Do you think Rank equals ability to get the job done?

2014-06-05T12:50:45-04:00

Response by Col Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2014 12:55 PM

2014-06-05T12:55:20-04:00

Although potentially helpful in accomplishing tasks or getting a "foot in the door,' IMHO rank does not factor much in the equation; someone with little rank can have credibility, connections, and know-how... and can therefore accomplish much. Conversely, someone with rank could have no credibility, just goes to show it is all subjective, and the ability to get things done can be accomplished at any level where there vision, wisdom, and knowledge are applied towards a definite desired end state.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2014 12:58 PM

2014-06-05T12:58:43-04:00

No. Good leadership equals the ability to get the job done. If we train and mentor our soldiers to the standard or above we can complete any job.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2014 1:01 PM

2014-06-05T13:01:17-04:00

Sadly no. Rank should equal ones ability to accomplish the job, but a lot of times, it is not the case.

Response by 1SG Steven Stankovich made Jun 5 at 2014 2:13 PM

2014-06-05T14:13:02-04:00

I believe that there are levels of expectation with each rank. Unit members expect a certain level of a great many things when the "new guy/gal" shows up; especially if that person is in a leadership position. Does that equate to the ability to get the job done? Unfortunately it does not. The expectation is there, but sometimes reality trumps what one expects. On the flip side in this context, rank may better equate to the ability to get promoted. Unfortunately, at the "boots on the ground level," the ability to get the job done at times does not equate to getting promoted.

Response by MSG Wade Huffman made Jun 5 at 2014 2:21 PM

2014-06-05T14:21:13-04:00

Your question can be answered by the "Peter Principle" which is alive and well in the Military as well as the corporate world.

In a nutshell, the Peter Principle suggests that people will tend to be promoted until they reach their "position of incompetence".

So the answer is no. Their current rank indicates they were able to get their previous job done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle

Peter principle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Peter principle is a concept in management theory formulated by Laurence J. Peter in which the selection of a candidate for a position is based on the candidate's performance in their current role, rather than on abilities relevant to the intended role. Thus, employees only stop being promoted once they can no longer perform effectively, and "managers rise to the level of their incompetence."

Response by SFC Rich Carey made Jun 5 at 2014 2:24 PM

2014-06-05T14:24:51-04:00

Not at all. It all depends on the task and responsibility.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jun 5 at 2014 2:38 PM

2014-06-05T14:38:39-04:00

Of course not... It SHOULD, but no.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2014 3:06 PM

2014-06-05T15:06:01-04:00

For me, rank = military experience. I came in as an O-3 with a PhD and around 15 years experience doing research. Put me in a lab, and I can out perform many who outrank me. But the first time I saw a leave form I had to have an E-4 help me. I've found that rank is a good predictor of knowing how to do Army - but maybe not necessarily your specific job.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jun 5 at 2014 4:03 PM

2014-06-05T16:03:16-04:00

Not necessarily an indicator of ability....

Response by COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM made Jun 5 at 2014 4:05 PM

2014-06-05T16:05:04-04:00

Short answer is no, rank does not equal ability to get the job done. Rank is an indicator of experience and past performance. Soldiers are promoted based upon anticipated potential to perform at the next higher rank. Some Soldiers realize this potential after performance while others do not.
There are several examples of the former that each of us can recognize in our personal service while there are examples of the latter of which a recent high profile example is BG Sinclair of the 82nd ABN DIV.
In addition, some Soldiers are able to perform above their pay grade but do not have either the time in service or time in grade to be eligible for promotion. An example of this is Dwight Eisenhower who was a LTC in 1939 and became a five star general by 1945 (six years later).

