Log Cabin Republicans v. United States of America et al

Filing 152

DECLARATION of Alan Okros in Support of Opposition to MOTION for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint #136 filed by Plaintiff Log Cabin Republicans. (Woods, Daniel)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

DAN WOODS (SBN: 78638) PATRICK HUNNIUS (SBN: 174633) WHITE & CASE LLP 633 W. Fifth Street, Suite 1900 Los Angeles, CA 90071-2007 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiff Log Cabin Republicans UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA LOG CABIN REPUBLICANS, a nonprofit corporation, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and ROBERT M. GATES, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, in his official capacity, Defendants. Case No. CV 04-8425 VAP (Ex) DECLARATION OF ALAN OKROS IN SUPPORT OF LOG CABIN REPUBLICANS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Date: April 26, 2010 Time: 2:00 p.m. Courtroom: 2

LOSANGELES 858925 (2K)

DECLARA nON OF ALAN OKROS 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9

I, A Ian Olaos, declare that:
I.

I am a Professor in the Department of Academics in the Canadian

Forces College. I served over 33 years as a member of the Regular Force, retiring in 2004 at the rank of Captain (Navy). From 1983 to 2004, I served as Personnel Selection Officer, the military occupation that draws on the behavioural sciences to enhance individual and group operational effectiveness through a range of means
including conducting rigorous scientific research; developing comprehensive personnel policies; producing military doctrine; and, advising the most senior

10 II
12

military leaders on the issues, options and implications of external societal changes and internal group dynamics.

2.

I have been retained by Plaintiff Log Cabin Republicans to testify as

13
14

an expert witness in this case.

3.

Attached as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of the expert report

15
16

that I prepared in this matter.
4.

It is an accurate statement of my expert opinion in this matter and sets

17 18 19 20
21

forth both my qualifications and the factual basis for my opinion. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed on April ~ , 20 lOin Toronto, Ontario.

22

23
24

Alan Olaos

25 26
27

28

LOSA~GI'L~S

8S!915 12K I

no save date (document not saved) (2K) [Document8]

Exhibit A

EXPERT REPORT ON CANADIAN FORCES POLICIES ON GAYS IN UNIFORM: PREPARED BY DR A.C. OKROS BACKGROUND At the request of White and Case acting for the Log Cabin Republicans, this document provides information from the experiences of the Canadian Forces (CF) in lifting a previous ban on gay1 members which I believe is relevant to the ongoing case involving the current `don't ask, don't tell' policy in the United States. As a brief overview, the CF has employed three policies: prior to 1988 an outright ban on gays serving; from 1988 to 1992 an interim policy that allowed gays in uniform to remain but with significant employment and career restrictions; and, post 1992 a policy permitting gays to serve and be fully open regarding their identity. This document provides an overview of the reason for the 1992 decision along with an assessment of the consequences of this decision particularly regarding the impacts on morale, cohesion and operational effectiveness. The information and opinions presented are based on my extensive experience serving in and studying the CF including 33 years service as a member of the Regular Force retiring in 2004 at the rank of Captain (Navy) and now six years as a civilian academic teaching at the Royal Military College and Canadian Forces College currently at the rank of Full Professor. From 1983 to 2004, I served as a Personnel Selection Officer, the military occupation that draws on the behavioural sciences to enhance individual and group operational effectiveness through a range of means including conducting rigourous scientific research; developing comprehensive personnel policies; producing military doctrine; and, advising the most senior military leaders on the issues, options and implications of external societal changes and internal group dynamics. During this period, I provided collegial input and professional commentary on a number of the research and policy initiatives that I will document below including the 1986 Zuliani study, the 1988 decision to move from an outright ban to restricted service, research on incidents of personal harassment conducted in 1992 and the initiatives taken

The label gay and reference to the gay communities will generally be used to refer to a broad range of sexual and gendered identities including gay men and lesbian women.

1

by the Navy immediately following the 1992 policy permitting open service. Subsequently, while in uniform, I served as the senior Personnel Selection Officer in the Canadian Forces and was responsible for directing research that: reexamined incidents of harassment; assessed the attitudes of CF members on a range of diversity and equity issues; developed measures to evaluate the morale, cohesion and attitudes of small units; and, led the team that wrote CF doctrine on the profession of arms and leadership which, among other objectives, articulated the principles for ensuring effective, cohesive teams that draw on the diversity found in Canadian society. In conducting this latter work, I specifically commissioned studies of the experiences of gays in uniform in order to understand their perspectives as well as examining CF policies. As a civilian academic, I have: continued to conduct research for the CF Directorate of Human Rights and Diversity; replicated a US attitudinal study that tapped into the attitudes of senior officers regarding gays; worked closely with a colleague who produced a special journal edition on diversity in the security sector; and, most recently, completed an update on CF policies on gays in uniform for the Palm Center at University of California, Santa Barbara. I have also represented the CF on international military research panels for several years and provided commentary and advice to American and British colleagues who were conducting research on the policies and experiences of gays in their respective nations. Finally, I have been a long standing member of the primary academic organization that focuses on the issues of relevance, the Inter-University Seminar on Armed Forces and Society (IUS) and am presently chair of IUS Canada. The issues surrounding the US `don't ask, don't tell' policy have been a continuing source of academic discourse at our annual conferences.2 Based on my expertise in studying diversity in the military and developing military policies and doctrine, I have been asked whether a change of policy for the US Services to permit gays to serve openly would have a detrimental effect on key factors such as morale, cohesion and operational effectiveness. My opinion is that, for the US, it should not and for the CF, it actually served to enhance these factors while also allowing
I have not testified as an expert witness at trial or by deposition during the previous four years. I am not requesting personal compensation for the time I spent preparing this report or will spend appearing in this lawsuit, other than reimbursement of travel expenses. EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS
2

2

the CF to truly attract the best and the brightest to serve the nation in uniform. The key reason for my comment is that those who have speculated on potential adverse effects are ignoring a key characteristic of professional militaries and decades of clear examples to the contrary. Unlike private sector firms, the military does not just hire employees or train staff to perform specific tasks; the military engages in a process of intentional, deeprooted socialization to transform the civilian into the soldier, sailor, aviator or marine. To do so, the military has perfected the key institutional levers that influence each individual's values, perceptions and behaviours and all group's characteristics, culture and effectiveness. Starting with dynamic leadership and supported by both organizational rules, doctrine and training and social customs, traditions and rites of passage, the military is very capable of `shaping' culture and does so precisely to ensure mission success. I this regard, the internationally recognized exemplary for doing so is the United States Marine Corps. It is clear to anybody who studies them that job one, day one is `Build the Marine'; job two is build the team. To suggest that the US Services cannot effectively do so while allowing gays to serve openly is to deny centuries of lessons learned. EVOLUTION OF CF POLICIES Prior to 1988, gays and lesbians were prohibited from serving in the CF with all applying to join formally asked about their sexual orientation and those in uniform found to be homosexual dismissed. The ban was justified on the basis of the dual concerns that their sexual orientation made gays a security risk and that their presence in CF units would be disruptive to morale, cohesion and discipline. The primary catalyst for an amendment to this ban was the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and, in particular, the equality rights under Section 15 of the Charter that came into effect in 1985. At that time, reviews of federal regulations including CF policies by the Justice Department determined that both the ban on gays serving and the employment restrictions then placed on women potentially violated the equality rights provisions of the Charter. In response, the CF created a Charter Task Force and initiated a series of policy reviews and behavioural science research projects to examine the feasibility of amending these policies and/or to generate evidence to justify their preservation. Of

EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS

3

particular relevance was a 1986 survey of a cross-section of CF members to assess the possible effects of a removal of the ban on gays serving. This survey was interpreted to indicate that heterosexual male members were strongly opposed to the removal of the ban and that the presence of homosexuals could lead to a serious decrease in operational effectiveness. Based to a large extent on this 1986 research, the Charter Task Force recommended the ban remain. In response, however, in January 1988, the Minister of National Defence directed further analyses be conducted and that an interim policy be adopted that relaxed the outright ban slightly by removing the order to inform, and by declining to dismiss soldiers who were discovered to be gay. Gays in uniform were, however, denied promotions, security clearances, transfers, and re-enlistment. Subsequently, and based on court rulings regarding the rights of gays in other domains, a number of suits were filed against the CF and the 1988 interim policy which culminated in the 1990 decision in favour of Michelle Douglas that her dismissal from the CF based on the policy violated her Charter rights. In response and informed by legal opinion that the Crown would not be successful in appealing the Douglas decision, the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) recommended to the government that the restrictive policy be cancelled which was approved and came into effect in 1992. UNDERSTANDING CF MEMBERS' RESPONSE TO THE 1992 POLICY DECISION Despite the dire warnings raised by the Charter Task Force based on the 1986 survey that this policy change would be disruptive, the 1992 removal of any restrictions on gays serving openly in the CF was very much a `non-event'. There were neither increased departures by heterosexual members nor significant numbers of complaints filed by gay members concerning harassment or other overt acts of discrimination. There are several explanations for why the consequences predicted in the 1986 survey did not come to pass. While the formal decision taken was simply to cancel the interim policy, the CF took a number of proactive steps. First, the CDS issued an internal formal statement and an external press release expressing his full support for the decision with articulation of the central principles to be followed. Second, a series of questions and

EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS

4

answers were disseminated to all members of the CF which explained the CF's intent and ensured that appropriate standards of military conduct were maintained. Third, staff officers were designated to work with Commanding Officers to address any issues or concerns that arose in their units. As the Command Personnel Selection Officer for the Navy in the year following the lifting of the ban, I was charged with this latter responsibility however I received not a single request for information, clarification or workshops from any ship or shore-based unit. Further, the CF chose to focus attention on the behaviours expected by all in uniform rather than attempting to influence some individuals' attitudes. To do so, the CF implemented a programme of broad harassment training which neither singled-out sexual orientation nor ignored it as a potential source of conflict. I was responsible for implementing this programme in the Navy and found it was well accepted at all rank levels. Thus, the combination of clear leadership, a focus on ensuring professional behaviour rather than attempting to change attitudes and the fact that potential frictions between straights and gays was subsumed under a broader personal harassment framework served to concurrently send the appropriate messages to all in uniform while also minimizing the specific attention given to sexual orientation. Beyond these specific steps that were directly linked to the 1992 decision, there are a number of other factors that help explain this `non-event'. One in particular is that reviews of the 1986 survey by experts in survey research revealed several flaws in the design, analysis and interpretation of the results. In other words, the CF had overstated the case in an effort to preserve the status quo. Beyond this fact, a number of other factors occurred during the period surrounding the 1992 decision which help put this issue in a broader context. The period from 1985 to 1994 can be described as a decade of social evolution for the CF. As with many other militaries, the CF had faced a number of calls to amend existing policies and rules due to changes in broad government legislation and evolutions in societal norms. Further, the military was also going through significant shifts in understanding its role and missions given the end of the Cold War and the emergence of new forms of conflict as well as facing the beginning of calls for a reduction in military spending as part of the post-Cold War "peace dividend". Finally, the CF had undergone a significant event during its 1993 mission in Somalia in which soldiers beat to death a Somali youth taken into custody that served to focus external

EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS

5

public and political attention as well as CF senior leadership. The following are of relevance. Employment of Women. As with the policy on gays in uniform, in the late 1980s several suits were brought against the CF policy that excluded women from combat roles ultimately resulting in a landmark Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision in 1989. As with the core issue regarding gays in the military, the Tribunal stated, "The issue is: does `operational effectiveness' constitute a bona fide occupational requirement of such a nature that the exclusion of women from combat-related occupations is justified, even though it is, on its face, a discriminatory practice." The Tribunal found that the CF had not made the case to retain the exclusionary policy and directed the CF to achieve full and complete gender integration in all occupations and all roles except submarines by 1998.3 In doing so, the Tribunal made the risk to operational effectives the central issue of the case and concluded "The risk to individual rights is high when women are excluded from any occupations, and the risk to national security is, by comparison, low."4 In response, the CF engaged in a wide range of policy, program, and doctrinal amendments thus the issue of the employment of women, particularly in combat roles, was of high visibility across the CF with commensurate visible leadership from the top to set the tone and ensure success. As a direct link to the 1992 policy change for gays in uniform, the changes regarding employment of women shared the core issue of concern over erosion of cohesion and operational effectiveness when all-male units were opened to women and, to some extent, the CF had already learned how to address these issues when the 1992 decision was taken. Employment Equity Act. A further catalyst for proactive programs in the military was the passage of the Employment Equity Act (EE Act) in 1986. This legislation requires that federal government agencies take steps to address the historical marginalization of four designated groups: women, Aboriginal peoples, visible minorities and persons with
3

The restriction on employment in submarines was subsequently cancelled when the CF acquired new submarines that were deemed to adequately address the privacy concerns identified by the Tribunal. See Gauthier et al for the presentation of the tribunal's decision. 4 Gauthier et al vs Canadian Armed Force, p 67. EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS

