Posted on Dec 4, 2013
How would you determine a 'quality' service member?
8.28K
124
34
6
6
0
What are (or would be) your 'Top 5' traits that determine 'quality' for a service member's possible continued service?
Example:
- High PFT score or subordinate's average PFT score
- Complete XX college credit hours or having subordinates complete XX college
- Volunteerism
- Competing in or having subordinates compete in/win competitive boards
- Awards
Example:
- High PFT score or subordinate's average PFT score
- Complete XX college credit hours or having subordinates complete XX college
- Volunteerism
- Competing in or having subordinates compete in/win competitive boards
- Awards
- ASVAB scores or ASVAB score improvement
Posted in these groups: 
Retention
Retention
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 15
2
2
0
1. Their loyalty to the command (unit) and country
2. Military Bearing and appearance
3. Their work ethic
4. Customs and Courtesies
5. PFT/PRT scores
6. Taking care of their careers, ie..PME/GMT without being told
7. to make a long story short: HONOR, COURAGE, COMMITMENT!
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Technical competence in lieu of college
Fitness
Military Bearing
Volunteerism
Awards
(2)
(0)
SGM Matthew Quick
Not sure if I completely agree with the awards as some are (unofficially) based on rank and not position.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I believe all of these qualities are good to have but a soldier needs to be well rounded. Would you want a 300 PT stud who spends all day on the range trying to qualify. Would you want a SGT that is an expert shooter but can't explain how to be a better marksman to his soldiers. Others could be very book smart and have a multiple college degrees but don't have the common sense to wear gloves when they know they will be out in the cold all day. I have also seen very high ASVAB scores from people who can barely maintain their MOS. Sorry about the rant, what I look for in my leaders is knowledge, experience, motivation, sincerity, and professionalism.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
1
1
0
I'm right there with most of y'all... I really wonder why there aren't MOS and general military competency exams of some sort to help the Army quantify who is good at their job and who isn't...
I realize that 1) that's part of what the board is SUPPOSED to measure, and 2) the NCOER "SHOULD" fill in the blanks with a more subjective assessment, but in the current system, Leaders are incentivized to get their troops promoted (regardless of their merits as future leaders.) Thus, boards (in some units) become a mere formality - a rite of passage so to speak - and the NCOER becomes a challenge for the rater to find sufficient fluff to write a review that meets or exceeds the standard...
I realize that 1) that's part of what the board is SUPPOSED to measure, and 2) the NCOER "SHOULD" fill in the blanks with a more subjective assessment, but in the current system, Leaders are incentivized to get their troops promoted (regardless of their merits as future leaders.) Thus, boards (in some units) become a mere formality - a rite of passage so to speak - and the NCOER becomes a challenge for the rater to find sufficient fluff to write a review that meets or exceeds the standard...
(1)
(0)
MSG Curtis Lange
We used to have the Skills Qualification Test (SQT) with both a hands-on component and written exam. Following that we had the SQT as a written only exam. Following that was the Skills Development Test (SDT) which tested common skills and MOS specific skills based on the Soldier's current rank. What they all had in common was they tested knowledge of all skills for an MOS, not just those particular to the current assignment.
What the tests failed to examine was exactly how well a Soldier actually could do the job once the hands-on went away. Some people test well and others freeze, but that does not predict how they will handle other stressful situations.
Not every MOS can have simulations like pilots for training and testing.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
MSG Lange,
I can see how that would happen... is there a good way to quantify job and MOS competency, because the current system doesn't seem to work any better than you describe... I mean if you are good at the board, and your NCO (or yourself in many cases) is good at writing excellence bullets, then you can get promoted without actually being able to tell your head from a hole in the ground...
I can see how that would happen... is there a good way to quantify job and MOS competency, because the current system doesn't seem to work any better than you describe... I mean if you are good at the board, and your NCO (or yourself in many cases) is good at writing excellence bullets, then you can get promoted without actually being able to tell your head from a hole in the ground...
(0)
(0)
MSG Curtis Lange
It all came down to the normal major detractors, money and tim, to do away with the tests. Those were major detractors.
On the other hand they leveled the field for all in an MOS and grade. You didn't allow for personalities to color that part of the quality of a Soldier. Plus the tests made you focus on your whole MOS, not just skills in your current job.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google