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

2013-12-12T10:55:46-05:00

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 .

Response by SFC James Baber made Dec 12 at 2013 12:14 PM

2013-12-12T12:14:55-05:00

There are many changes that are needed to update the promotion board system, but as long as some of the "old boy" network members are still sitting up at DA it will never be able to adapt or change. I am sure many of our brethren who felt the system will agree with me on that aspect.

Response by CSM Mike Maynard made Dec 14 at 2013 6:23 AM

2013-12-14T06:23:16-05:00

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>

Response by SFC Lamont Womack made Dec 14 at 2013 6:46 AM

2013-12-14T06:46:08-05:00

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.

Response by 1SG Steven Stankovich made Dec 14 at 2013 6:48 AM

2013-12-14T06:48:42-05:00

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...

Response by SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL made Dec 14 at 2013 8:38 AM

2013-12-14T08:38:36-05:00

I say hooa, roger that!!

Response by SSG Lloyd Becker BSBA-HCM, MBA made Jan 4 at 2015 2:03 AM

2015-01-04T02:03:23-05:00

I retired in 1988 and I find the Evaluation system flawed. Even under the guidelines it used in the early 1970s.

Because of these flaws, people noted that a number of junior NCOs were not getting promoted to SFC. Around that time Army found that having rating this low was affecting the promotion system and some good NCOs left the Service. When inflated EERs started re-appearing, people were getting promoted again.

For those who remember the old system, the NCOIC rated with a possible 125 and Platoon Leader had the same, 125. Three signatures appeared on the form, excluding the S-1 was the two raters and the person being rated. The point being, if they even had a slight problem with the individual, you can find that individual on the QMP roster.

The point being here is, the rated individual must be rated on abilities and capabilities; not how they would politically interface with their seniors. I have not been the type to politic my way through the military; yet, I was the fixer for the most part of the remainder of my career. I got called on to fix problems other NCOs could not handle, though I retired, I wound up on the QMP list.

I have no regrets. In fact, if given the same circumstances, I would not change a thing. I was hoping that they would have recalled me for Desert Storm. But, they did not and that was my type of a war.