6

disabilities, with the goal to achieve equitable representation in all areas and at all levels of employment. Again, senior leaders took early steps to conduct research, develop strategies and amend policies so as to be able to meet the expectations of the EE Act. These plans were underway when the Tribunal directed gender integration and a CF Employment Equity Action Plan had been developed by the time of the 1992 policy decision regarding gays in the military. Key were the efforts to attract members of the various visible minority communities that had been underrepresented in the CF. These initiatives were extended beyond the simple amendment of recruiting images that reflected all designated groups in uniform to include more substantive efforts to inform CF members and ensure that leaders at all levels were equipped to deal with evolutions to internal traditions, customs and workplace practices. Defence Ethics Program. Developed concurrently in the 1988-1992 period, the Defence Ethics Program (DEP), provided a values-based framework to promote ethical behavior. The framework presents a hierarchical set of three ethical obligations: respect the dignity of all persons; serve Canada before self; and obey and support lawful authority. The perception that the lifting of the ban on gays in the military in 1992 was a "non-event" is rooted in some part in the first prong of the DEP focus: respecting the dignity of all persons. Incorporation of these principles in CF-wide professional development programs along with the creation of comprehensive conflict management and alternate dispute resolution programs with services at the local unit level provided CF leaders and members with awareness of the importance of principle-based reasoning and the tools to manage differing perspectives in the workplace, which likely had an impact on the reaction to the liberalizing policy on sexual orientation. Somalia and Canada's `Blue Beret' Image. On the night of March 16, 1993, a small number of Canadian soldiers beat to death Shidane Abukar Arone, a 16-year-old who had been taken into custody when found in the Canadian compound in Somalia. The subsequent outcry amongs Canadians and criticism of senior military leadership by politicians led to the disbanding of the Airborne Regiment in disgrace and to the firing of the Chief of the Defence Staff, General John Boyle. Among other concerns, the events

EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS

7

surrounding the Airborne Regiment prior to and during the deployment to Somalia highlighted concerns regarding racism, prejudice, and a "rogue" culture that was at odds with Canadian norms and military standards. Of importance, these events illustrated that Canadians expected their military to represent Canadian society with an obligation to project values as much as project force. Thus, senior leaders understood that the CF had to adopt the Janowitzian approach that the military must be a part of society, rather than Huntington's notion of a military apart from society. Summary. This overview of changes occurring in the CF around the time of the 1992 decision to remove the ban on gays serving in uniform reveals that the institution was engaged in addressing a number of concurrent issues related to changes in civilian culture. The key conclusion is that senior leaders recognized that the central issue in all cases pertained to culture and identity and, in particular, the requirement to ensure that key aspects of the CF culture reflected that of Canadian society. In turn, this understanding led to initiatives to articulate the requirements, objectives, and the desired end states using shared, key principles. The key messages sent were not about changing the rules about who could be in uniform or under what conditions but about the fundamental principles that underpinned how the military (collectively) served the nation and how each individual served the military. In doing so, the obligations of leaders were given a central role. A fairly consistent message was that the role of leaders has been, is today, and always will be, to take well-trained, highly motivated, talented individuals who want to serve their country in uniform and transform them into cohesive, effective teams. By focusing on enduring messages, the CF effectively managed the change in specific policies for gays in uniform while taking appropriate steps to maintain morale, build cohesive units and ensure operational effectiveness. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL CHANGES In the years following the 1992 decision, the CF has continued to update a range of policies and programmes to ensure equality of gay and straight members' rights, aspirations and needs. In addition, starting in the mid-90s with missions in Bosnia and

EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS

8

Kosovo and extending to Afghanistan today, the CF has been tested in combat. Together, these recent developments illustrate the measures that can be taken by a military to fully incorporate gay members while concurrently demonstrating that this can be achieved with no detriment to the military's capacity to engage in combat. The following are the key factors: Same-sex Marriage. The legal recognition of marriage between same-sex partners occurred over the course of several years as provincial governments amended statutes, and culminated with the federal government doing so in 2005. As legislation was passed, the CF moved quickly to amend a host of related policies including those regarding pay, pensions, married quarters, relocation benefits etc. The CF had however been proactive in this matter and implemented Interim Guidelines for CF Chaplains for same-sex marriages in September 2003 fully two years before the laws were amended. As an extension of the comments in the previous section, these guidelines address key principles and the importance of the Defence Ethics Program's focus on the obligation to respect the dignity of all persons is clearly highlighted. Another example of a proactive approach was the decision to provide gender-reassignment surgery and associated counseling services to serving members electing to make this transition. Thus, with both marriage and medical support, the CF moved beyond minimal compliance with the law to ensure that all members were given the level of personal support needed to address personal issues thus discharging its moral obligations to its members and enhancing career satisfaction, commitment and retention. Outreach and Community Engagement. Over the last few years, the CF has also developed more proactive approaches to engage with the gay community. One example is the creation of a Facebook site for the Canadian Forces Gay, Lesbian, Bi and Heterosexual Group.5 Although the posting states it is not an official CF site, the presence of the CF logo, the use of military ranks, and the identification of both a Group Harassment Advisor and Bilingualism Officer (common CF unit-level secondary duties) are all indicators of an implicit acknowledgement and endorsement of this site by the
5

Accessible at: http://www facebook.com/group.php?gid=2215599900&ref=mf

EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS

9

institution. A clearer example of formal outreach to the gay community pertains to participation in Pride Parades. At the request of gay and straight members of the CF, permission was given in 2008 for CF members to participate in Pride Parades in uniform. In 2009, this was extended to a more formal outreach program that was integrated into a larger initiative which is intended to raise awareness of, and garner the support of Canadians for the CF by showcasing the men and women of the CF. This initiative is seen to support recruiting and diversity efforts with clear statements of the principle that "embracing diversity contributes to the relevance of the CF as a national institution in that Canadians see themselves when looking at the CF... Moreover, diversity is an operational imperative because it acts as a force multiplier as we conduct more operations in non-traditional theatres."6 For a number of Pride Parades this year, volunteers from across the CF were on duty participating in the parades in uniform handing out promotional items to those in attendance and at an official recruiting booth. Research. A number of recent studies continue to illustrate that the issue of gays in the military is not a concern for the CF. For example, in an update to a comprehensive analysis of CF legal/disciplinary cases, the author of that work confirmed that, as of summer 2009, there have not been any courts martial since 2000 for either sexual misconduct involving gay members or for inappropriate behaviors directed at gay members.7 A study I conducted in 2001-2004 with the senior officers from Major to Colonel attending advanced War College courses revealed that they had no concerns with the evolution of CF culture and, in particular, 68% fully supported the CF policy allowing gay men and lesbian women to serve openly in the military and only 28% indicated that they would be more comfortable with a straight CO than with a gay CO. These results represent a significant shift from the 1986 survey results and it should be noted that, in comparison to the broader population of the entire CF, this sample was older and overrepresented males, operational occupations (MOS), and those on a command
Quotes are from the June 2009 Operation Order for CF Participation at the 29th Toronto Pride Parade cited with permission from the originating office ­J3 Joint Task Force (Central) 7 Personal communication, Dr Chris Madsen, 14 October 2009. Dr Madsen reviews and summarizes military legal procedures to produce case studies for senior PME programs in Canada and the US. EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS
6

