed and guilt-ridden by constant shortcomings that they either shape up or drop out.  ???


----------



## Sig_Des (24 Oct 2005)

Glorified Ape said:
			
		

> I personally find it embarassing and guilt-inducing as heck when I need help from the others because of some deficiency on my part. To have that constantly occuring would be absolute heck. That embarassment and guilt, I find, is the greatest motivation not to be in that position again.



sadly, not everyone sees it that way. Some assume people should be continuously covering for them. Don't get me wrong, I'll help people out, and appreciate help given to me if nescessary, but that makes me strive to work to a point where I don't need help. And making the same mistakes twice is a no no


----------



## armyvern (25 Oct 2005)

Sig_Des said:
			
		

> sadly, not everyone sees it that way. Some assume people should be continuously covering for them. Don't get me wrong, I'll help people out, and appreciate help given to me if nescessary, but that makes me strive to work to a point where I don't need help. And making the same mistakes twice is a no no


I totally agree...there are quite too many out there these days that are quite contented to collect the paycheck but make absolutely no attempt to ever pass go.


----------

