Discipline: Art vs. Science Published Jan. 8, 2010 By Lt. Col. Reginald Williams 30th Space Wing Command Post chief VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. -- For hundreds of years, a cornerstone of military success or failure has been the traditions of good order and discipline. Many people believe discipline is primarily associated with the word punishment; those people who truly understand the art of discipline know punishment is only a piece of a disciplined environment. I see discipline in the military as having two significant facets: self-discipline (modeling) and being disciplined by others (punishment). Arguably, there are other areas that can be intricately included in a discussion on military discipline, such as the awards system, but these are the ones we will talk about in this article. Disciplinary actions, or being disciplined by others, come in many forms, such as verbal admonishment, a simple feedback session on poor performance, a letter of counseling or Uniform Code of Military Justice actions. A sense of discipline as an Airman is the attitude of an individual toward the discipline (military discipline) established in the Armed Forces and their ability to build their behavior with its requirements. There are those people who view military discipline as a system of rules and standards governing an Airman's behavior. The scary thing about this view is the belief that only ensuring our Airman's compliance with rules and standards set forth by leadership maintains good order and discipline. I call this approach the "science of discipline" rather than the "art." There is more to discipline than just paperwork, and our individual self-discipline is what makes good order and discipline work. There are four types of people who work in any unit or organization and they all posses their own form of discipline: those who 1) are efficient workers and do share the core values 2) are efficient workers and do not share core values 3) are inefficient workers and do share your core, and lastly 4) are inefficient workers and do not share the core values. No doubt the first type you want in your unit or organization, and the fourth type you would "show the door." While the first and fourth types are shining examples of self-discipline and being disciplined, respectively, types two and three require the art of leadership and management rather than the science. Can you have military discipline without self-discipline? Researching this article, I discovered that the definitions out there for self-discipline are vague such as "the system of a serviceman's attitudes to the surrounding world," "internal orderliness in any matter," "an ability to behave correctly in any situation," and "an ability to control one's behavior." I view self-discipline to be characterized by words and phrases such as self-control, conformist behavior, service before self, integrity in all I do, etc. Ultimately, in my humble opinion, military discipline cannot be accomplished without individual self-discipline. Each Airman posses their individual motivations for maintaining self-discipline; whether it is pride in selfless service or fear of punishment. It cannot be overstated that the value of our Airman's disciplined attitude is directly correlated to maintaining the strength of our military might. I believe the young men and women who come into our Air Force and acclimate or discipline themselves into category one or three above come with some skill of self-discipline. The discussion of self-discipline and how it relates to military discipline is a discussion of individuals accepting the rules and standards of military life. Additionally, it is about conforming themselves to what is expected under the umbrella of good order and discipline. Even the Airmen who fall into category two or four above can make a decision and self-discipline themselves to the environment of good order and discipline. The mere tightening of military discipline to maintain good order and discipline is insufficient to accomplish the task. The success or failure of a military organization is tied to good order and discipline; the success or failure of good order and discipline is tied to an individual's self-discipline. Military discipline is a foundation to good command and control, as well as combat readiness. Although military discipline is viewed through the prism of self-discipline, it should not be reduced to the sum of individual self-disciplines. This is because the distinction between military discipline and self-discipline has quantitative and qualitative characteristics; hence, the art of discipline. The interconnection and specifics of the functioning and development of military discipline and individual self-discipline as integrated systems determine the character of good order and discipline and the difference between them. There is no doubt the practice of military discipline is a must; however, this article is not to question or give instructions, but to open and facilitate discussion on the significant role of self-discipline in military discipline.