10

career path, all factors that would predict a more conservative outlook than a broader cross-section of the CF. Finally, both the 1992 and 1998 Personal Harassment surveys found that, while a small number perceived they had been subject to unwanted comments or attention related to sexual orientation, the major areas of concern pertained to abuse of authority or perceived harassment based on gender or language. Based on my own experience counseling military members, it is worth noting that many of those reporting harassment based on sexual orientation were likely straight not gay. A not uncommon event in the military is for men to suggest that female colleagues who rebuff sexual overtures are lesbians or that other men who do not express an overt interest in having sexual encounters with women are gay. As a straight female Officer recounted to me recently, a clear benefit of allowing gays to serve openly was that she could respond "I'm not a lesbian but if you want to understand lesbians, talk to Person X who is". Doctrine and the prototype "Combat Male Warrior". Doctrine has specific meaning in the military context and serves as a powerful tool to communicate key ideas and to inform professional conduct. Consideration of doctrine is also important as, when combined with reinforcing institutional reward systems and effective transformational leadership, the three can serve to shape attitudes and culture, an issue that is important when the dominant narrative, culture, and implicit attitudes are problematic. I was responsible for two doctrine manuals Duty with Honour: The Profession of Arms in Canada and Leadership in the Canadian Forces: Conceptual Foundations. Together, these two doctrine manuals are intended to establish an appropriate philosophical, sociological, and ethical framework to enable the CF to evolve to meet both emerging societal expectations and to achieve complex (human) security missions. Of particular relevance for this review, Duty with Honour strove to retain the concept of the "warrior's honor" while shifting away from the dominant prototype of the "combat male warrior." This prototype places an overemphasis on a narrow set of physiological characteristics and specific behaviors that are associated with the concept of "heroic" leadership while dismissing a much broader range of characteristics and behaviors which are actually required in 21st-century military missions. It is considered that the (gradual) acceptance

EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS

11

of a redefined image of the effective soldier and effective leader that accepts a range of characteristics and behaviors as all of value is key to achieving broadly defined diversity objectives particularly for gays in uniform. Conceptual Foundations presents a valuesbased leadership model that emphasizes transformational leadership approaches with key messages about respecting the dignity of all persons and drawing on the strengths of diverse teams. Combat and Operational Settings. Over the last 15 years in a number of missions where Canadian and American soldiers have served together such as Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan as well as engaging in naval interdiction and counterpiracy off the Horn of Africa, the CF certainly believes it has demonstrated its collective combat capabilities on land, in the air, at sea and in special forces contexts. Particularly in Afghanistan, the CF has sustained significant losses (relative to the size of the CF) as well as standing its ground in the face of a rather determined insurgency. The CF believes that soldier-for-soldier, man or woman, gay or straight, it is capable of `punching above its weight'. Further, many of the CF leaders who have commanded in Afghanistan have commented to me on the high level of respect and trust that the CF has earned when fighting alongside US soldiers and I have never heard of American service members who were reluctant to serve alongside Canadians despite the fact that they would be aware that there were gays serving openly in the CF. As part of my recent review of CF experiences I spoke with several members of the CF including a General who commanded Canadian and Dutch troops in southern Afghanistan, an openly gay Commanding Officer of a combatant naval vessel and an experienced anthropologist who recently spent several weeks on active combat missions with soldiers in Afghanistan. All confirmed three key points. The CF is highly confident of its combat capability, the presence of open gays in combat units is a non issue and what really counts in combat is the competence of the individual and their commitment to support their buddies. In a recent publication, Dr Irwin provides a key point of relevance to the current US policy. She states that the key factors of importance in a combat unit

EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS

12

are not the usual diversity characteristics like ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation but factors such as whether one is a hard worker vs slacker, a joiner or a loner and a sharer (of goodies sent from home) or a hoarder. In response to a query from me recently on her observations concerning gay members of the unit, she stated: "My intuitive feeling was that it was a non-issue. There was one openly gay woman in the infantry company I was studying, and she seemed to be fully accepted. No openly gay men, although the gay woman told me that she knew gay guys in other branches who claimed to have had sex with guys in the company but wouldn't say who. .. I believe that the whole issue is in some ways more complex than the research acknowledges and in other ways simpler. More complex: sexuality is more plastic and situational than much of the research ..would suggest. The whole idea of a "gay identity" as something fixed and immutable is much too much of a simplification. Simpler: sexuality to a large degree is irrelevant; what matters is whether someone is reliable, loyal and hardworking. Good sense of humour - a joiner, rather than a loner. Beyond that, although there is lots of talk about sex and sexuality, I don't think anyone really cares."8 Similar comments were received from Commander Luc Cassivi, currently Commanding Officer HMCS Ville de Quebec, a combatant frigate who has previously commanded two submarines and came out in 1997. He stated: "As long as the individual is competent, an effective member of the team, respectful of others and has the desire to serve his/her country, the experience for most is positive. The reaction of most straights in my experience has been of curiosity and of acceptance. I know it has not been the case for all and some still feel that they need to remain in the closet (at least at work). .. At

8

Personal Communication, Dr Anne Irwin, 14 October 2009.

EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS

13

the end, clear policies, an open mind and a sense of humour are the best tools to achieve success." This brief overview of military operations illustrates that, at a minimum, gays serving openly has not eroded combat effectiveness as well as demonstrating that some of those who are open have been attained positions of command. Of importance for considering the current US policy is Dr Irwin's comments on the importance of being a joiner not a loner. Don't ask, don't tell likely makes it harder for gay members of small teams to be seen as joiners as they are prohibited from sharing aspects of their personal lives with others. To the extent this occurs, it will serve to erode the level of trust and cohesion that is essential for operational effectiveness. The CF policy does not present this barrier thus likely leads to a number of desired outcomes: more tightly knit teams, enhanced operational effectiveness, higher individual morale, increased re-enlistment/ retention and greater career satisfaction. Family and Social Support. There are a number of key areas in which militaries recognize the importance of strong support from member's families. It is well established that positive family support is related to increased retention, willingness to deploy on missions multiple times and enhanced performance as members. The CF, therefore, ensures that gay partners are included in all programmes aimed to inform and support the family so that the family, in turn can support the member. Further, as with the US Services, the CF recognizes the key role of social support networks in mitigating the psychological stressors of current missions and the incidences of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Family members are provided with information, counseling services and other resources so that they can understand psychological responses to combat and can better assist their partners should symptoms arise. As with the previous point, the CF policy allows gay members greater ability to draw on their loved ones by including them in counseling sessions etc thus setting the conditions for better recovery than is likely the case in the US. As an extension, because gay CF

EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS

14

members know that their partners and family are acknowledged and accepted by the institution, they are likely more committed and more effective. THE CF TODAY The individual credited with causing the CF to change its policy in 1992, Michelle Douglas, has been quoted to say that "Gay people have never screamed to be really, really out. They just want to be really safe from being fired." While this may have reflected the immediate consequences of the 1992 decision, the more recent events in the CF have revealed that the military has moved beyond this minimal condition to more fully enable gay members to integrate their personal and their professional lives to a similar extent as their straight colleagues. This evolution has had three main effects. For gays in uniform it has likely contributed to a greater sense of belonging which in turn can lead to better integration in units, enhanced operational effectiveness and helps minimize PTSD. Second, recalling the military truism `you recruit the individual, you retain the family,' the greater sense of belonging can result in higher retention and greater productivity which is becoming of increased importance in the battle for talent. Finally, the emphasis on respecting the dignity of all persons and the development of inclusive models of professionalism and leadership have given the CF enhanced ability to `win the hearts and minds' of those they interact with in nations with very different cultures. In this regard, one of the most promising avenues to address individual understanding and align military culture pertains to the increased importance being given in many nations on what the US Department of Defence has called Cross-Cultural Competence (3C). As increasingly incorporated in US military professional education, a central component in developing a capacity to make sense of novel, culturally complex settings is to start with self-insight and self-understanding. Simplistically, it is necessary to understand `me' and `here' before one can grasp `them' and `there'. Broad culture-general education programs and effective leaders helping soldiers understand who `we' are and how we are all the same yet each individually different could complement the previously identified success factors of using a generalized harassment program and updated doctrine to set the conditions so that the military can optimize the individual and collective contribution of all of those citizens who have chosen to serve their nation in uniform.

EXPERT REPORT OF DR. A.C. OKROS

15

Curriculum Vitae Dr. Alan C. Okros 801 Bay Street #1902 Toronto, ON, M5S 1Y9 EDUCATION PhD - Industrial/Organizational Psychology, University of Waterloo, 1993 Masters of Applied Science ­ I/O Psychology, University of Waterloo, 1987 Bachelor of Commerce (Honour's) ­ University of Manitoba, 1975 ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS Professor: Department of Academics, Canadian Forces College Deputy Chair: Department of Command, Leadership and Management, Canadian Forces College External Affiliations Associate ­ Centre for Industrial Relations, Queen's University: 2005 Associate ­ Corporate Training Centre, St Lawrence College: 2007 Previous Academic Appointments Associate Professor: Department of Military Psychology and Leadership, Royal Military College of Canada: 2004-2008 Executive Director: Centre for Security, Armed Forces and Society, Royal Military College: 2005-2008 Previous Senior Military Appointments Director ­ Canadian Forces Leadership Institute: 2000 to 2004 Responsible for a multi-disciplinary team conducting theoretical and applied research on leadership, professionalism and ethics. The 18 member team possessed graduate training in: sociology, psychology, military history, political science, philosophy and anthropology. Director ­ Directorate of Strategic Human Resource Coordination: 1997 to 2000 Responsible for a multi-disciplinary team conducting analyses of long-term Human Resource trends and emerging concepts, reviews of evolutions in Canadian society, workforce modeling and application of scenario-based planning to strategic decision making. The 25 member team possessed graduate training in: sociology, psychology, economics, statistics, finance and business management. Director ­ Personnel Research Team: 1996-1997 and Commanding Officer ­ Canadian Forces Applied Research Unit: 1995-1996

Responsible for a 20 person unit conducting applied psychometric and sociological research to develop, validate and analyze measures used in military selection, performance appraisal and promotion programs and workforce demographics and attitudinal indicators across a wide spectrum of military Human Resource policies and programs including employment equity/diversity, ethics, job/career satisfaction, stress and quality of life initiatives. Branch Advisor ­ Personnel Selection Branch: 1996-2000 As the senior PSel Officer in the CF, oversaw a significant review, restructuring and rebuilding of the Branch including responsibilities for all facets of PSel professional development, chairing annual intake assessment boards that saw the Branch almost double in five year, establishing merit board criteria, creation of the first position for PSOs to serve in deployed operations and, as the senior PSO, providing behavioural science advice to ADM (HR-Mil) and Armed Forces Council. Staff Officer-Researcher ­ various positions: 1979-1995 Served in a number of staff and research positions responsible for: - delivering key personnel services including recruiting, staff assessment, career counseling, retirement transitions, critical incidence debriefings - developing and administering a range of Human Resource policies at Canadian Forces Bases and Command Headquarters including gender integration, diversity, harassment prevention and stress management; and - conducting research including primary data collection on assigned projects related to officer selection and promotion programs, combat related employment of women and psychological fitness of submariners. TEACHING Graduate WS 552 Leadership ­ Sep 04 to Apr 05 WS 558 Directed Readings ­ Sep 04 to Apr 05 WS 552 Leadership ­ Sep 06 to Apr 07 WS 558 Directed Readings ­ Sep 07 to Dec 07 WS 558 Directed Readings ­ Sep 08 to Dec 08 DS 581 Executive Leadership and Strategic Thinking ­ Jan 09 to Mar 09 DS 521 Officership (Distance Learning) ­ Sep 08 to Jul 09 DS 581 Executive Leadership and Strategic Thinking ­ Sep 09 to Nov 09 Undergraduate University of Waterloo (BA) PRST 200 Personnel Studies ­ Jan 91 to Apr 91 PSE 324 Cross-Cultural Psychology ­ Sep 05 to Dec 05 PSE 464 Directed Readings in Military Psychology ­ Sep 05 to Dec 05 PSE 454 Advanced Leadership ­ Jan 06 to Apr 06 PSE 465 Directed Readings in Military Leadership ­ Jan 06 to Apr 06 PSE 452 Advanced Research Methods ­ Sep 06 to Dec 06 PSE 454 Advanced Leadership ­ Jan 07 to Apr 07 PSE 464 Directed Readings in Military Psychology ­ Jan 07 to Apr 07 PSE 465 Directed Readings in Military Leadership ­ Jan 07 to Apr 07

