Army Development of Junior Leaders

[RTK]

Fill out your profile a bit more and perhaps introduce yourself in the Introductions thread. This post may get more headway if you do so.

As for your question, it's 95% of what it used to be. That's essentially how the promotion system worked 6 or 7 years ago.

Here's the deal. Joe makes E5 if his PSG and PL send him to the board. If he's not ready, don't send him. So many senior NCOs and officers who complain about how quick Joe makes rank forget they're the one's sending him to the promotion board. If you don't think he's ready, dont put him in front of the CSM in his Class As.

[Strategic LT]

RTK,

Thanks for the advice, I will introduce myself properly shortly. I think that maybe I clouded what my point was with some complaining. I do agree with you that it is the commands responsibility to prepare soldiers for promotion. However I feel that going in front of a board is not the best way to evaluate an individuals leadership ability. If WLC was run like we propose, than a soldier could be more assessed on his actions rather than if he interviews well. We believe that the system has good aspects but it could be much better. I like the idea of promoting soldiers quickly as long as they are ready. A good WLC that they prepare for and execute well should provide set them up for success as an NCO. If WLC was run like we propose it would put a soldiers chances of promotion more in his hands.

[Jedburgh]

...Here's the deal. Joe makes E5 if his PSG and PL send him to the board. If he's not ready, don't send him. So many senior NCOs and officers who complain about how quick Joe makes rank forget they're the one's sending him to the promotion board. If you don't think he's ready, dont put him in front of the CSM in his Class As.

A big part of the problem is that it is simply easier to send Joe to the board. When a soldier meets minimum TIG/TIS requirements, his leadership has to begin justifying why he's not being sent to the board. If he's received disciplinary counseling, or an Art 15 etc. that is easy enough. However, if he is just a minimal acheiver with nothing covered in previous counseling that substantiates not sending him - the soldier's leadership can find themselves almost forced to send him to the board (dependent upon the personality make up of the higher chain of command). Properly counseling and documenting each individual soldier's strengths and weaknesses, goals and objectives for professional development can be labor intensive for a young SGT/SSG; just as it can be labor intensive for the PSG to make sure all of his NCOs are doing their job in this regard - but it is absolutely necessary.

Taking the time not only to develop the soldier, but to adequately document his professional development strengths and weaknesses, goals and objectives, is a fundamental responsibility of NCO leaders. However, it tends to be one of those things that falls by the wayside. Pressure to do the right thing needs to be continuous from the NCO leadership - CSM, 1SG, PSG. We are training, developing and mentoring soldiers in a time of war to be future leaders. This is not the time to just be checking the block.

[Old Eagle]

These issues need discussion.

I do find it amazing, however, that my good NCOs and I felt the same way after Vietnam, a hundred years ago. We were saddled with McNamara's 100k as NCOs. We "couldn't" let them leave the Army because we were "too understrength". So we re-enlisted them and promoted them. THEN Thurman's all recruited force started coming in the bottom end and the challenges were HUGE. Highly talented and intelligent privates were consistently outperforming half of their leaders. Ouch.

Just another challenge to leadership.

[RTK]

A big part of the problem is that it is simply easier to send Joe to the board. When a soldier meets minimum TIG/TIS requirements, his leadership has to begin justifying why he's not being sent to the board. If he's received disciplinary counseling, or an Art 15 etc. that is easy enough. However, if he is just a minimal acheiver with nothing covered in previous counseling that substantiates not sending him - the soldier's leadership can find themselves almost forced to send him to the board (dependent upon the personality make up of the higher chain of command). Properly counseling and documenting each individual soldier's strengths and weaknesses, goals and objectives for professional development can be labor intensive for a young SGT/SSG; just as it can be labor intensive for the PSG to make sure all of his NCOs are doing their job in this regard - but it is absolutely necessary.

Taking the time not only to develop the soldier, but to adequately document his professional development strengths and weaknesses, goals and objectives, is a fundamental responsibility of NCO leaders. However, it tends to be one of those things that falls by the wayside. Pressure to do the right thing needs to be continuous from the NCO leadership - CSM, 1SG, PSG. We are training, developing and mentoring soldiers in a time of war to be future leaders. This is not the time to just be checking the block.

You're right. But if Joe is dumber than a sack of hammers then his NCO should be telling him that at the end of each month. And if it goes in the monthly counselling, along with the other reasons why he won't be going to the board that month, then things work themselves out. Also, few Commanders have figured out how to properly administer the "bar to reenlistment" 4187. It's too easy and can be done for just about anything.

[Jedburgh]

You're right. But if Joe is dumber than a sack of hammers then his NCO should be telling him that at the end of each month. And if it goes in the monthly counselling, along with the other reasons why he won't be going to the board that month, then things work themselves out.

RTK, I'm with you. That is the converse of professional development - some people just can't be helped or motivated. If your NCO has PVT Joe #### the Ragman who is ####ed up like a soup sandwich in everything that he does, then he has to find some way to put that observation succinctly and quantifiably in writing in his counseling.

Unfortunately, a lot of outstanding tactical leaders are really bad at doing this, and the other necessary admin work required to expeditiously get rid of the dead weight - or at least ensure that they never make it to positions where they may possess even a smidgen of authority.



