Review into the treatment of women at the Australian Defence Force ...

DI(G) PERS 35-3, the 2009 directive on the management and reporting of unacceptable behaviour,is useful for contextualising how equity and diversity, unacceptable behaviour and complaintsmanagement are entwined in Defence policy. This document was examined in the ADFA Report and isnot part of ADFA’s post 2011 reforms. 20ADFA’s new equity and diversity training continuum has been redeveloped for 2013. As noted above,much of the package continues to focus on unacceptable behaviour, complaints and reporting, howeverpart of the second and third year training concentrates more on the strategic focus of equity anddiversity in Defence.Undergraduates conduct specific leadership exercises and projects each year at ADFA. Each has anethics component. Leadership Challenge One is a four hour exercise designed to assess teamwork andleadership skills. There are eight components to this challenge, one of which is ‘ethical dilemmas’, inwhich undergraduates are expected to address ‘the tactical as well as the ethical or moral decisions’. 21Leadership Challenge Two is a two-week exercise, and includes the ‘Intro to Practical Leadership andMoral Self Assessment’ as its first objective. 22 Leadership Challenge Three includes an evening activity,‘Model for Guided Reflection’, that draws on various ADF leadership doctrines. 23Additionally, the Audit has been provided with an outline of the ‘ADFA Citizenship Package’, underwhich training is organised. 24 The citizenship package, as drafted, deals with a number of componentsincluding ‘Equity and Diversity’, ‘Military Ethics’ and ‘Character Development’. The content of the equityand diversity component is the training continuum referred to above, and this was provided to the Audit.The Audit received no information on the military ethics or character development components.At the completion of the Audit process, the team had the opportunity to attend the second annual‘Linking with Universities’ conference at which ADFA undergraduates and other tertiary studentsexamined ethical decision making. Presentations and sessions were facilitated by the St James EthicsCentre, the AFP and various academics.Audit findingsThe documentation provided to the Audit about policy and training – some newly designed, and someongoing – indicates that there are links between equity and diversity principles, ethics and values, andleadership, but that these are not clearly or consistently applied.An underlying cause for the lack of a positive link between equity and diversity and ethical leadership isthe way that ‘equity and diversity’ is conceptualised in Defence policy documents. For example, DI(G)PERS 35-3 outlines unacceptable behaviour and complaints management policy in the ADF and refersto equity and diversity principles in this context. It notes that:Everyone in Defence is required to be treated with respect, fairness and without harassment.Values underpin relationships and behaviour. Values-based behaviour in Defence requireseveryone to accept personal responsibility and accountability for their actions and to think clearlyabout the consequences of their actions for Defence. 25Equity and diversity principles and training are framed as strategies to minimise unacceptable behaviour.For the purposes of this Recommendation, this directive cannot be said to address the teaching ofequity and diversity principles as core values underpinning ethical leadership. On the contrary, it requiresadherence to equity and diversity guidelines as a way to avoid complaints and unacceptable behaviour.As discussed in Recommendation 7, the majority of the equity and diversity training package continuesto focus on complaints and unacceptable behaviour, reflecting the fact that equity and diversity isaligned with unacceptable behaviour in a key ADF policy document.Audit Report: Review into the Treatment of Women at the Australian Defence Force Academy • 2013 • 39