2

PSE 324 Cross-Cultural Psychology ­ Sep 07 to Dec 07 PSE 454 Advanced Leadership ­ Jan 08 to Apr 08 Academic Guest Lecturer/Speaker Provided formal lectures for a number of MPL and Political Science classes at RMC, military history classes at Queen's and Industrial Psychology classes at St. Mary's. Other academic presentations comprise invited speaker/brown bag presentations to faculty and graduate students at Canadian universities including St. Mary's, St Paul's, Toronto, Carleton, Queen's, Waterloo, Guelph, Calgary and Royal Roads. Military Professional Development Lectures/Courses Provided approximately 60 lectures on Human Resources, leadership and professionalism to CF and International professional development courses including: - General/Flag Officer symposium - National Security Studies Course/Programme - Advanced Military Studies Course/Programme - (Joint) Command and Staff Course/Programme - Executive Leader Programme - Human Resource Management course - Advanced Logistics Officers course - Advanced and Basic Personnel Selection Officer course - Basic Chaplain Officer Qualification course - Intelligence Strategic Analysts course - US Air War College course - US Air Force Staff College course - Singapore Armed Forces Staff College course - Singapore Armed Forces Warrant Officers and Specialist Course - Bolivian Army Military College program - Bolivian Army Command and Staff course - Folke Bernadotte Academy, Sweden Professional Certificates and Workshops Provided over 20 presentations to a number of certificate programmes and applied workshops including: - Queen's Industrial Relations Centre Leadership Capacity Programme - Queen's Public Executive Programme - St. Lawrence College Leadership Development Programme - Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority Leadership workshop - Ontario Ministry of Finance Leadership workshop - Ontario Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Leadership workshops - Conference Board of Canada ­ Strategic Human Resources Council - Conference Board of Canada ­ Economic Development Council - Conference Board of Canada ­ Organizational Development and Learning Council

3

Additional Presentations Additional presentations cover a range of formal briefings to Minister and Deputy Minister of National Defence, Minister's committees, Treasury Board and Auditor General staff; CF, NATO and allied military leaders; various CF, Base, Unit and Branch professional development symposia; research project sponsors; and, DND and CF senior leadership committees including: Defence Management Council Armed Forces Council Strategic Human Resource Council Human Resource Advisory Board Education Advisory Board Defence Diversity Council Defence Aboriginal Advisors Forum Army Council Naval Board Air Force Personnel Council Base Commanders' Symposium CF Chief Warrant Officer's Council

THESIS SUPERVISION Best, R.R. (2006) Differences in preferred leadership in the Canadian Forces based on gender and membership in Chief of Land Staff or Chief of Air Staff. Honour's thesis, Bachelor of Arts (Psychology), RMC. Duval, A. (2006) Leadership and gender: Implicit associations. Honour's thesis, Bachelor of Arts (Psychology), RMC. Noonan, C. M. (2006) Big Five personality differences between first and fourth students at the Royal Military College of Canada. Honour's thesis, Bachelor of Arts (Psychology), RMC. Research Papers Connolly, M.A. (2008) Striving for national autonomy: Civil control and national command of Canadian expeditionary forces. Masters of Defence Studies, RMC. Johnson, B.K. (2008) The Canadian Whole-of-Government approach to state building: How effective is it? Masters of Defence Studies, RMC. Pecher, A. (2008) The Erosion of Mission Command Leadership in the 21st Century? Theoretical Considerations on a Military Leadership Philosophy in Western Societies. Masters of Defence Studies, RMC. Cadden, S. (2009) What the Government Wants: Growing the CF Regular Force to 70,000. National Security Programme, Directed Research Paper. Lockhart, P. (2009) Officer Professional Development ­ Reaching Out for a Comprehensive Approach. Masters of Defence Studies, RMC.

4

Martel, L. (2009) Psychological Fitness and the Prevention of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Masters of Defence Studies, RMC. Morehen, T. (2009) Selection Process for SOF Aviation in Canada. Masters of Defence Studies, RMC. Plante, M. (2009) To transfer or not to transfer, that is the question (regarding detainees ­ a Canadian perspective). Masters of Defence Studies, RMC. Reffeinstein, A. (2009) Gender Mainstreaming in the Canadian Forces. Masters of Defence Studies, RMC. Szelecz, H. (2009) Operational Stress and the Role of the Frontline Leader. Masters of Defence Studies, RMC. Wallington, G. (2009) The Naval Officer Identity Crisis: Who are we ? Masters of Defence Studies, RMC. Thesis Examiner/Committee Member Dupree K.M. (1998) MA (Psychology), St Mary's University Lepine P. (2003) PhD, University of Calgary. Lavallee A.M. (2005) MBA, RMC. Hansen K.P.L. (2005) MA (War Studies), RMC. Mullen J.E. (2005) PhD, St Mary's University. Winegard T. (2006) MA (War Studies), RMC. Hrychuck H. (2007) MA (War Studies), RMC. Engen M.A. (2008) MA (History), Queen's University. Simons M.V. in Progress PhD (Education), Massey University, NZ PUBLICATIONS Books Bland D.L., Last D., Pinch F. & Okros A.C. (editors) (2002) Challenge and Change for the Military: New Missions, Old Problems, Montreal, QC: McGill-Queen's University Press. Last D., Pinch F., Bland D.L., & Okros A.C. (editors) (2002) Challenge and Change for the Military: Social and Cultural Change, Montreal, QC: McGill-Queen's University Press.

5

Pinch F., MacIntyre A.T., Browne P. & Okros A.C. (editors) (2005) Challenge and Change for the Military: Gender and Diversity Issues, Winnipeg, MN: Canadian Forces Leadership Institute. Okros A.C., Hill S. & Pinch F. (2008) Between 9/11 and Kandahar: Attitudes of Canadian Forces Officers in Transition. (Claxton Paper # 8). Kingston, ON: Queen's University School of Policy Studies. Book Chapters Okros A.C. (1999) Into the 21st Century: Strategic Human Resource Issues in the Army. In Backbone of the Army: Non-Commissioned Officers in the Future Army, Bland D.L. (ed), Kingston, ON: McGill-Queen's University Press. Okros A.C. & Keizer W. (2007) Humanitarianism as a profession. In Helping Hands and Loaded Arms: Navigating the Military and Humanitarian Space, Meharg S.J. (ed), Clementsport, NS: Pearson Peacekeeping Centre Press. Okros A.C. (2009) Becoming an Employer of Choice: Human Resource Challenges within DND and the CF. In The Public Management of Defence in Canada. Craig Stone (ed), Toronto, ON: Breakout Educational Network. Journal Articles Okros A.C. (in press) Rethinking "Diversity" and "Security". Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, Vol 47, No 4, 346-373, November 2009. Research Reports Okros A. C. (1988) Analysis of Maritime Surface Officer Classification Training Results Technical Note 1/88, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Okros A. C. & Rodgers M.N. (1988) Evaluation of Maritime Surface and Sub-Surface Officer Classification Training Performance Measures. Technical Note 9/88, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Okros A. C. (1988) Development of the Passage Planning Test: A MARS Officer Specific Selection Test. Technical Note 10/88, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Okros A. C. (1988) Proposal for Reducing Non-Academic Attrition During College Militaire Royal Preparatory Year. Technical Note19/88, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Okros A. C., Johnston V.W, & Rodgers M.N. (1988) An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Naval Officer Selection Board as a Predictor of Success on the Basic Officer Training Course. Working Paper 88-1, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON.