...in the old days we just shoved'em outside the stockade and let the injuns have their way with'em.

[Ski]

"Better no officer than a bad officer."

The Army personnel system is a giant shell game of numbers. People of lesser talent are going to be promoted along with you because they have to be. As long as the senior leadership demands that units be manned at 100% in the Division/BCT level forces, you are going to have this occur.

One other thing - the way that the Army rewards a job well done is to give you another hard job. While you might be tearing stuff up as an infantry platoon leader, when you see the spread of 1LT's, you'll start to see the cream seperate from the milk. The speciality platoons are usually led by the best 1LT's in the battalion(did they remove the support platoon leader position from combined arms and light battalions? I think so but can't remember...)

Also strongly agree with Jedburgh and RTK. Admin work is necessary to get ride of any problem children so know how to use the system.

[Strategic LT]

All,

I appreciate your feedback. Believe it or not, my unit has been abnormally successful in weeding out the bad. We have been able to chapter/not promote those who do not deserve with more success than any other unit in the squadron. My real beef here is with the development of leaders. I see no reason why the promotion system for NCOs cannot be changed. Please review our concept for WLC again and let me know what you think. I agree that the command has the biggest responsibility to find and reward those who should be promoted, but there are some commands that do not do this well (we are dealing with a past command who was that bad right now). WLC at this point is not needed to make E5. You can make promotion points by getting college credits, and for all of us ROTC grads you know that just by going to college does not make you a leader.

Example: we have E6 section chiefs who new as much about their piece as the soldiers did. Question to the past command: How in the hell can you justify promoting a guy who knows next to nothing about his MOS? You have done him, his soldiers, his unit, and the army a disservice for not preparing him for the section chief position that his rank puts him in.

I feel we can break the cycle by raising the bar, challenging, and instilling a competitive mentality amongst today’s lower enlisted ranks and junior officers for that matter.

I do like the idea of having more challenging assignments, but it is ridiculous that I get these tough jobs and excel in them while my peers are wasting away doing less difficult jobs and doing them poorly and still make rank at the same pace. Part of this stems from the BS that a LTs records are sealed after he makes CPT, why? If an LT makes a big mistake it should affect his future (a PVTs mistakes affect his future, why are LTs so different)

[Ski]

"I do like the idea of having more challenging assignments, but it is ridiculous that I get these tough jobs and excel in them while my peers are wasting away doing less difficult jobs and doing them poorly and still make rank at the same pace."

Honestly, you need to stop worrying about stuff like this and be the best officer you can be. There's little you can do to affect the career of another peer (other than diming him/her out and that's worse) so focus on what you want out of the military, and where you'd like to see your career progress to. The Army is seriously hurting for LT's and CPT's - they are going to promote almost everyone for the near term - and there's little you can do about it.

[nalmo2000]

Here's the deal. Joe makes E5 if his PSG and PL send him to the board. If he's not ready, don't send him. So many senior NCOs and officers who complain about how quick Joe makes rank forget they're the one's sending him to the promotion board. If you don't think he's ready, dont put him in front of the CSM in his Class As.

The problem I encounter is, that our 1SG stresses us to send more soldiers to the promotion board. We are VERY short on NCO's, but have an abundance of eligible E4's. Some of them are ready and it is due to the "negligence" of their leaders they are not sent to the board; however, many of them are not ready. Another issue is, our policy makes it mandatory that every eligible E4 has to attend a soldier of the month board prior to attending the promotion board, but only one soldier per unit is allowed to attend the SOM board. This means that only that soldier can attend the next promotion board - so in our unit only one per month get promoted (if they are even recommended).

[Ken White]

The problem I encounter is, that our 1SG stresses us to send more soldiers to the promotion board.

And this:

Another issue is, our policy makes it mandatory that every eligible E4 has to attend a soldier of the month board prior to attending the promotion board, but only one soldier per unit is allowed to attend the SOM board. This means that only that soldier can attend the next promotion board - so in our unit only one per month get promoted (if they are even recommended).

Those are both so wrong I'm speechless.

[RTK]

The problem I encounter is, that our 1SG stresses us to send more soldiers to the promotion board.

I hope what he means is to send more of the right Soldiers to the promotion board.

We are VERY short on NCO's, but have an abundance of eligible E4's. Some of them are ready and it is due to the "negligence" of their leaders they are not sent to the board; however, many of them are not ready.

Make the eligible and capable ones corporals as a "try out." I remember back in the day (Christ, now I feel old) when the corporal was the most feared NCO in the company - because he had to prove his leadership every minute he was death on minor infractions and competent in the corrective training it took to eradicate those infractions.

If they're not ready they shouldn't go to the board. From a commander's perspective, I've always been willing to go shorthanded with the right people than heavy or overmanned with the wrong ones.

Another issue is, our policy makes it mandatory that every eligible E4 has to attend a soldier of the month board prior to attending the promotion board, but only one soldier per unit is allowed to attend the SOM board. This means that only that soldier can attend the next promotion board - so in our unit only one per month get promoted (if they are even recommended).

How is this different than teaching to the test?

[Ken White]

I hope what he means is to send more of the right Soldiers to the promotion board...I've always been willing to go shorthanded with the right people than heavy or overmanned with the wrong ones...How is this different than teaching to the test?

You do good work.