[January 08, 2015] In Part 1 of this why veterans fail series, I proposed that military veterans who fail more than their peers would likely have failed anyway. Many veterans will see this if they look closely at the issue, as surely as I have.
I argue that there are two possible factors. First, the self-election of those that seek the military over-represents those who would have failed anyway. Second, the military rewards specific skills and beliefs that are, in some cases, not necessarily helpful in the civilian world. For these reasons veterans as a group are more likely to fail.
Current programs to integrate veterans into the workforce or college, and to improve other measures of wellness, focus almost exclusively on post-service time. This period of time is important but fewer resources might be available in the future and therefore it is our responsibility to consider solutions that can be effective sooner.
The military expends its funds on deterrence and the preparation for war. As expected, this is costly and the gravity of failure so immense, great attention is paid to getting it right. The very skills of our troops that make this possible, may not be so successful in the civilian world. What are the solutions that can make our military service members more prepared once they depart the service? Some of the following are being tried but on a limited scale – those efforts could be expanded.
- We can begin with making some changes in the military formal education system. Military hard skills can be taught in civilian settings, whether college or trade schools. This also puts our military in contact with a more diverse mix of people and helps them establish a network for future use. Further, there should be a greater emphasis placed on a continuous education vice an occasional schoolhouse attendance.
- There should also be more enhanced civilian-military partnerships with participation at some level by all service members. Nearly every skill set in the military has some counterpart in the business or academic world. Maximum use of industrial partners, for example, will help our military personnel and help breakdown future stereotyping of our vets.
- Better interagency and inter-institutional movement of military personnel. Not just cooperation and working together, which is important also, but the actual temporary employment of that service member in other government and non-government entities. This allows more than networking but the veteran will gain those skills needed for the civilian world.
There are many others also. Like a U.S. Army initiative called Soldier for Life. This program is designed to achieve much of what I discussed today but its scale and reach is small. The idea is right. Our military members, their families, and communities are part of the concept that being a soldier doesn’t stop when they leave military service.
The issue of why veterans fail is complex and many factors are surely to blame. Yet, it is the predisposition of veterans to self-select the military and the military’s reward system that has been overlooked as causal factors. When we begin to require the military service member to diversify their skills outside the military throughout their military career, only then will be see more similar successes when compared to their civilian peers.
[Don’t forget to “Like” the Leader Maker at our Facebook Page.]