Posted on Dec 12, 2013

Is the Senior Centralized Promotion Boards in need of a change?

6.48K

As the Army is changing with professional growth for the enlisted Soldier. Is it time to revamp the system, since its inception in 1969. I think so, because times are different and the Army owes SR. NCO more feedback professionaly on where to grow and achieve success. Especially on areas within the Soldiers MOS and strategic point of view army wide .

Posted in these groups: Logistics imageslemdo1xq

Logistics

Posted >1 y ago

Follow this discussion

Responses: 6

CSM Mike Maynard

Posted >1 y ago

SFC Davis - I would agree that "individualized" feedback would be beneficial, but there are are few factors that make this inefficient and/or ineffectual.<div><br></div><div>1) Centralized Promotion Boards do not actually determine who gets promoted - they only OML each person from first to last. HRC then determines how many folks need to get promoted. So, the panel doesn't even know who is getting promoted or who is not getting promoted.</div><div><br></div><div>2) With the sheer volume of records reviewed, it would be impossible to provide individualized feedback to each person on why they were or were not competitive. It's not as if each panel member is writing down why this person is not competitive or what they should do to be more competitive.</div><div><br></div><div>3) The feedback the board panel would give would be very generalized (just like the feedback they already give to the force in general) due to them really only looking at your NCOERs and other things in your iPERMS - you and your chain already have the information that the board sees to gauge you.</div><div><br></div><div>4) The real individualized feedback should be coming from your immediate chain of command. They are the folks working with you on a daily basis and they should be providing the counseling to let you know what you can do to improve. Additionally, your branch and your mentors should be providing you the career progression opportunity information that would be beneficial to you.</div>

(10)

Comment

(0)

SSG Dan McIntosh

>1 y

Great response CSM, personally for me, I would like to see more emphasis on point 4 you mentioned. The lack of chain of command giving the feedback, lack of constructive counseling or just counseling at all, and the need for more input from branch and career managers make it hard to know the areas any NCO should concentrate on to be better.

(2)

(0)

1SG Steven Stankovich

Posted >1 y ago

I agree with CSM Maynard that individual feedback from the Board would be inefficient/ineffectual. Given the fact that Board Members average less than two minutes per record, individual feedback would be as generic as the current Board AARs.

With that being said, I do feel that NCOs who were considered for promotion should be informed of where they were on the "OML." CSM is right, the Board does not promote, they only rank into an OML. Once all records are reviewed and the OML is complete, the "guy or gal" gets the list and marries it up with the number to be promoted. That is the list.

If the magic number is 50 to select and they reviewed 500 records, I think it would be beneficial to know, if I was not selected, where on the OML did I end up? There is a big difference between 51 and 500.

Just my two cents...

(8)

Comment

(0)

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL

>1 y

MSG Stankovich, point made "the Board does not promote, they only rank into an OML" I totaly agree with the OML ranking. I wonder would the big Army G-1, SMA agree with this concept.

(4)

(0)

SFC Lamont Womack

Posted >1 y ago

I think the Army should go to a test system like the Navy. The test should be based on basic Army knowledge and MOS specific knowledge. If individuals do not make a certain score, their records are not allowed to be reviewed for promotion. I think this would make the process better to select the best qualified. There are so many records that go before the board that the best qualified don't always get selected. A test would weed out some of the less qualified.

(5)

Comment

(1)

show previous comments

SFC Lamont Womack

>1 y

I apologize for the formatting I don't know what happened.

(2)

(0)

SFC Rocky Gannon

>1 y

I believe that NCO's should be tested ie: SQT to show the basic knowledge of the MOS. At least it will provide a ground level that they know there MOS.

(4)

(0)

SSG Dan McIntosh

>1 y

All though I dont agree with the SQT, I do agree with 1SG Rink in that one change I would like to see is a semi-annual board. And a previous comment made by MSG Stankovich about knowing your OML rank would be nice too. Put these together and an NCO can track every 6 months if they are doing better or worse from the previous board. Now couple that with better counseling, feedback from chain of command, the individual wouldnt have the problems of today of trying to figure out which part of their record they need to concentrate on.

(3)

(0)

CSM Mike Maynard

>1 y

SFC Womack - the easiest and best fix is for raters and senior raters to do their job. If they rated/assessed folks properly and reflected that on the NCOER, this would be a non-issue.

Too many intangibles that can't be translated to a question/answer test. Leadership/management is not black and white and is always situational.

(4)

(0)

Show More Comments

Is the Senior Centralized Promotion Boards in need of a change?

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.