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2014 4:10 PM

2014-06-05T16:10:44-04:00

Simply, no. The higher the rank the greater the distance from sweat and mud. That's just the nature of the business. It's the experience and knowledge of the job gained at the lower ranks prepares you to manage and advise in the higher ranks. Often, personnel in the top three enlisted ranks have not been "doing the job" themselves for years and would be very rusty doing what some of us do everyday. They should never forget where they started and we should never forget where they started. As far as I'm concerned, personnel in both positions can take care of each other.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2014 4:16 PM

2014-06-05T16:16:07-04:00

Not necessarily. To me, rank equals experience and maturity to carry out tasks. To earn rank is to earn heavier loads than what you're accustomed to carry. Not just your ability to get your specific job done but to be able to perform above and beyond.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2014 4:22 PM

2014-06-05T16:22:52-04:00

Depends on the type of job. Is the person or persons qualified and knowledgeable enough to truly be wearing the rank? Can the leader or ranking person conduct operations and mission effectively and decisively while remaining disciplined? I would say that within the ranks of all the branches the military gets it right about 80% of the time. Will those who truly need help from subordinates to negotiate their own job need the help; ABSOLFRICKINLUTELY!!! I am aware of leadership in the Army at least that speaking from my own experiences from the outside in that Senior leadership and subordinate NCO leadership need a wake up call. The questions for influence and leadership shoudl never go down always up. Like the gripes and compaliners should never whine to their subordinates. A good leader will either be humbled by training from a subordinate member of their team or seek out the solution from their own superior. A leader should never task someone with a job they themselves have never experienced or done. To caveat to this a Leader must rely on intuition and basic knowledge and combat skills. How can a E-5 with a bachelor's degree and maxed out military schools be promoted to E-6/E-7 without ever really getting to know their subordinates? Yet the 20%'s happen to get this way and that is one reason why NCOER's from the Army are so tore up. Many leaders failed at monthly counselings and now fail at yearly evaluations. SO what can fix this....do like the Air Force and show a bit of competency in the MOS as well as the Leadership... DO some drill and ceremony exercises/ train a class on how to load a radio / land nav / and BRM and a well rounded leader will have a tight knit group of steely eyed killers.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Jun 5 at 2014 4:25 PM

2014-06-05T16:25:11-04:00

I've seen many who outranked me that couldn't poor water from a boot with instructions on the heel and I've seen many subordinates who could do my job like it was second nature. As some of my esteemed colleagues have noted, with rank comes an expected level of ability and responsibility. Either you live up to the expectations (and this goes on the civilian side of the house as well) or you create a FUMU situation - f__k up, move up. RARELY have I seen it go the opposite, yet correct, way - FUMD.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2014 4:34 PM

2014-06-05T16:34:12-04:00

Theoretically yes...reality NO

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Jun 5 at 2014 6:50 PM

2014-06-05T18:50:18-04:00

"Rank gives you authority...not ability." - Robert Burns

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2014 9:41 PM

2014-06-05T21:41:56-04:00

I think rank equals an expectation to get the job done, not necessarily ability. It takes a lot more than rank to make things happen. Great leaders who train, empower and provide direction to Soldiers get results. At the end of the day, rank is just fabric on your chest. It's what's behind the rank that makes a difference.

Response by SSgt Gregory Guina made Jun 6 at 2014 12:20 AM

2014-06-06T00:20:40-04:00

Absolutely not. I have seen plenty of people with the rank that have no idea what they are doing. At the same time I have seen guys that walk circles around those with more rank. When I go into IPAC(Installation S1) I look for the guy that I know has been busted back down to LCpl because he usually doesn't care if he pisses someone off and will make sure that the job is done correctly.

Response by SGT Carissa Lara, RCS made Jun 6 at 2014 12:44 AM

2014-06-06T00:44:06-04:00

Unfortunately my answer is no.

I've seen it many times but there is one time in particular time that will always stand out for me. We were swamped with procedures, short staffed and we had a patient from a previous procedure that needed the tube we left in the femoral artery pulled out (a routine procedure). This is something we are taught to to as junior soldiers. It's a basic part of our job. The only two people available to do so were the NCOIC of the service (E-7) and the NCOIC of the clinic (E-6). The clinic NCOIC refused to do it because he "wasn't signed off on it." The service NCOIC was just about in tears because they couldn't do it because it's been too long since they had done it. The solution (because the patient still needed taken care of) was that another technician had to go take care of it causing the rest of his appointments for the day to be 30 minutes behind.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 6 at 2014 9:49 AM

2014-06-06T09:49:09-04:00

Absolutely not.

