Posted on May 1, 2016
Is the QMP/OSB wrongly being implemented? Have you seen Soldiers/Officers that shouldn't have been effected by this process?
14.2K
41
30
2
2
0
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 9
A few points. 1. OSB is wrong, due to a lack of clarification on how potential is defined and terrible talent management. If people knew they were in the 70% or less it wouldn't be a surprise, but currently there is no expectation management. Where do you really fall compared to your peers? I guess you can ask informal leaders, but with an inflated evaluation system the best they can do is make an educated guess. Is the Army really doing the best it can to manage talent and expectations? Two guys with a similar record, but one is prior service and has more time in service. The older guy is going to get the boot as the younger one has greater long-term potential. It isn't that the younger guy is better, but the older guy's 20 year mark hits first and the younger guy has more potential because of it. It may not be fair, but this is reality and ageism.
2. QMP, if all QMP Soldiers were for solid Army Values issues there is no arguement from me and no one is going to feel bad for you. However, have a dust up with your rating chain and if they slam you on the eval, you are done. No need for an investigation and no due process. One falling out between an NCO and maybe a toxic leader and the NCO is going to be shown the door. How is that reasonable? Allowing that creates a culture of yes-man, where you are more concerned about career preservation than taking care of your Soldiers. Because if you speak out and the leader allows it wonderful, but if he doesn't you can be toast.
Overall these processes treat people as numbers and not people. I wasn't cut by the OSB or any action so I don't have an axe to grind. I feel that many that say these processes are fair do so from a point of view that it is only catching shitty Soldiers and the ones who are not shitty, are just the cost of doing business. Loyalty during a draw down is an interesting concept.
2. QMP, if all QMP Soldiers were for solid Army Values issues there is no arguement from me and no one is going to feel bad for you. However, have a dust up with your rating chain and if they slam you on the eval, you are done. No need for an investigation and no due process. One falling out between an NCO and maybe a toxic leader and the NCO is going to be shown the door. How is that reasonable? Allowing that creates a culture of yes-man, where you are more concerned about career preservation than taking care of your Soldiers. Because if you speak out and the leader allows it wonderful, but if he doesn't you can be toast.
Overall these processes treat people as numbers and not people. I wasn't cut by the OSB or any action so I don't have an axe to grind. I feel that many that say these processes are fair do so from a point of view that it is only catching shitty Soldiers and the ones who are not shitty, are just the cost of doing business. Loyalty during a draw down is an interesting concept.
(8)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Nice post. I know exactly what you mean by the toxic leadership part. I had a first sergeant that wanted yes men as platoon sergeants and that is not what I am.
(0)
(0)
I think an easier way to draw down is to cut those who are already slated for chapter. Next ask everyone in the target demographic if they want to early out and let them go. If the number is still to high then there might be a need for it.
(4)
(0)
SGT David T.
SSG (Join to see) - Maybe just maybe one day one of you all will get to that level to affect such a change...ok so I am an idealistic optimist lol
(0)
(0)
I'll say this. The QMP process & outcome is greatly flawed. In a court of law a defense is aware of why he specifically is being charged & they even prove it in her/his face. This way is cowardly & has a quota to meet.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next