First, the search function was utilized. It isn't great but I did try, and now I'm here.
Apparently I don't know CAP's Core Values. When I went through my basic enlisted time as a cadet, I learned the Core Values as:
Integrity
Volunteer Service
Excellence
Respect
Now, the Learn to Lead lists them as:
Integrity First
Volunteer Service
Excellence in All We Do
Respect
Guess what? CAPP 50-2, as of April 2010, affirms that the Core Values are the former set which I was taught.
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/P050_002_C64238751B2E9.pdf (http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/P050_002_C64238751B2E9.pdf)
Any thoughts?
Unless someone shows me that CCs at all levels have been made aware of this mistake, or that our Core Values have been changed, I'm running this up the chain. I won't let our Core Values be "multi-branded" (EDIT: meant more "won't allow them to be inconsistent"- referencing the Triangle Thingy and such)
Multi-what?
They say the same things - learn to lead enhances the verbiage a bit to make them easier to understand and teach.
Not really a big deal.
Quote from: Eclipse on October 04, 2011, 05:35:02 PM
Multi-what?
They say the same things - learn to lead enhances the verbiage a bit to make them easier to understand and teach.
Not really a big deal.
It is a big deal if it's used as memory work...
I wouldn't gig anyone being tested verbally if they said it either way - the point is the idea, not the text. Now, if there is a "gotcha" question on a written test, that's not cricket.
Quote from: Eclipse on October 04, 2011, 05:56:36 PM
I wouldn't gig anyone being tested verbally if they said it either way - the point is the idea, not the text. Now, if there is a "gotcha" question on a written test, that's not cricket.
I wouldn't gig them either. But we are mature adults that pass the reasonable person test. Cadets on the other hand...
Quote from: davidsinn on October 04, 2011, 06:10:48 PM
Cadets on the other hand...
...should have mature adults there to mentor and coach them until they can pass the reasonable person test.
But that's only if we assume that they don't pass the reasonable person test already. You know, guilty until proven innocent? :)
Quote from: Briski on October 04, 2011, 06:30:57 PM
Quote from: davidsinn on October 04, 2011, 06:10:48 PM
Cadets on the other hand...
...should have mature adults there to mentor and coach them until they can pass the reasonable person test.
But that's only if we assume that they don't pass the reasonable person test already. You know, guilty until proven innocent? :)
There are never enough adults to go around. Yes, guilty until proven innocent. Proven fact that the brain is not done developing until late in the 20's.
Clearly, the changes are made to make CAP Core Values more closely resemble our big brothers' Core Values.
Major Lord
Quote from: Eclipse on October 04, 2011, 05:35:02 PM
Multi-what?
They say the same things - learn to lead enhances the verbiage a bit to make them easier to understand and teach.
Not really a big deal.
Lack of branding, perhaps? I was a bit rushed and need to fix that one bit- I was referencing the Triangle Thingy and assorted sundry other issues CAP has with consistency.
And at the squadron level, I've had both Senior Members and confused newer cadets correct me on my take on the Core Values (which is apparently the correct one). And I can see this being a Quiz Bowl/Cadet Competition question at various levels.
Quote from: Major Lord on October 04, 2011, 06:58:35 PM
Clearly, the changes are made to make CAP Core Values more closely resemble our big brothers' Core Values.
Major Lord
I would have no problem with that were it an actual change. As is, it appears that the CP staff in incorrect. The CAP Pamphlet specifically addressing the Core Values (see first post) still lists them as I was taught. And I've heard nothing about the National Board (who is referenced as approving Integrity, Volunteer Service, Excellence, Respect in 1996) having changed them in an official capacity.
I am always concerned when someone adds modifiers or conditional "improvements" to the word "integrity". We saw a lot of people struggling with the terminology of "moral leadership" too, and eventually, ( last I heard) the right side one out. Its like the "Three Missions" of CAP....
Major Lord
My question is why do the CAP Core Values differ from the Air Force Core Values.
1. Integrity First
2. Service before self
3. Excellance in all we do
You can't tell me that these won't work for CAP as well as they work for the AF.
I am not sure how long ago CAP adopted its core values, but USAF's version was reduced to three a long time ago. ( 1997?) Perhaps our C.V.'s predates the USAF current version. From the "USAF Little Blue Book of Core Values" ( not to be confused with the Kelly Blue Book of used car values)
"The second reason for recognizing the Core Values is that they point to what is universal and
unchanging in the profession of arms. Some persons are bothered by the fact that different
branches of the service recognize different values; other persons are bothered by the fact that the
Air Force once recognized six values and has now reduced them to three."
