Is the awarding of the Meritorious Service Medal being watered down due to lack of standardization across the services?

My first MSM was for my tenure in the G-1 as I was leaving for another unit. In a nutshell, the award for creating innovative ideas and improving business rules that affected the organization, administratively, technically and operationally, etc etc etc. My 2nd would have been while in theatre but only E-7 & above could get those, got an ARCOM 4th award instead. So my actual 2nd actual MSM came by as a result of my retirement, for the usual, service, duty, worked hard, etc etc. I had already maxed my awards anyways.

So, I don't think it's a matter of standardization, the standards for the awards are there as defined by regulation of each service branch. The Meritorious Service Medal is recommended, "For outstanding meritorious achievement or service ...", so now the issue comes to formulate that achievement or service.
Interpretation of regulations is yet another thing, not to mention whatever criteria in the unit/BN/BDE/DIV SOP for awards may have. Quick example, if you went to a school course and awarded Honor Grad/Distinguished Honor Grad/Commandants List, you were almost guaranteed to get an AAM. But as with my experiences, I've also seen that you have to be of a certain rank, know someone in the inner sanctum or meet whatever made-up criteria to get a particular award. Just my two cents, or do I have to adjust that for today's inflation?

I still disagree with putting names and ranks on award recommendations. The merits are in the package. If criteria are met in the write up, then award the member. A junior member really can 'pop' on paper, going above and beyond normal duties. Awards have consistently been reserved for specific pay grades. It's the scope of responsibility and how they carried out those responsibilities. If an E5 or E6 is performing very well and has a significant impact to the mission or influences far beyond their respective unit, and does it meritoriously and with distinction, absolutely, submit this member for an MSM or BSM. The criteria is subjective, but only to a point. Are awards inflated some? Many would say yes, but also keep in mind, no one serving today wrote the award criteria. Don't punish the member by disapproving or downgrading an award in which the criteria have been met or in some cases exceeded. By doing so, you're part of the problem and it'll have second and third order effects down the road for sure! That's my two pennies.

To comment on the "standardization across the services" for the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM). Here is the criteria for the MSM for all the branches of the services:
CRITERIA
The Meritorious Service Medal may be awarded to any member (notice it doesn't say anything about rank requirement) of the armed forces of the United States who distinguishes themselves by either outstanding achievement or meritorious service to the United States.

Additionally, from SECNAVINST 1650.1H, SECTION 3 - REQUIREMENTS, 230. SPECIFIC MILITARY DECORATIONS, 10. MERITORIOUS SERVICE MEDAL, b., it states the following:
Eligibility Requirements. Awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States, or members of the armed forces of a friendly foreign nation, who distinguish themselves by outstanding meritorious achievement or service to the United States. To justify this decoration, the acts or services
rendered by an individual, regardless of grade or rate, must have be comparable to that required for the Legion of Merit, but in a duty of lesser responsibility. The Meritorious Service Medal is the counterpart of the Bronze Star Medal for the recognition of meritorious non-combat service. When the degree of meritorious achievement or service rendered is not sufficient to warrant the award of the Meritorious Service Medal, the Navy Commendation Medal, when appropriate, should be considered.

Notice in the last paragraph it states, "regardless of grade or rate"...it doesn't state they have to be a certain rank nor have more than 12 years of service to be awarded the MSM.

As far as the ranks of the individuals who were wearing the MSM's...irrelevant, period! These two individuals (regardless of which branch of service) distinguished themselves enough through their outstanding achievement or meritorious service that their leadership felt their actions had such an impact on the mission it warranted the medal. Through the vetting process of each service, their actions warranted the award.

Second, apparently you were curious enough about the medals to find out that they both had less than 12 years of service. Since you were asking how many years of service they had, why didn't you take the time to ask each of them what they did to EARN the MSM's? Better yet, you should have asked them to justify (to you) why they earned the medals...since this is basically what you're wanting.

Third, "in the Marine Corps there is a very high standard required to receive the award." So what's being inferred here is the Army, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard don't have a "very high standard required to receive the award." That's a very bold and disparaging statement in a time were we're doing more and more joint operations supporting all the services.

What's even more surprising is you're a GySgt. A Senior NCO who's suppose to be building cohesiveness between the services, not trying to drive wedges between them. Come on Gunney, let's get with the program.

Enough said...

Maybe he did something awesome, you dont know.

I've seen many a senior leader, officer or NCO, with the most colorful salad on their chest you could ever wish to see, I myself had a fairly impressive rack, and frankly I feel like I earned every single award I ever received. Which I'm sure is the case with these two, as well. There is no rank requirement, no TIS requirement, nothing other than what the standards to receive that award require.