6

Okros A. C. & Eyres S.A.T. (1989) Evaluation of the Combat Arms Officer Selection Board Information Gain Questionnaire. Technical Note 2/89, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Okros A. C. & Lynn D.G. (1989) Development of the Problem Sensitivity Test: A MARS Officer Specific Selection Test. Technical Note 3/89, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Okros A. C. & King W.D. (1989) Pre-Screening of Naval Officer Assessment Board Candidates. Technical Note 7/89, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Trudel J.R. & Okros A.C. (1989) An Evaluation of the Defence Mechanism Test as a Potential Pilot Selection Measure. Technical Note 9/89, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Okros A. C. (1989) A Proposal for the Screening and Monitoring of Psychological Fitness for Submarines. Working Paper 89-1, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Flynn J.A. & Okros A. C. (1990) Psychometric Evaluation and Validation of the Air Traffic Controller Aptitude Test. Technical Note 3/90, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Okros A. C. (1990) Revalidation of Pilot Selection Standards. Working Paper 90-3, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Spinner B. & Okros A. C. (1990) The Canadian Automated Pilot Selection System: Current Issues and Future Directions. Working Paper 90-8, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Flynn J.A. & Okros A. C. (1990) Revalidation of Air Navigator Selection Standards. Working Paper 90-9, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Okros A. C., Spinner B. & James J.A. (1991) The Canadian Automated Pilot Selection System. Research Report 91-1, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Bradley J.P. & Okros A.C. (1991) New Directions in Officer Selection Research. Technical Note 8/91, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Flynn J.A. & Okros A.C. (1992) Revised Aircrew Selection Centre Test Procedures. Technical Note 92-5, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Okros A.C. (1992) Evaluation of the Officer Performance Evaluation Report as a Predictor of Merit Board Ratings. Technical Note 22/92, Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON.

7

Okros A.C. (1995) Annual Research Program Research Year 1995/96. Canadian Forces Personnel Applied Research Unit, Toronto, ON. Okros A.C. (1995) Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of the International Military Testing Association, Toronto, ON. Okros A.C. (1998) Into the 21st Century: Strategic Human Resource Issues. Directorate of Strategic Human Resource Coordination, Ottawa, ON. Aker T., Boisvert C., Flemming S., Hunter J., McKee B., Holden N., Okros A., Simpson S., Truscott S., Verdon J., & Wait T. (2000) Development of HR 2020: A Review of External Driving Factors. Research Report 2/2000, Directorate of Strategic Human Resource Coordination, Ottawa, ON. Okros A.C. (2001) Integrating Leadership Research Or Three Easy Steps To Overcoming The Simplistic Approaches Used In Examining Leadership. Canadian Forces Leadership Institute, Kingston, ON. Okros A.C. (2004) Applying the CFLI Leaders Framework. Canadian Forces Leadership Institute, Kingston, ON. Okros A.C. (2005) Framing Network Research Issues. Paper prepared for Defence Research and Development Canada (Toronto). Okros A.C. (2006) Preliminary analyses of Profession of Arms Constructs using Army Culture data. Report submitted to Chief of the Land Staff. Okros A.C. & Scott, D. (2009) CFLGBTTIQQ2S: An update on Canadian Forces approaches to gays and lesbians in uniform. Report prepared for The Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military, University of California at Santa Barbara. CF Doctrine Manuals Responsible for the working groups that produced three doctrine manuals: ______, (2003) Duty with Honour: The Profession of Arms in Canada. Canadian Forces Leadership Institute, Kingston, ON. ______, (2005) Leadership in the Canadian Forces: Conceptual Foundations. Canadian Forces Leadership Institute, Kingston, ON. ______, (2005) Leadership in the Canadian Forces: Doctrine. Canadian Forces Leadership Institute, Kingston, ON. Non-Referred Contributions Sinclair C.E. and Okros A.C. (2006) "The Canadian Code of Ethics and the Darker Side of Interrogation." (Psynopsis, Spring 2006).

8

CF Research Reports Supervised/Approved As Research Coordinator, Commanding Officer or Director, supervised, edited and approved over 100 technical reports, working papers and research reports produced by staff and over 90 contracted research papers produced by graduate students and/or faculty at various Canadian and international universities and research centres. Conference Papers Okros A.C. (1987) Evaluating the Effectiveness of Employment Equity Policies. Paper presented at the 47th Annual Conference of the Canadian Psychological Association, Vancouver, BC, 13-15 June 1987. Okros A. C. (1988) Development of a Naval Officer Selection Test. Paper presented at the 30th Annual Conference of the Military Testing Association, Washington, D.C., 27 November ­ 2 December 1988. Okros A. C. (1989) Psychological Fitness for Submarines: A Proposal for Screening and Monitoring. Paper presented at the 25th International Applied Military Psychology Symposium, Spiez, Switzerland, 1-5 May 1989. Okros A. C. (1989) Development of a Measure of Problem Sensitivity. Paper presented at the 12th Meeting of the Euro-NATO Aircrew Selection Working Group, London, England, 9-13 October 1989. Crooks D.S. & Okros A. C. (1989) The Legal and Ethical Context of Computerized Testing in Canada. Paper presented at the 3rd session of NATO Panel 8/RSG 15 at Paris France, 14-16 November 1989. Okros A. C. (1990) Research in Combining Pilot Prediction Measures. Paper presented at the 14th Meeting of the Euro-NATO Aircrew Selection Working Group, Florence, Italy, 15 November, 1990. Spinner B.& Okros A. C. (1990) Validation of the Canadian Automated Pilot Selection System. Paper presented at the 32nd Annual Conference of the Military Testing Association, Orange Beach, Alabama, 5-9 November, 1990. Okros A.C. (1993) A Competitive Test of Industrial/Organizational and Organizational Behaviour Models. Paper presented at the 14th Annual I/O Psychology and Organizational Behaviour Graduate Student Conference, Toronto, On, 19-21 March 1993. Okros A.C. (1993) The Canadian Automated Pilot Selection System: An Application of Simulator Technology. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Recruitment and Selection, Cranwell, England, 13-16 April, 1993. Okros A.C. (1999) Attracting and Retaining the Best: An Integrative Analysis of Future Human Resource Issues and Trends. Paper presented to the 41st Annual Conference of the International Military Testing Association, Washington, DC. 22-25 October 1999.