Did CAP ever have six core values? Maybe some of you old timers ( I am still a newbie going into my second decade) know.
Major Lord
Air Power! ( but not more or less than 60 HP per person)
I got a DDR calendar about 3 years ago that had one page that listed CAP's core values...all 14 of them...
No, the four core values mimic the Air Force's, except that "respect" is pulled out of "integrity" and set up as a fourth value. Either someone thought strongly of respect, or they didn't really study the Air Force doctrine document.
Quote from: PHall on October 04, 2011, 10:15:33 PM
My question is why do the CAP Core Values differ from the Air Force Core Values.
1. Integrity First
2. Service before self
3. Excellance in all we do
You can't tell me that these won't work for CAP as well as they work for the AF.
#2 is problematic in a volunteer organization - we stress volunteer service, not "service before self", especially for the cadets, who are always
told family and school come before CAP.
Quote from: Eclipse on October 05, 2011, 04:31:21 AM
Quote from: PHall on October 04, 2011, 10:15:33 PM
My question is why do the CAP Core Values differ from the Air Force Core Values.
1. Integrity First
2. Service before self
3. Excellance in all we do
You can't tell me that these won't work for CAP as well as they work for the AF.
#2 is problematic in a volunteer organization - we stress volunteer service, not "service before self", especially for the cadets, who are always
told family and school come before CAP.
Bob, the Air Force is a
volunteer organization. Everybody volunteered to join.
And don't try to use the "volunteer" card, it makes you sound like somebody else here on CT.
Our military may be "voluntary" to join, but when your supervisor comes by and tells you to do something you don't want to, or that you're deploying in a month, it's not exactly voluntary anymore, is it? If you're enlisted, you signed up for four years, and if you decide you don't want to do it, most likely you're going to have some sort of action against you that will follow you for the rest of our life (dishonorable discharge, criminal prosecution, etc). Even my civilian job I can just say "I quit," same as CAP. Voluntary registration does not equate to "volunteer organization."
Quote from: PHall on October 05, 2011, 05:28:29 AM
Bob, the Air Force is a volunteer organization. Everybody volunteered to join.
And don't try to use the "volunteer" card, it makes you sound like somebody else here on CT.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on October 05, 2011, 03:19:25 PMVoluntary registration does not equate to "volunteer organization."
Exactly - yes, joining the military is voluntary, then they own you 24x7 for the duration of your affiliation, with real-life consequences should you disobey
a commander, and including the authority to limit your ability to separate.
Not
exactly the same thing (and has nothing to do with the "I'm just a volunteer." excuse used for poor performance.)
CAP
members exemplary the concept of "service before self" if only by the fact that they are there at all, but the
organization does not hold as one of its mantras that the corps comes before anything. It can't by its very nature, since it doesn't provide a livelihood to its members.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on October 05, 2011, 03:19:25 PM
Our military may be "voluntary" to join, but when your supervisor comes by and tells you to do something you don't want to, or that you're deploying in a month, it's not exactly voluntary anymore, is it? If you're enlisted, you signed up for four years, and if you decide you don't want to do it, most likely you're going to have some sort of action against you that will follow you for the rest of our life (dishonorable discharge, criminal prosecution, etc). Even my civilian job I can just say "I quit," same as CAP. Voluntary registration does not equate to "volunteer organization."
Excellent point, I guess its "voluntary" in the same sense that we voluntarily file a tax return; That is to say, they will come and burn your house down if you don't "volunteer" to comply. The people at least who join USAF know the job is dangerous when they take it.....
Major Lord
So no one sees any issue with inconsistency of our Core Values, and how they are taught to cadets?
I get that lots of money was put into uniforms which garner so much attention and heartache; the Triangle Thingy really is crappy- but I did kinda think that someone might at least agree someone should alert the NHQ CP staff of this. The real reason I posted was to see if it had already been addressed.
Kinda disappointing the direction the thread took, at least to me.