Let me relate a story to you. At the end of my first deployment to Iraq, 03-04, initial invasion, I had 2 soldiers who, based on their actions and duty responsibilities I felt deserved at least an ARCOM, thusly I put them in for it, filled out the 638, and submitted it. Several weeks later the list came out to the staffs, and looking through I discovered that not only did my 2 soldiers not receive an ARCOM, they didn't receive anything other than the blanket AAM that every single swinging Richard who deployed, got. The whole FOBBIT's thing, folks who never left FOB, never fired a shot, who soaked up AC and had a cold soda with every meal soldiers got. Needless to say I was annoyed. I brought it up to my FSO, and the story I received was, and I quote "there weren't enough awards available, the quota had been met", for ARCOMs, now I was no longer annoyed, I was livid. Things being what they were we had a ton of work to do in order to redeploy, so awards went to the wayside. We returned home a few weeks later, and when the awards ceremonies were held, those who received any award above ARCOM or any award with a V device were presented by the Brigade commander, and so on, ARCOMs were presented by the Battalion commander, and so on. The soldiers who received the 'blanket' AAM were presented by the Battery commander, the next day. The soldiers were quite happy to receive an award and an acknowledgement of their performance, I not so much, because I had a different understanding of the circumstances. Following the awards ceremony, I recalled my conversation with my FSO, at which I vented my frustrations on Army Times, and low and behold a couple weeks later, Army Times comes out, and boom, there's my comment published. Later that day sitting in an auditorium receiving yet another redeployment briefing the 1SG comes and pulls me from the event, and asks me if I wrote a letter to Army Times, which I of course confirmed, "well, good job, you're being ordered to report to the Corps commander, with the entire chain of command, in one hour" meaning Division/CSM on down. Needless to say, I was a little nervous, as a SSG having to walk the hall outside the Corps commander's office with the eyes of every person I worked for staring at me, but not daring to raise voices given where we were. So, we get called in, we are lined up by rank and position in front of the LTG's desk, and he calls me forward, I report, and he asks, "did you write this letter to Army Times?" to which I responded, "yes sir I did". And to everyone's surprise, or consternation, depending on your point of view, he replied. "you are absolutely correct", he then told all of them to go back to their commands, the read the letter I wrote, and really give some thought to the awards process and how we do business, and dismissed all of them, except my Battery Cdr/1SG, he told them to wait outside for me. I sat in there with him for over an hour, and he explained his consternation with the whole process, but also made it clear that in order to not cheapen the award there had to more stringent requirements on how the awards are given, rather than blank awards based on position or level of responsibility only, he called it the lazy man's way of giving awards. I guess he also passed down to the rest of my CoC to leave the issue with me alone, cause I never heard from any of the other members of said chain about the incident, but my 1SG and Cdr were quite happy to not be 'on the carpet in a bad way'.

My point for all of this, is to say, there is no quota, there is no rank/position requirement, each award recommendation should be evaluated on it's merits, not convenience of the chain of command, I would surmise that each of those 2 individuals you mentioned, were recommended for, and received those awards because someone took the time to read and decide whether the actions warranted the awards or not.

I agree, I had one but it was for 20 years of service and what I did in Iraq for 63 months from being a platform gunner to doing hometown articles for my unit... I do understand the frustration and I understand and empathize with you on this issue. Sincerely Mark

I work in a headquarters battalion, and I can tell you that sometimes MSMs are attempted to be passed on to young NCOs/officers all the time - and it honestly isn't warranted. But because of the high level they work at, it is approved.

Awards aren't really rank fixed sure, but they are impact and influence fixed. An O-6 who is working as a director at the Army level can expect an MSM as a PCS award because her level of influence and impact was appropriately that large. An E-6 driver working on that office may have done an excellent job too, but doesn't neccesarily mean that he should walk out with an MSM. Some people seem to confuse that.

I taught at the Air Force's Senior NCO Academy, and the usual term for the MSM there was the "Master Sergeant's Medal." It was pretty telling when E-8s from the Navy and Coast Guard, and senior E-8s and E-9s from the Army would show up with a Commendation medal being their highest award, and nearly every Air Force E-7 would have oak leaf clusters on their MSMs. And the number of SILVER oak leaf clusters I've seen on MSMs STILL has me amazed!

Do you know what jobs they held? It would not be unusual to see a PJ or Combat Controller E5/E6 get an award usually awarded to those of higher grade......

If it has been watered down, as some have stated, I'm quite sure it started happening after I received mine :) Which, btw, was a little over 25 years ago. Damn. I'm getting old