Initial Officer Selection

[SethB]

What happens to the 50% who fail?

They go home. As do those that are selected but decline a commission, which is different than the Army, where those who don't graduate often end up being assigned to an enlisted job according to the needs of the Army.

What is the cost of training those who don't make it?

Cheap. In comparison to training them. USMA spends $400,000-$800,000 and has no selection mechanism aside from the admissions process. OCS costs a fraction of that.

What psychological impact does this (largely avoidable failure) have on these individuals? Are they lost to the service? Is there not some room for improvement in the initial selection process?

I'm not worried about those that aren't selected as much as I am getting the best.

Leadership isn't the thing to focus on. Integrity, intestinal fortitude and team playing are very important.

When I went through Army OCS, we has a student 1SG who reported a cadre member to the 1SG for the heinous crime of allowing them off a punishment detail early.

When asked why, he smiled and said "because I intend to get an Excellence [rating]."

That, right there, is an example of someone who has the wrong motivations. Had he ignored the situation to help his colleagues I could respect his decision. Had he told the 1SG in the interest of consistency, fairness, discipline or upholding the standard, I could agree. But those that are motivated for personal profit cannot be taught to be good leaders.

[JMA]

They go home. As do those that are selected but decline a commission, which is different than the Army, where those who don't graduate often end up being assigned to an enlisted job according to the needs of the Army.

I'm not sure of the total number involved here. But looking back it seems such a waste to squander to the opportunity to accommodate young people who had at one point significant interest in a carreer in the services.

I question as I did with the current Brit system why they are commissioned before they are fully trained and ready to command a platoon in battle. The Brits do the AOSB as a pre-course initial selection (over a total of 6 days) followed by the Officers Course of 48 weeks when they are commissioned and then attend the 16 week Platoon Commanders Battle Course after which they are posted to their units and take command of their platoons. Although 80% plus of cadets who start the Officers Course are graduates it is not a requirement prior to commisssioning. (Red Rat correct me here if necessary).

Why not hold back the commissions until after the successful completion of the 16 week Platoon Commanders Battle Course (to allow for those who perform poorly to exit out the side door).

My approach to the academic is that the military needs control over what degree courses are taken and indeed what lines of study are beneficial to the military and the officers carreer. The only value I can see in the requirement for a degree before commissioning is that the officers at platoon level will be a few years older and perhaps more mature. I would argue that it would be better to take the kids in young and raw and blood them. Once the settling has taken place where the service likes what it sees and believes there is a future for the individual and the individual wants to stay in the servive then the service can invest in his/her future by sending them to university. (I would suggest that in the case of those who it is apparrent do not have a carreer beyond major that they too can be released to go to college to get a suitable qualification for their futures)

Back to the point. As time passes I am less supportive of the approach where volunteers (for officer training or special units etc) are sucked in and then spat out if they don't make the grade. I am the first one to insist that standards be maintained but I do believe that the methods need to be refined and be honourable in all respects.

Cheap. In comparison to training them. USMA spends $400,000-$800,000 and has no selection mechanism aside from the admissions process. OCS costs a fraction of that.

It seems the USMA is a different kettle of fish altogether. So I don't necessarily agree with the "well we waste less money than they do" approach. Waste is waste and better (more thorough) initial pre-course selection will reduce that.

I'm not worried about those that aren't selected as much as I am getting the best.

The end result is critical but the method of arriving there can be finnessed to get the best without treating the rest like sh*t. Should be the natural approach of an officer, yes?

Leadership isn't the thing to focus on. Integrity, intestinal fortitude and team playing are very important.

Al Capone and many of his mates had proven leadership skills but probably little integrity. I suggest that leadership is the most important aspect. Find out who those are who have it and then filter out those lacking in the moral behaviour and judgement needed in the service (this does not apply only to officers). The papaer Research and Study Group 31 - Officer Selection contains a good piece about the real leadership required by officers. Worth a read to see if we are on the same page on this.

When I went through Army OCS, we has a student 1SG who reported a cadre member to the 1SG for the heinous crime of allowing them off a punishment detail early.

When asked why, he smiled and said "because I intend to get an Excellence [rating]."

That, right there, is an example of someone who has the wrong motivations. Had he ignored the situation to help his colleagues I could respect his decision. Had he told the 1SG in the interest of consistency, fairness, discipline or upholding the standard, I could agree. But those that are motivated for personal profit cannot be taught to be good leaders.

There is a line between honesty and responsibility and being a f**king snitch. I can't believe that this sort behaviour is encouraged in the US services. I will confront a person personally and individually if I believe his out of line but will never run to the teacher with tattle tails. Man, the thought of this makes me want to throw-up.