"This is a re-tread statement from what I think I said earlier in the thread, but this is exactly why someone needs to expend more energy to figure out why people stay...not necessarily why people leave."
True. As he said earlier, we know and understand why they leave and we sort of understand why some stay (for various reasons depending on how well we know the individual or his or her situation). What we don't have a handle on is the broad 'why.'

I think that applies as a matter of need to both Officers and to Peons...

Speaking of Peons and harking to their elevation to commissioned status, here are some random thoughts:

Why do Platoon leaders need to be commissioned -- I understand the training (of them) aspect but that isn't the vital thing many imagine, there have been many who skipped that step for one reason or another. Seems to me to be somewhat of a waste of an expensively trained officer.

Why do over man most Staffs other than to meet the archaic requirements of the bureaucratic staffing guides.

Why can't we pay a guy or gal extra money for doing a good job instead of having to promote them in rank?

Do we have too many ranks? Both Officer and enlisted. Shouldn't the number of ranks in both categories be based on level required by echelons of employment. For NCOs, Individual troop / Team / Squad / Platoon /Company / Higher -- that's five or six ranks, not nine. For Officers, Company / Battalion / Brigade-Regt / Higher; that's four to six, not ten or eleven.

How smart is up or out?

A look at all those items quickly tells us that a personnel system designed to easily 'manage' large numbers of people and provide 'incentives' to enter and stay may not be what we really need...

Goes back to J Custis; Why do they stay?