A title indicates nothing more than a person's position and in the military it's a rough indicator as to how much money they're making.

When it comes to being able to actually "do" the job, I've been in for 12 years and in all of the boards I've been to, I don't recall the focus of the promotion board/system having anything to do with "ability." Now, the leaders who sent personnel to the boards were "supposed" to ensure they were able to do their jobs, but we all know what happened to the promotion system during the war years.

So, no.

Just because someone is wearing a certain rank doesn't mean anything to me other than they were promoted "x" number of times more or less than me.

I look to see what they're actually capable of before making assumptions.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 6 at 2014 10:07 AM

2014-06-06T10:07:27-04:00

NO!

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 6 at 2014 11:33 AM

2014-06-06T11:33:50-04:00

Of course not. If that were the case we would never experience incompetence.
There are reasons why incompetent people get promoted when they are not ready. Automatic promotion system, critical MOS, "board babies" are some that come to mind. Of course this is mostly in reference to enlisted.

I have met a few officers that were in positions well above their ability level as well.

But we all operate as a team. As NCOs, we support the commanders. If they are lacking, we bring them up to speed. If they fail, it is because we failed them in our supporting roles. If someone appears incompetent, it's likely that their support staff had a hand in that, and they are allowing the individual to remain uninformed and untrained.

Response by 1SG Jeffrey Bergeron made Jun 6 at 2014 11:50 AM

2014-06-06T11:50:36-04:00

The Rank you earn is given become you display the potentail ablilty to complete the job assigned to that Rank. However as we all know not everyone raises to the challenge to meet the rank requirements. That is why we have the QMP system.

Response by CPO Greg Frazho made Jun 6 at 2014 12:03 PM

2014-06-06T12:03:15-04:00

No, it doesn't. There are plenty of what I would call placeholders. They're there. That's it. They don't get into a lot of trouble, they don't cause a lot of trouble, they don't speak up much, they're just riding their own coattails. We all know somebody that fits that description. Some of them haven't deployed or even taken a tough job in years.

With that in mind, while I almost expect a certain level of sandbaggery from on high, it's a death wish for a senior NCO. If there's one group of people who cannot afford to be spinning their wheels in limbo, it's them.

You'd think that with the amount of time in service senior NCOs and senior officers have, they wouldn't be riding the stale buzz to retirement, but a lot of them do. It's called being on the ROAD Program. (Retired On Active Duty)

Response by SrA DeWitt Tremaine made Jun 6 at 2014 12:25 PM

2014-06-06T12:25:23-04:00

Rank equals time and compliance with codes and standards unless acquried on the battlefeild then it equal necesity. Ability to get the job done depends on the job and the circumstances, the motivation and abilities of the individual. these things can be specualted based on previous accomplishments, but can not be truly known until the task presents itself. Rank does not measure job competence as much as compliance with military behavioral codes, so no it does not measure ability. Rank does measure authority and provides a chain of command and responsability that keeps needed order and organization in the military.

Response by SPC David Hannaman made Jun 6 at 2014 12:31 PM

2014-06-06T12:31:13-04:00

Absolutely not... (at least in the NCO side). The promotion system is broken (at least it used to be in the early '90's). A good example would be my roommate at Ft Campbell '92.

Jorge was a heck of a nice guy, smart, and maxed his PT test, but he barely spoke English and didn't have much mechanical aptitude, so the Maintenance platoon put him first in the tool bin, and then sent him to be a lifeguard at the post swimming pool.

Like I said, no dummy though, he took college and correspondence courses, and within a year he had the points to make E-5, which automatically made him a squad leader... problem was that he had never really touched an aircraft, and still barely spoke English. Heck of a nice guy, but zero ability to get the job done.

I saw much less of this on the Commissioned side though, usually by the time someone made CPT or MAJ they were pretty squared away, but there were always normal human idiosyncrasies that would make one person better suited for a specific job than another.

