A recent article by Matt Lensing, titled “Save Infantry Leaders From Bias by Removing Ranger Tabs,” has sparked considerable debate within military circles. Lensing argues that the presence of Ranger Tabs as a visible marker on uniforms creates an unintentional yet powerful bias in how infantry leaders are perceived and evaluated. According to Lensing, the distinction between those who have completed Ranger School and those who have not fosters a “have and have not” culture, which can impact promotions, assignments, and overall unit cohesion. He suggests that removing visible Ranger Tabs from uniforms would help ensure leaders are judged on their actual leadership abilities and performance rather than their attendance at a specific military course.
The article challenges long-standing military traditions, raising fundamental questions about how the Army evaluates competence, commitment, and leadership potential. This perspective has ignited strong reactions from those who view the Ranger Tab as an essential symbol of excellence and commitment, as well as those who see merit in addressing potential biases within the ranks.
The Discussion: A Divisive Debate
Rob recently posted this article to his personal linkedin page. With nearly 400 comments, the dicussion reflects a broad spectrum of opinions, largely falling into three key categories:
The debate over the visibility and significance of Ranger Tabs in the U.S. Army has elicited a wide array of opinions. Below is a comprehensive compilation of notable comments from the LinkedIn discussion on this topic, categorized to reflect the diverse perspectives:
1. Defenders of the Ranger Tab as a Leadership Credential
Many believe that the Ranger Tab signifies essential qualities such as dedication, resilience, and a commitment to excellence. They argue that leaders should demonstrate their willingness to undergo rigorous training to earn respect and effectively lead their units.
-
“The days of having a Ranger Tab, EIB, and Jump Master are a must! If you want to lead, then display your willingness to sacrifice and obtain a higher level of professional military schooling.”
-
“Complete BS! What does a puddle pirate know about ‘TABs’? I have earned both the ‘Seabee Combat’ and the ‘Surface Warfare’ pins (tabs if you want). The respect that a warrior gets is warranted—we’re warriors who earned the ‘TABs’.”
-
“Skill identifiers exist for a reason. This absurd idea is parroted the most by those who wash out of higher levels of training. Pretty weak and pathetic perspective, to be honest.”
-
“If you didn’t write this, then you sure as hell shouldn’t repost it not knowing what it takes to EARN your TAB. Having earned both my Ranger and Sapper tabs, I can only guess that Mr. Lensing is/was a poor candidate and was not chosen to attend Ranger School and is now bitter about it.”
-
“Sounds to me like a grief letter written by someone who never went to Ranger School.”
-
“The Ranger Tab is a symbol of excellence and commitment. Removing it would undermine the value of hard-earned achievements.”
-
“Earning the Ranger Tab demonstrates a leader’s dedication to mastering their craft and leading by example.”
-
“The Tab signifies a standard of excellence that motivates others to strive for higher levels of performance.”
-
“Removing the Ranger Tab would be a disservice to those who have sacrificed and endured to earn it.”
-
“The Ranger Tab is more than just a badge; it’s a testament to a soldier’s resilience and leadership capabilities.”
2. Concerns Over Bias and the “Have/Have Not” Culture
Some commenters acknowledge that while the Ranger Tab is a notable achievement, its prominence may lead to unintended biases, creating a divide between those who have it and those who don’t. They emphasize evaluating leaders based on performance rather than specific qualifications.
-
“When you walk into a new unit, you are tab-checked. You have it or you don’t. You are a have or have not. You are a good or bad leader on day one. That is the fallacy infantry leaders believe, and one I have perpetuated in my career.”
-
“Removing the tab from everyday wear in the Army would force leaders to engage their analytical abilities to evaluate talent other than a biased judgment.”
-
“Anytime someone says that an individual is a good leader solely based on their Ranger Tab, they are supporting this cognitive bias.”
-
“While the uniform tells a story, it can become an impediment to assessing actual skill and talent, which can contribute to another bias, the anchoring effect.”