I understand your concern, but I view the Regulation as authoritative and "Learn to Lead" as just another pamphlet, not binding or carrying any real imprimatur. I think you are right to point out the inconsistency, and you did a great job in doing so! If you are waiting for an official acknowledgment and apology from NHQ, I suggest not holding your breath. Heck, we have regulations that contradict each other, let alone expecting every teaching aid to be 100% accurate. The "core values" seem to be a rather new thing in CAP. Just breezing through my 1965 copy of "The Leadership Laboratory Manual" there is no mention of such a thing. This leads me to believe that CAP somehow managed to survive for quite some time without "Core Values". I guess in those days, regular old fashioned "values" must have been sufficient.
Major Lord
I only take issue with it if they are being used as a memorization item. However, since I don't use them as a memorization item, it doesn't bother me. Instead, I like my cadets to use those as guiding principles for their decision making. Whether they are putting "Integrity" or "Integrity First" into their decision making process doesn't matter to me.
Quote
What really are core values? Well, they're actually quite simple. These values represent a cultural commitment within Civil Air Patrol: to practice basic honesty, to give of one's self for the betterment of humanity, to deliver top quality services, and to treat others fairly. In summary, core values require all CAP members to exemplify the highest standards of personal and professional conduct. As former Air Force Chief of Staff General Ronald Fogleman said, "core values must guide our daily actions --- 'even when no one else is watching.'"
I think that making them a memorization item only pays lip service to the goal that they are trying to accomplish.
Quote from: DakRadz on October 05, 2011, 07:29:29 PM
So no one sees any issue with inconsistency of our Core Values, and how they are taught to cadets?
... I did kinda think that someone might at least agree someone should alert the NHQ CP staff of this.
I agree that the Core Values should be presented in a consistent manner. But how did this thread turn towards cadets? The OP cited CAPP 50-2, which is a Professional Development publication according to CAPR 0-2. The OP was not talking about Learn to Lead.
Quote from: SamFranklin on October 05, 2011, 08:42:06 PM
Quote from: DakRadz on October 05, 2011, 07:29:29 PM
So no one sees any issue with inconsistency of our Core Values, and how they are taught to cadets?
... I did kinda think that someone might at least agree someone should alert the NHQ CP staff of this.
I agree that the Core Values should be presented in a consistent manner. But how did this thread turn towards cadets? The OP cited CAPP 50-2, which is a Professional Development publication according to CAPR 0-2. The OP was not talking about Learn to Lead.
On the contrary, the OP was indeed talking about Learn to Lead. The objection of the OP is that 50-2 says that the core values are:
Integrity
Volunteer Service
Excellence
Respect
Learn to Lead presents them as follows:
Integrity First
Volunteer Service
Excellence in All We Do
Respect
So, he was wondering why the new cadet textbooks don't have them listed as presented in the Core Values regulation. So, we are talking about cadets.
Here's something interesting: In an "Air & Space Power Journal" article, a PhD criticizes the Air Force for presenting its Core Values inconsistently (Blue Book vs. AFDD 1-1). There's a big chart and a long section called "lack of coherence between formulations of the core values."
http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj06/win06/toner.html (http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj06/win06/toner.html)
I've always been taught Integrity, Volunteer Service, Excellence, and Respect, and that's good enough for me.
As the Air Force's core values stand versus CAP's, there's two things that stick out, one glaring (and I'll recapitulate it from earlier).
"Integrity First" -- wow, if every member of CAP actually lived by that, think how much better off we'd be.
"Service before self" is commendable in CAP. It's also not something we can expect from cadets. And since we're not sworn and held to the same standard as Big Brother Air Force, we can't truly live up to that. So the "volunteer service" permutation doesn't bother me so much.
"Excellence In All We Do" -- enough said.
"Respect" -- Really? Any knucklehead reading the AFPD on the core values will know that respect is inherent in integrity. That makes a fourth CAP-only core value ridiculously redundant. The problem is that whomever suggested this as a standalone core value either misunderstood the Air Force doctrine, didn't read it, or thought it needed to be redundant for emphasis. I say it's unnecessary. If members understand the doctrine and policy -- or if it's even imparted, which it should be right off the bat for all members, this wouldn't be necessary.
So I'm perfectly fine with...
Integrity First -- Volunteer Service -- Excellence In All We Do
And we should strive to live those values every waking, breathing minute where CAP is concerned, and in our own lives, for that matter.
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on November 17, 2011, 05:31:09 AM
Integrity First -- Volunteer Service -- Excellence In All We Do
Why not:
Integrity
Service
Excellence
And frankly even the "Excellence" is redundant to "Integrity". To BvuckeyeDEJ's point, if you have to explain the value,
it's too subjective to be a "value".