Check the Box or Check Your Compass

Imagine you’re a platoon leader preparing for a field training exercise while managing a mountain of administrative tasks. You are informed that everything is a priority. The mandatory training statistics are due by close of business, maintenance checks need updating, and, oh yeah, your team must somehow be mission-ready by next week. You blink. You sigh. Then you “green” the report and hit send.

Sound familiar?

This scenario is not about laziness or dishonesty, at least not consciously. It’s about ethical fading, the slow, almost imperceptible erosion of moral clarity when mission demands, and systemic pressures make deception feel more like survival rather than sabotage. The scariest part? You likely won’t even realize it’s happening – because of something called “ethical fading.”

What Is Ethical Fading?

Ethical fading occurs when our brains engage in moral gymnastics to avoid the discomfort of feeling that we are violating our values, even when we actually are. Researchers Ann E. Tenbrunsel and David M. Messick explain how we rationalize, reframe, and redirect our decisions to maintain a sense of moral integrity, even as ethics quietly exit stage left. Instead of admitting, “we’re lying,” we phrase it as: “We’re adjusting expectations,” “We’re being efficient with reporting,” or the classic, “This is how it’s always been done.”

Authors David Todd, Paolo Tripodi, and Jonathan Haidt confirm that moral decisions are often rapid, automatic, and driven by emotion. When military hierarchy, tempo, and fear of failure are added, it creates a perfect storm for ethical fading.

From Pressure Cooker to Culture Shift

You don’t have to be a general officer to feel the weight of meeting expectations, even if the pressure does intensify with rank. From junior leaders responding to battalion-wide demands to senior leaders setting the tone at the top, the burden is felt across the formation. More visibility. More metrics. More “do it all” demands. According to authors Clinton Longenecker and James Shufelt, that’s when leaders become even more susceptible to subtle compromises, especially in a culture that sometimes seems to reward results over integrity.

Authors Leonard Wong and Stephen Gerras demonstrated that the military’s bureaucratic overload often forces soldiers into the position of having to “check the box” dishonestly. When perfection is the standard and transparency results in more work (or, worse, reprimand), the path of least resistance begins to seem…quite rational. In casual and candid conversations with my peers, I have heard individuals say, “If we always reported the truth, we would never get another block leave approved.”

It’s amusing, yet it’s also true and concerning.

Why It Matters (Besides the Obvious)

When ethical fading becomes the norm, it quietly poisons trust, erodes accountability, and ultimately leads to operational failures. U.S. Army Colonel Everett Spain and his colleagues describe this process of ethical decline as the “leaky character reservoir:” good people who gradually run dry on moral resilience because the system itself demands compromise.

If a battalion alters readiness numbers to appear favorable on paper, how does the brigade prepare for real-world contingencies? If platoon leadership exaggerates its training completion at the company training meeting, who is actually ready when it matters? In these contexts, the risk is not merely personal; it’s also tactical and operational.

So…What Can Be Done?

Let’s be honest. We’re not going to “PowerPoint” our way out of this. However, we can develop systems that make ethical decision-making more sustainable, even under pressure. For example:

1. Ethical Review Sessions

These are not your typical after-action reviews. Consider them as ethical guardrails. They align with the “Ethical Triangle,” as explained by Dr. Jack D. Kem, balancing rules (principles-based), outcomes (consequences-based) and character (virtues-based). They don’t merely ask, “Did you complete the task?” Instead, they inquire, “Did we uphold the values while doing it?” And yes, they hold leaders accountable. That’s the whole point.

For example, suppose a company reports 100% training completion despite obvious constraints (inclement weather, minimal range time, or soldiers with established physical limitations). An ethical review session examines how that was possible. If reporting was rushed or “massaged,” the session redirects focus toward sustainable practices and integrity in readiness reporting.

For junior leaders, proposing or normalizing these sessions, whether at platoon or company-level maintenance meetings or during pre-combat checks at the squad level, helps integrate ethical reflection into routine tasks. This drives home the notion that ethical leadership isn’t optional; it’s a tactical and operational necessity.
Efforts like Moral Terrain Coaching, which are gaining traction across institutions like the U.S. Military Academy and special operations units, showcase what this review can look like in practice. These short, structured reflections, conducted immediately after morally significant training moments, help leaders connect emotional response with ethical reasoning, reinforcing moral awareness without disrupting operational flow.
Think of it as checking your compass while navigating a dense forest: You pause briefly, reorient to your values, and make sure you’re still heading true north.

2. Task Saturation Audits

While we’re on the topic of integrity, we may as well talk about reality. Are we demanding too much from too few with too little? The reality is that over time, units often accumulate task requirements like sediment, especially during command transitions. Each new commander brings priorities that reflect the operational conditions and constraints of their tenure. But when previous requirements are not scrubbed from the platoon’s or company’s workload, the result is an inflated checklist of inherited tasks, many of which may no longer align with the current mission.

That’s where task saturation audits come in. These reviews assess whether junior leaders are being overwhelmed by outdated or competing demands. Left unchecked, that overload creates an environment where success feels impossible, and when success feels impossible, integrity becomes negotiable.
When telling the truth starts to look like failure, it becomes difficult to advocate sincerely for honesty. Within that paradigm, Dr. Kem rightly emphasizes that ethics involves not only individual choices but also the environment in which choices are made. Resolve the overload, and you’ll find it much easier to practice integrity.

3. Task Prioritization Frameworks

Not everything can be priority one. If every building is burning, the fire crew may not know where to start. A clear prioritization framework helps squad leaders, platoon sergeants, platoon leaders, and company commanders differentiate between mission-essential tasks and administratively “nice-to-do” tasks, so time and energy are focused where they matter most.

Too often, junior leaders inherit bloated task lists shaped by previous initiatives, compliance demands, or well-intended but misaligned guidance. Without a deliberate approach to categorizing effort, everything feels critical, and eventually, the ethical foundations begin to crumble.

A clear framework doesn’t just improve time management; it protects moral decision-making. When platoon and company-level leaders know what truly requires their focus, they’re less likely to find themselves choosing between honesty and execution. I mean, let’s be honest, having to choose between lying and failing is not an ideal situation for anyone. A good framework eliminates that dilemma altogether.

Still Not Convinced?

Ask yourself…Have I ever “penciled in” completion just to avoid more friction? Do I expect subordinates to “figure it out” when given impossible timelines? Am I more focused on appearances than on accuracy? If you answered yes, you are not a villain; you’re human. But awareness is the first step toward change.

Let’s Stop Lying to Ourselves

Ethical fading is not about bad people; it’s about good people in flawed systems. But here’s the kicker: those systems are created and sustained by us. Junior officers and NCOs are not merely cogs in the machine; they’re future battalion commanders, Command Sergeants Major, brigade XOs, operations SGMs, and policy makers.

If you don’t tactfully push back against ethical fading now, you’ll be the one institutionalizing it later. So, what can you do today?

• Call out unrealistic expectations in your formations.
• Lead with transparency, even when it’s uncomfortable.
• Advocate for structural solutions like review sessions and audits.
• And more importantly, check your moral compass as often as you check your readiness metrics.

Integrity is not a checkbox. It’s a muscle. Use it – or lose it.