Military Review English Edition November-December 2014 | Page 101

LOYAL DISSENT

be expected to be lazy and never fully contribute no
matter what decision a leader has made. (Let us again
assume these types of subordinates must be dealt with
using legitimate authority in ways outside the scope of
this article.) However, when leaders confuse unproductive dissent with genuine loyal dissent, and lump both
together, their followers will become ingratiating and
obsequious. Worse still, those subordinates with the potential to make significant contributions to the unit by
supplying creative and perceptive contrary views may
decide to simply wait out their leader’s tour, electing to
contribute in a minimal way in order to avoid attention,
and hoping that somehow things will improve due to
other external factors.7 Such a circumstance denies the
unit the energy and potential contributions to mission
success these soldiers could provide.
Consequently, treating all dissent as adverse is
wrong-headed and highly counterproductive. Instead,
successful leaders are often those most willing to provide a real and productive forum to leverage the value
of loyal dissent .

Evaluating the Nature of Dissent
To discern the difference between valuable loyal
dissent and its opposite, consider the source. Loyal dissenters are generally hard working with a proven track
record, not complainers who seldom contribute their
full potential.
Next, consider their motivation. If resolution of the
dissent provides the dissenter with no personal gain, or
risks a leader’s disfavor by bringing up a controversial
issue, then the reputed loyal dissenter is likely motivated by good intentions or acting for the good of the unit.
Finally, consider the dissenting idea itself. Could it
potentially improve your organization? Even if the idea
cannot be implemented right now, would future similar
ideas from others potentially help your team? If so,
consider giving it a chance.
If the dissent passes this three-part test then it is
likely loyal in nature. Leaders must then carefully decide how they react to loyal dissent, as everyone in their
organization is now watching.

The Challenges to Accepting Loyal
Dissent
To employ our subordinates to the organization’s
full advantage, we must encourage them to speak freely
MILITARY REVIEW  November-December 2014

when appropriate. Loyally dissenting subordinates are
not a threat. However, leaders sometimes have a tough
time differentiating between challenges to their personal authority—which is not the intent of truly loyal
dissent—and challenges to their ideas or policies.8 A
subordinate can disagree with a policy, and bring you a
solution or new recommendation, without challenging
your right to lead

Human Context of Dissent
Even loyal dissent may tax our deeply entrenched
human aversion and cultural conditioning against challenges to the hierarchy without our even knowing it,
leaving both the would-be dissenter and the dominant
leader feeling uneasy. This occurs despite the fact the
leader may have actually requested that his or her subordinate provide a respectful critique (i.e., “Tell me what
you really think”). Overcoming these uneasy feelings
that result from productive dissent first requires us to
understand their origins and then have the courage and
strength to mitigate their stifling effects.
Some resistance to hearing loyal dissent may come
from our biological roots. Psychologist and education
expert Dr. Howard Gardner argues that, as primates,
we are hard wired to seek out hierarchical organizations and then imitate and follow the dominate
leaders.9 This has been a good thing for society overall
as it has allowed us to create great civilizations ordered
by the rule of law. However, the biological legacy that
creates deference to hierarchy may also mean that we
are all internally wired to avoid loyal dissent when
facing uncertainty and stress.
This aversion is especially apparent among newly
formed groups, which characteristically have higher
rates of anxiety about their chances for success stemming from their unproven track record. In the Army,
new groups are formed and reformed regularly. A
battalion or brigade recently reconstituted as part of
the Army force generation cycle contains mostly new
soldiers and must make ready for combat in short
order. These new teams are particularly vulnerable to
bottling up loyal and productive dissent.
To reduce anxiety, new groups like these tend to
become more homogeneous in thought as a coping
mechanism. This may successfully reduce some anxiety, but also disrupts aggregate creativity and dissuades all dissent, both loyal and disloyal.10 A similar
99