9

Okros A.C. (1999) Into the 21st Century: Strategic Human Resource Issues in the Army. Paper presented at the Special Symposium: The Non-Commissioned Officer in the Future Army, Kingston, ON, 28-29 June 1999. Okros A.C. (2000) Civilian Human Resource Strategies for the 21st Century. Paper presented at the Human Resource Manager's Symposium, Cornwall, ON, 7-9 February 2000. Okros A.C. (2000) Future Military Human Resource Challenges. Paper presented to the Royal Canadian Military Institute, Toronto, ON, 15 May 2000. Okros A.C. (2000) The Gaps Between Military And Civilian Societies: A Canadian View On Military Professions In A Global Society. Paper presented to the Conference on the Military-Civilian Gaps. St Cyr, France, 10-12 October 2000. Okros A.C. (2000) Future Leadership Challenges. Paper presented to RKUSI, Kingston, ON, 17 November, 2000. Okros A.C. (2001) Development of the Canadian Forces Leadership Institute. Paper presented at the 4th Annual Research and Education in Defence and Security Studies Conference, Washington, D.C., 22-25 May 2001. Okros A.C. (2001) Different Missions, Different Values? A Canadian View On Military Professions In A Global Society. Paper presented at the 2001 Inter-University Seminar on Armed Forces and Society Biennial Conference, Baltimore, MD, October 2001. Okros A.C. (2002) Modernization and Change in the Canadian Forces. Paper presented at the International Symposium "The Political and Military Challenges of the 21st Century", La Paz, Bolivia, 5-6 March 2002. Okros A.C. (2002) Military Strategic Leadership: The Confluence of Professional and Institutional Obligations. Paper presented at the 1st Canadian Inter-University Seminar on Armed Forces and Society Conference, Kingston, ON, 17-18 October 2002. Okros A.C. (2003) Military Leadership and Professionalism. Paper presented to the Ottawa I/O Psychologist Professional Meeting, Ottawa, ON, 25 September, 2003. Okros A.C. (2003) Recent Reforms in Military Professional Development. Paper presented to the Toronto Round Table, Toronto, ON, 14 May 2003. Wenek K.W. & Okros A.C. (2003) Leader Development. Paper presented at the 64th Canadian Psychological Association Conference, Hamilton, ON, 12-14 June 2003. Okros A.C. & Wenek, K.W. (2003) An Institutional Model of Military Leadership. Paper presented at the 2003 Inter-University Seminar on the Armed Forces and Society Biennial Conference, Chicago, Illinois, 25-26 October 2003. Okros A.C. (2003) Duty With Honour: The Profession Of Arms In Canada; Defining The Nature Of The Military As A Profession. Paper presented at the 7th Annual Research

10

and Education in Defence and Security Studies conference, Santiago, Chile, 28-29 October 2003. Okros A.C. (2003) An Emergent Model of Military Leadership in Canada. Paper presented at the 5th Canadian Conference on Ethical Leadership, Kingston, ON, 5-6 November 2003. Okros A.C. (2004) Transforming Leader Development. Paper presented at the 6th Annual Leadership Succession Management Conference, Toronto, ON, 19-20 January, 2004. Okros A.C. (2004) Since When Did Issuing An Order Become The Signal For The Debate To Begin? Paper presented at the US Air War College, Montgomery, Alabama, 10 February, 2004. Okros A.C. (2004) Duty With Honour: The Role Of Values And Ethos In Military Professionalism. Paper presented at the International Symposium "Democracy, Multiculturalism and Human Security", La Paz, Bolivia, 24-26 March, 2004. Okros A.C. (2005) The Military Perspective on 3D Security. Paper presented at CanadaNorway Peace Prize Symposium, Vancouver, BC 3 February, 2005. Okros A.C. (2005) Leading Diverse Teams. Paper presented at 2005 Air Symposium, Canadian Forces College Toronto, 19 April 2005. Okros A.C. (2005) Using a model of Professionalism to Guide Ethical Conduct. Paper presented at the 66th Annual Convention of the Canadian Psychological Association, Montreal, 11 June 2005. Okros A.C. (2005) Leadership in the Canadian Forces: Issues and Challenges. Paper presented at the 66th Annual Convention of the Canadian Psychological Association, Montreal, 11 June 2005. Okros A.C. (2005) Duty with Honour: The profession of arms in Canada - Defining the military as a profession. Paper presented at the SAFTI Military Institute 10th Anniversary Symposium on the Profession of Arms, Singapore, 28 July 2005. Okros A.C. (2006) Models of Diversity in Canada. Paper presented the seminar on "Multiculturalism in the Armed Forces: from programs to sustainable policies", La Paz, Bolivia 24-25 March 2006. Okros. A.C. (2006) Recruitment and Retention in the Canadian Forces. Paper presented at the C.D. Howe Institute Policy Seminar "Budgeting for Canada's Defence: What and When to Buy", Toronto, ON, 11 May 06. Okros A.C. (2006) Future Directions: Academic Support to Bolivian Diversity Policies. Paper presented at the 3rd Biennial Conference of the Inter-University Seminar on the Armed Forces and Society, Ottawa, ON, 1 October 2006. Okros A.C. (2006) Moving from Tight to Loose Cultures: Understanding Employment Equity in the Canadian Forces. Paper presented at the 3rd Biennial Conference of the

11

Inter-University Seminar on the Armed Forces and Society, Ottawa, ON, 1 October 2006. Okros A.C. (2006) The 3 Block War, 3 D Security and Human Security: How do the pieces fit? Paper presented at the 3rd Biennial Conference of the Inter-University Seminar on the Armed Forces and Society, Ottawa, ON, 1 October 2006. Okros A.C. (2006) Applying profession of arms constructs to examine institutional culture. Paper presented at the 2006 Conference of the International Military Testing Association, Kingston, ON, 3 October, 2006. Okros A.C. (2006) Leadership: Building effective teams, being transparent and honouring the social contract. Presentation to the CFB Kingston Share Forum, Kingston, ON, 1 November 2006. Okros A.C. (2006) Diversity and the Military. Paper presented at the Conference "Inclusion with Rights"(translated), La Paz, Bolivia, 25-26 November, 2006. Okros A.C. (2007) 3D Security: The implications of integrating Defence, Diplomacy and Development in multi-national missions. Paper presented at Swedish National Defence College Forum for Security Studies Conference "Civil-Military Cooperation in Multinational Missions", Stockholm, January 18-19, 2007. Okros A.C. (2007) Leading in a professional public service: Managing culture by managing meaning. Paper presented at University of Guelph Centre for Studies in Leadership Conference "Public Sector Leadership in the 21st Century." Guelph, ON, May 4-5, 2007. Okros A.C. (2007) Diversity and the Security Sector. Paper presented at the Seventh International Conference on Diversity in Organizations, Communities and Nations, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 3-6 July 2007. Okros A.C. (2007) The Need to Move to a Looser Military Culture. Paper presented at Ethnicity and Democratic Governance Conference "Immigration, Minorities and Multiculturalism in Democracies". Montreal, QC, October 25-27, 2007. Okros A.C. (2007) A Canadian perspective on addressing culture in Professional Military Education. Paper presented at the 2007 Biennial Conference of the Inter-University Seminar on the Armed Forces and Society, Chicago, IL, 26-28 October 2007. Okros A.C. (2007) Contested jurisdictions and the militarization of aid. Paper presented a