Response by SGT Alison McArty made Jun 6 at 2014 12:39 PM

2014-06-06T12:39:14-04:00

I believe that the ability to get the job done comes from what is within a person, and not what he/she wears on the collar (so to speak).

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 6 at 2014 12:55 PM

2014-06-06T12:55:01-04:00

I'm gonna go with a big negative. I just finished up working with an Army Unit in Afghanistan. There were 3 of us working with them. It was myself (E3) an E4 and an E6 that was working with them. Of the three of us the Army trusted me most with getting the job done, because when it came to work I made sure I not only knew everything about my job but I knew how to do every job of every individual around me. When we finished working with them they only awarded one of us a Medal. And if you are the average military minded individual you would be wrong in guessing that that medal was awarded to the ranking individual.

Response by SgtMaj Michael Lillie made Jun 6 at 2014 1:12 PM

2014-06-06T13:12:12-04:00

Rank does not equate to ability. It is only a reflection of authority and responsibility, but neither guarenties efficacy.

Furthermore, "The Peter Principle" suggest that most people are eventually promoted to a point of incompetence. So it would be more likely that RANK EVENTUALLY EQUALS AN INABILITY TO GET THE JOB DONE.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle

Response by CW2 Geoff Lachance made Jun 6 at 2014 3:22 PM

2014-06-06T15:22:20-04:00

All throughout our history there have been examples of formal leaders failing and informal leaders stepping up. I'd like to think that the formal leaders have the ability to accomplish the mission. Unfortunately, you can do all the right things to get you promoted and score high in all the soldier skills, but on the battle field, a different story! regardless of rank there are those formal leaders who cannot take the high stress of battle. Some lowly private may step up, assess the situation and take charge! It could even be the guy no one thought would ever get promoted. As leaders, it is our responsibility to make every soldier under us feel needed and important!

Response by PFC Earl Herman made Jun 6 at 2014 3:43 PM

2014-06-06T15:43:38-04:00

No, I do not believe that Rank equals ability. During my service those that were E-4 and up did not necessarily have the "experience" in their MOS to do a proper job and were paying the price. Lower ranking SM's were being put in leadership roles to complete the job that the "Section Leader" started.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 6 at 2014 4:00 PM

2014-06-06T16:00:36-04:00

In a collective business or communities Rank allows people to produce all of the goods and services needed to survive. Rank is not no different in the commercial market than a Division of Labor
Rank or Labor specialization refers to the practice of splitting a job into discrete tasks and assigning each task to a specific worker. For example, no worker in a modern car factory makes an entire car from start to finish. Instead, some workers specialize in painting, others in frame assembly, while other workers install seats or dashboards. There are hundreds of specific tasks involved in manufacturing a car, and each task is assigned to an individual worker. You can look at Rank and compare employees that started a entry level and as they accomplished higher taxonomies of skills to take on increased responsibilities and to steer more staff towards a common goal than the person at the entry level.
Productivity is a measure of economic output relative to the amount of labor involved. For example, if a factory can make 100 cars every day and then finds a way to increase production to 110 cars per hour without needing more workers or longer shifts, it has increased its productivity. By the same token, if the factory only makes 90 cars in one week, its productivity has decreased for that week it takes a team to achieve the production goals. The rank has to have other attributes and skills to motivate and drive output.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 6 at 2014 6:38 PM

2014-06-06T18:38:10-04:00

Most definitely not. I have seen plenty of people who are "senior" or equal in rank to me who couldn't find their way out of a wet paper bag, and that's putting it nicely. I've also seen plenty of junior enlisted who could very well get the job done. If anyone is familiar with USR, it's a tough thing to do every single month. During my tenure as the SQDN S4 NCOIC, I had a new and young PFC come to my shop. He assisted me with prepping our part of the USR then after a while he literally took it over. He just stepped up to the plate and ran with it. And he did VERY WELL. he knew what to do and where to acquire the information from. Sadly, he was medically retired for some issues. He had so much potential in the military.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 6 at 2014 7:22 PM

2014-06-06T19:22:25-04:00

No. However, sometimes rank helps get things done as they carry more weight than a junior rank.

