Playing the Game vs. Changing the Game

So, I am in this program that is regarded as only selecting high potential employees that will one day be Global Directors and Vice Presidents. Due to the highly selective nature of the program, the individuals in the program are very intelligent, highly motivated and in some way are visionary (I have no idea how I got in this program). Keep all of this in mind as you are reading this post.

As I have gotten accustomed to the working world, I have realized that there is an unwritten structure on how to address issues within my company. It seems that as I work my way through the company those who are successful are the ones who follow the old saying of knowing when to pick your battles. I understand that this is important as going on through life but what I am having trouble with reconciling is that there are people being penalized for voicing their concerns when we are in a group that is positioned as future leaders of the company. Leaders are characterized as being critical of the process and trying to find ways to solve it. How can we be expected to critically assess a program and voice our concerns about it, if every time it happens, we are chastised?

After hearing about the situation, I have attributed it to a lack of understanding of setting rather than saying something truly offensive. We were in a casual setting that was really structured for us to get to know some important people in the company and it wasn't a venue to vent the problems on the day. However, there is something that should be said for stifling honesty. How can they tell us that we are the leaders of the future and will be solving the problems that plagues the company but when we apply the ability to assess and think critically, we are discouraged? This does not make sense to me.

It is what it is....

P.S. Sorry for the lack of structure or coherence but I couldn't figure out a better way to tell the situation without telling the whole story which I told a friend that I wouldn't.