-
“The emphasis on the Ranger Tab can overshadow other critical leadership qualities and competencies.”
-
“Not having a Ranger Tab doesn’t equate to a lack of leadership ability; performance should be the primary evaluation metric.”
-
“The current system may inadvertently sideline capable leaders who haven’t had the opportunity to attend Ranger School.”
-
“We need to ensure that leadership evaluations are fair and inclusive, beyond just visible accolades.”
-
“The ‘have or have not’ culture can be detrimental to unit cohesion and morale.”
-
“Assessing leaders based on a single qualification overlooks the diverse skills necessary for effective leadership.”
3. The Motivational and Symbolic Power of the Ranger Tab
Others highlight the Ranger Tab’s role in inspiring and motivating soldiers. They believe that leaders who have earned such distinctions set a standard for their units, fostering pride and encouraging others to strive for excellence.
-
“When a leader wears those tabs or skill badges, it speaks to expert and referent power or influence of the leader. That means something to the young private and NCO.”
-
“It gives pride and confidence in the unit and leaders and motivates soldiers to be the best they can be for the unit and themselves.”
-
“These tabs are about more than that. They are bigger in purpose than the person wearing them.”
-
“The Ranger Tab serves as a constant reminder of the standards we uphold and the excellence we strive for.”
-
“Seeing leaders with the Ranger Tab inspires junior soldiers to challenge themselves and pursue rigorous training.”
-
“The Tab symbolizes a shared experience and bond that strengthens unit cohesion.”
-
“Earning the Ranger Tab is a rite of passage that motivates others to push their limits.”
-
“The presence of the Tab on a leader’s uniform can boost morale and set a benchmark for others.”
-
“It’s not just about the Tab; it’s about what it represents—dedication, perseverance, and leadership.”
-
“The Ranger Tab embodies the warrior ethos and serves as a powerful motivator for the entire unit.”
4. Criticisms and Alternative Perspectives
A few commenters express skepticism about the necessity of the Ranger Tab, suggesting that its importance may be overstated or that it could lead to exclusionary practices.
- “The overemphasis on the Ranger Tab can create an elitist culture that alienates capable soldiers.”
- “There are plenty of outstanding leaders who never went to Ranger School. Are we saying they’re not as competent?”
- “Ranger School is an excellent training experience, but it’s not the only way to test leadership under stress.”
- “I’ve seen leaders with a Ranger Tab who were terrible decision-makers in real operations. The tab doesn’t always mean great leadership.”
- “In combat, nobody cares about a tab. They care about how well you lead under fire.”
- “There are ways to push yourself and demonstrate leadership without needing a specific course to validate you.”
- “Just because someone passed Ranger School doesn’t mean they’re automatically the best choice for leadership positions.”
- “If the Army starts removing visible distinctions, what’s next? Should we remove Airborne wings, CIBs, and other markers of professional achievement?”
- “Leadership is proven over time, not by a 61-day course.”
Conclusion: A Debate That Speaks to Military Culture and Leadership
The discussion surrounding the visibility of the Ranger Tab reveals a fundamental debate about tradition, merit, and fairness in leadership selection. On one side, many argue that the tab is a well-earned distinction that signifies resilience, dedication, and a commitment to excellence. On the other, some believe its overemphasis leads to an unfair bias that can exclude highly capable leaders who have not had the opportunity to attend or complete the course.
Despite differing perspectives, one thing remains clear: the military community is deeply invested in ensuring that leadership standards remain high while also considering how biases—intentional or unintentional—shape career progression. Moving forward, the challenge will be balancing the need for rigorous standards with ensuring that all leaders, regardless of their training history, are evaluated based on their ability to lead, adapt, and inspire in real-world scenarios.
Whether or not changes are made, the intensity of this discussion reflects the passion and commitment of those who serve—and that alone is a testament to the importance of the issue.