Response by SSG Richard Stevens made Jun 6 at 2014 11:39 PM

2014-06-06T23:39:57-04:00

It is the person, not the rank people, let there, to to there head.

Response by MSG Martin C. made Jun 7 at 2014 10:00 AM

2014-06-07T10:00:04-04:00

Rank is an indication of your current pay grade. Not of your work performance or potential. You can assume because of a certain rank the individual has being tested and proven himself at the previous rank not the current.

Response by SGT Juanita Coover made Jun 7 at 2014 12:17 PM

2014-06-07T12:17:44-04:00

I prefer common sense and experience!

Response by Sgt Vance Bonds made Jun 8 at 2014 3:03 AM

2014-06-08T03:03:21-04:00

No. Rank seems to have become political as well as how to fill in the paperwork. What I'm trying to say is that enough friends and knowing which block to check will move someone up faster than doing a good job, having knowledge in your field and having the maturity and skills necessary to motivate your people.

Response by COL Roxanne Arndt made Jun 8 at 2014 12:46 PM

2014-06-08T12:46:41-04:00

No I don't think Rank equals the ability to get the job done. My only experience is from the Nurse Corp and I've seen many people get promoted and then watch as they fail as leaders. It is very difficult to get relieve a person in a leadership role just for being ignorant! I really feel this is why so many good people leave the military....they get frustrated at the incompetence of it all.

Response by SSG Mark Ives made Jun 8 at 2014 5:44 PM

2014-06-08T17:44:44-04:00

Definitely not! I had a 1SG who had never served in a tactical capacity during the 20+ years he was in, until he came to our unit. He had to have some tactical time to make his SGM. A SGT and I showed him how to prepare a range card and setup fields of fire for a fighting position at Ft Riley. I had privates who were more capable of a job than I was and I had them do it. Using the best assets for accomplishing the mission is more important than the rank of the people involved.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 8 at 2014 7:12 PM

2014-06-08T19:12:24-04:00

No it does not. When I first got promoted to E-5, I was ordered by my senior leadership to sponsor an E-4 for the E-5 board. I was young in my career and did as I was told, even though I didn't agree with the decision. The same scenario presented itself for a second time in my career a year or so later with a different Soldier. I expressed my disagreement with the decision to send this Soldier to the board and was told to do as I was directed. These 2 Soldiers were sent to the board because they were eligible and nothing more. About 3 years later, I had this situation show its ugly face again. After the second time, I had told myself I would never take a 3rd Soldier to the board who didn't deserve to go. This happened to be a Soldier I had for about 2 years. I had been in the Army for about 7.5 yrs at this point. This particular Soldier was back-and-forth on and off the Army Weight Control Program every 6 months for the 2 yrs I was Supervisor. He would bust tape; get on the program; pass his weight about a month later; the next semi-annual APFT the same thing all over again. The last time this happened before I PCSed, I was told I was going to take him to the board. I refused and wrote a promotion counseling laying these points out in great detail. I was still told after writing this counseling to take him to the board. I said I would not and that this is why Officers and fellow NCO's are losing faith in the NCO Corps. I went on to say that a Soldier does not deserve to go to the E-5 Board just because they are eligible.

Response by CWO2 Shelby DuBois made Jun 10 at 2014 10:46 AM

2014-06-10T10:46:07-04:00

View from the bottom.. Of course not.. View from the top... Of course. Depends on your particular point of view and experiences. Bottom line is that promotion is a sign of time in service and accumulated education/experience/skill/leadership and the expectation that those traits are going to help you succeed in completing assigned missions and training your subordinates to the best of their abilities. It's not a guarantee. We've all had bosses whom we have had to make look good...and we've all been in awe of a superior officer.

Response by SSgt James Stanley made Jun 17 at 2014 10:11 PM

2014-06-17T22:11:19-04:00

Rank equals the ability to assign a job to a subordinate with the instructions on how to complete it, and then follow through until it is completed. That is usually how rank gets a job done.